Is the creative process a fundamentally learned or innate behavior?
As a left-handed person, I have a soft spot in my heart for this topic. I am a practicing artist and public performer, and therefore inclined to say that art is like any muscle, it is strengthened by exertion and exercise (there is a difference). In order to become better at what you do, so as to refine your style and develop finesse in your execution, you must practice.
As an artist, I am hard pressed to deny that there seems to be some sort of mystique about the creative process. The wellspring of my imagination is a sometimes elusive destination for my intentions. In order to locate this fountainhead better I have adopted a policy of Chaining the Muse[sup]™[/sup]. I intentionally force my mind to enter its creative state and willfully execute forms of innovative thought as an exercise of my free will and artistic impulse. Doing so requires a rigorous determination about accomplishing what are often difficult to attain goals. In terms of being a mental discipline, this exercise of will goes beyond physical education and enters the realm of yoga. To purposely redirect the accustomed paths of thought which your mind becomes habituated to, is a less-than-easy occupation.
The Koni Bicycle Manual defines the ability to race bicycles as requiring; “… the capacity for agonistic endeavor.” So it is with art. If you are willing to extend your boundaries beyond those which you know, if, like some trailblazer of the Old West, you are willing to explore uncharted territory within your mind’s purview, then you have the characteristics of an artist.
[Let us digress momentarily to agree that all forms of personal endeavor can exhibit art. The carpenter driving a nail with one deft hammer blow is an artist. The smith forging a fine blade that will serve its owner faultlessly is every bit the artist. All craft in its skillful execution contains the essence of art. (Please dispute this sidebar if you feel so inclined.) Finesse is simply an incontrovertible demonstration of art.]
This represents a crucial fulcrum in this debate. There are performers that seem to display a natural ease and facility for the execution of their art. I have often been accused of this. Many’s the time where I have improvised a tune with someone that I have never met before, only to be asked how long we had practiced that piece beforehand.
Clearly, there seems to be some definite predisposition towards delicate or complex expression of intention. Where this comes from may await a discovery similar to the recent finding that excellent chefs often possess an enhanced olfactory capacity.
I would like to augment this discussion with an observation about the world at large. There is a huge trend away from any practice of the arts in recent times. The lack of funding for art in public schools is a fine barometer of this fact. Modern media and technology have almost made it too easy for one to obtain the experience of art without any of the usually requisite “artistic suffering” involved. Again, feel free to introduce arguments concerning the almost traditional need for suffering as a perquisite for any artist.
In times not long past, a home’s “stereo system” or “jukebox” consisted of a piano in the parlor (if you were lucky), or perhaps, an accordion (if you weren’t so lucky). If you wanted to hear music, by gosh, you had to sit down and make it yourself. Other family members would often accompany, and in this way, art was transmitted via piano for a few centuries (whereas, oral and percussive tradition have passed on such knowledge for many millennia).
The notion of having to make your own music is almost entirely lost upon our current generation. Much like how this age of talking heads and canned dialogue has assisted in extinguishing the fine art of conversation, so has music suffered an ignominious fate. All you need do is push the “on” button to hear music, without any of the mental gymnastics that were previously required. For this very reason, art now appears to be a mysterious process, available only to the select few.
All of this is complete horse puckey in light of the realization that art is simply the flexure of extraterritorial thought processes. Since this feature of human cognizance is in short supply, it appears to be a jewel of exceeding rarity. In reality, what we are discussing is merely the anticipated flowering of the human mind. That such florescence is profoundly lacking in modern society is a harsh indictment of its stated priorities.