[The Berean]

I suppose "art" can mean many things. I consider a beautiful carbon fiber bicycle frame to be a work of art. I have been inspired by other "garage builders" to build my own carbon fiber bike frame.

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/howibuil.htm

http://theprojectjunkie.com/composit...e-project.html

http://www.instructables.com/id/How-...ome-and-a-bam/

[The Barbarian]

I think it's all self-driven. I take a great image, and then, after it's printed up, I see every imperfection, and cringe when someone admires it, knowing how I could have made it better.

It's a craft more than an art, but I think the feelings are the same.

I enjoy writing poetry, though. Probably because I'm not good at it.

[Quincy]

Originally Posted by Arthur Brain

I think the biggest mistake the author makes is the implication that creativity itself is connected to suffering or can only come about through it. Objectively that simply isn't true. Powerful works have certainly come about through suffering and I'd hardly deny it can be an impetus to channel such but creativity itself crosses the spectrum of human experience. The act of creating something can be as special as it can be the result of trauma, sometimes both.

I do agree it could be from something more special or treasured, like love instance. Love has probably lead to more poetic verses than any other emotion. You could say to a degree love can torment us but itm ore often than not is a great source of happiness.

[noguru]

Originally Posted by kmoney

I am reading a book about suffering and the author makes the following statement about artists, who are also creators: "Creation involves suffering."

And for a longer quote:

"Whatever the reason, for us as we are now, creation involves suffering, and the greatest creativity involves the greatest suffering. The greatest beauty comes from the greatest suffering. Tragedy is our highest literary form. Sad music is the most beautiful music."

Do you agree with this statement? And the paragraph? If so, how do artists suffer through the creation of their works?

I am not an artist so I am interested to see how the artists of TOL feel about this. But anyone can contribute, of course. Anyone who sees themself as a creator, do you suffer for it?




PS - the book is Peter Kreeft's "Making Sense Out Of Suffering", which is about the theological problem of evil, but I'm not necessarily looking to get into that for this thread.

You can't sing the blues if you don't live the blues.

[kmoney]

Thanks for your thoughts everyone.

Originally Posted by PureX

Only an outsider would refer to that aspect of the creative act as "suffering".

It might be true that Kreeft is an outsider (I don't know if he has any experience or affiliation with art), but here you make it seem like Kreeft is saying the suffering in creation is a bad thing. I don't think that is true. To be fair, he only had a small section on creation/suffering so he didn't go into great detail, but I didn't get the impression that he was viewing it in a negative light.

[kmoney]

Originally Posted by zoo22

No, I don't agree with the statements.

"Creation involves suffering." I could agree with to a certain extent, mostly in that there's a struggle. But I don't think it's universal for artists, or intrinsic to creating art.

I suppose I suffer for my art sometimes, but again, more in that it can be a struggle to create, develop, to always keep moving forward with it. You consistently have to push through and past things. Sometimes you have to throw things that you are attached to away. That can be technique, ideas, even personal emotion you become attached to. I suppose you have to suffer your failures, which is a part of the process, but I don't think that's what he's referring to, and it's not something that's exclusive to art.

I think creating art can often involve a kind of purging for the artist. In those cases, I think there's more of an intrinsic suffering. But there are so many different reasons for creating art, so many different drives for different artists, so many different approaches, processes, purposes, etc... Not all involve suffering. And some, completely the opposite.

I put in bold the parts that I think Kreeft was getting at. That, in creating art you are imparting a piece of yourself.

The term "suffering" might be clouding the discussion. I think "struggle" is a good term too. But again, Kreeft only had a small section on it and I don't want to put words in his mouth.

[PureX]

Originally Posted by kmoney

It might be true that Kreeft is an outsider (I don't know if he has any experience or affiliation with art), but here you make it seem like Kreeft is saying the suffering in creation is a bad thing. I don't think that is true. To be fair, he only had a small section on creation/suffering so he didn't go into great detail, but I didn't get the impression that he was viewing it in a negative light.

I have certainly struggled with artworks over the years, but it wasn't painful. And it wasn't because I was exposing myself or giving birth or anything like that. It was because I couldn't see how to resolve the 'puzzle' that the artwork had become for me. The struggle has to do with my getting so wrapped up in what I think the artwork is about that I can no longer see what it's really about. My own ego can make me deaf, dumb, and blind, sometimes. Being an artist is a strange endeavor. On the one hand you're completely in charge of what you're doing, and on the other hand you're not really in charge at all, the artwork is. When the magic happens, it's a lot like some art goddess has stepped into your body and mind and is making the artwork for you. And it's wonderful. You're as amazed as anyone at the outcome. But it's not always like that. Sometimes you have to just keep banging away at it blindly, waiting for the goddess to show up. And that's exhausting, and frustrating, and not at all fun. But that's just the nature of the gig. Yet even on a bad day, it's not suffering. Like I said before, every artist I know would rather be doing art than just about anything else in life.

[zippy2006]

Originally Posted by PureX

I have certainly struggled with artworks over the years, but it wasn't painful. And it wasn't because I was exposing myself or giving birth or anything like that. It was because I couldn't see how to resolve the 'puzzle' that the artwork had become for me. The struggle has to do with my getting so wrapped up in what I think the artwork is about that I can no longer see what it's really about. My own ego can make me deaf, dumb, and blind, sometimes. Being an artist is a strange endeavor. On the one hand you're completely in charge of what you're doing, and on the other hand you're not really in charge at all, the artwork is. When the magic happens, it's a lot like some art goddess has stepped into your body and mind and is making the artwork for you. And it's wonderful. You're as amazed as anyone at the outcome. But it's not always like that. Sometimes you have to just keep banging away at it blindly, waiting for the goddess to show up. And that's exhausting, and frustrating, and not at all fun. But that's just the nature of the gig. Yet even on a bad day, it's not suffering. Like I said before, every artist I know would rather be doing art than just about anything else in life.

I agree with this, at least most of it.

Originally Posted by kmoney

And for a longer quote:

"Whatever the reason, for us as we are now, creation involves suffering, and the greatest creativity involves the greatest suffering. The greatest beauty comes from the greatest suffering. Tragedy is our highest literary form. Sad music is the most beautiful music."

Do you agree with this statement? And the paragraph? If so, how do artists suffer through the creation of their works?

I am not an artist so I am interested to see how the artists of TOL feel about this. But anyone can contribute, of course. Anyone who sees themself as a creator, do you suffer for it?

I think I agree. I think of Thom Yorke and I feel like him on a miniscule level. He has slaved over albums to get them just perfect, and in the end is probably still largely dissatisfied with the effort. I think that kind of perfectionism and self-criticism takes a toll, trying to get what you envision. But I think that when you love something very much you are willing to suffer to see it through, no matter what it is.

A muse is a different matter as Pure noted, but that is a fairly rare occurrence. But there are other forms of effortless creation (I think of ad libing in one way or another). I can't say those fall under the umbrella of suffering.

[zippy2006]

Originally Posted by noguru

You can't sing the blues if you don't live the blues.

"I know a man and he sings the blues
Yea he plays just what he feels
keeps a letter in the pocket of his coat
he never breaks the seal"

Postcards from Hell

[zoo22]

Originally Posted by kmoney

I put in bold the parts that I think Kreeft was getting at. That, in creating art you are imparting a piece of yourself.

If you get a chance, have a look at that video I posted; it's something she addresses. It's pretty much what the talk is about. Artist and self; artists dealing with self; artists and suffering self and their art; artists separating self from art... So on.

I thought it was a really interesting talk. Also, very easy to watch/listen to. Funny and insightful. Not heavy-handed. And I found it very inspiring. In terms of creating art and personally.