Killing the muse

'm wondering if creativity has more to do with enjoying the technique of doing something than "catching the muse." My brother Ben's songwriting is a great example of this. He's written truckloads of songs, of varying quality (he doesn't labor over them too much). But, above all, he enjoys writing/playing. It doesn't take a solution to world peace or something to get him writing. He writes because it's fun to him in the same way that playing xbox 360 is fun to my brother Jake. So the motivation to write a story, play guitar, paint something...I think that comes in a large part from enjoyment/stimulation derived from those things as activities, not as spiritual awakenings. This helps to explain several phenomenon.

1) It helps to explain why some "unenlightened" people have created great art. Take Ella Fitzgerald. I just did a paper on her. It turns out that she got around, a lot. Performed an abortion on herself at my age and could never have kids later as a result. Never had a marriage that lasted more than a few years. Look, I don't want to judge her too harshly, but this is clearly someone who had some big spiritual pieces missing in her life...and yet she could sing like an angel. To a great degree, I think that's because she sang incessantly and had a naturally beautiful tone.

2)It helps to explain why so few people become "artists." Art is work. Getting technique is work. And most people don't like to work!

3)It helps to explain why great art has been created in circumstances where there is little intellectual or spiritual freedom. Consider the composer Haydn. He was hired by Prince Esterhazy not because he was some free-spirited visionary, but because he was extraordinarily skilled and the Prince knew he could count on Haydn to write pieces for him that he would like. Haydn, and lots of artists before the 19th century, were servants of the court and church. And yet, in the grips of those institutions, they made great art and I think that's simply because they practiced a lot.

4)It can help explain how art fits into everyday life. After all, artists do live in the world. To escape the mundane is to swim upstream, everyday. If art was solely about finding the muse, I'm sure much of it would never have been created. Many of the artists I've learned about had surprisingly ordinarily lives. In other words, they had human lives. Again, what made them artists is that they practiced their craft a lot.

That said, art does have an undeniable spiritual and personal dimension. But that comes after doing something repeatedly, developing technique, and simply caring about something; our lives develop their own personal stamp and meaning in the same way. As we develop habits, live from day to day, and have fun, we develop personalities that make us unique and accumulate wisdom. I've never met two people who are the same, and most are somewhat reflective and learn things from life. Basically, it's human nature to be different and to pursue truth. In the same way, art takes on individuality and spirituality when someone practices it enough and thinks about it enough. Individuality and spirituality are part of human nature and mark all human creations, to one degree or another.

If you extend this metaphor of life for art, how ridiculous the idea of not creating until you've found your individual, creative muse sounds. Would you ever tell someone to not live their life until they "discovered" their personality? Of course not. We discover ourselves, our ideals, learn wisdom, etc. from living and from doing. Isolation, uncertainty, and inactivity can only GUARANTEE that we will never experience anything worth experiencing. The same applies to art. We discover truth in art as we practice it. Art becomes an enlightening experience as we live it by practicing it. In my case, when I brood around not creating anything because I don't feel "inspired," I'm just giving up too soon and ensuring that I will never discover anything through art or develop a skill set to communicate anything once I think I know what to say.

Sometimes I think I expect too much from art. I look to "creativity" to solve all my problems, to make me feel alive, purposeful, engaged with my existence. And when I don't find my muse, I feel aimless and discouraged. But that enlightened state I'm seeking...I don't think anyone gets there completely. Not anyone. Not when we'r'e faced with the realities of providing financially for ourselves, the reality of our deaths, pain, sickness, etc. That's not to say that life isn't good and fun, too, but...it's also inescapably hard. It's demanding too much of any one process or profession to expect it elevate us above all that. Only religion and self-esteem can bring us assurance that life is ultimately purposeful and that we have the ability to get what we want out of life and be happy.

So, what is art and creativity good for? I think, more than anything, art gets it's effect from describing life. Sometimes art does actually answer big-picture questions, but it does so inadvertently, by describing life and leaving the viewer room to infer truth. In this way, truths may be revealed to the viewer that may never have occurred to the artist. It's the idea that "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder." Perhaps the role of the artist is not so much to meet the muse and deliver truth to the populace like some prophet. Instead, it may have more to do with someone faithfully describing their experiences and thoughts...and then offering this up for general consumption and reflection. Basically, the ability to tap into "the muse" may have little relevance to the artist. Perhaps the more important question to ask the aspiring artist is: "Do you enjoy writing/singing/painting etc. about your life? Expressing even the mundane in your chosen medium?" If not, then art may not be for you. That doesn't mean you have turn your back on the big-questions or creativity, either. There are many other ways to be reflective and creative.

Like Edisson said, creativity is "99% perspiration, 1% inspiration."