You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
After the completion of the workshop group discussions in the morning of the second day the forum ended with a further plenary session, this time chaired by Dr R. Wallerstein, and with a panel composed of Dr C. Chiland, Dr P. Neubauer and Dr L. Shengold.
R. Wallerstein: With your permission I shall call to order the proceedings of this last plenary session in this International Colloquium. In this first ninety-minute session we will begin with a special treat. Dr Shengold has undertaken to speak to us on the fascinating issues which were raised in response to Dr Spruiell's paper yesterday dealing with creativity in relation to issues of imagination and fantasy.
After Len Shengold's presentation I will then call on each of the spokespersons for the four different groups who met yesterday afternoon and this morning briefly to report for us on the issues that arose in their groups and which they want to bring before the panel for general discussion. The rest of this first session will be spent on what I hope will be an animated dialogue relating to those issues. The members of the panel who sit on the platform will have a certain primacy in being able to say their piece first, but they will by no means monopolize the discussion. We intend it to be an interchange between the panel and the whole group.
We will then take a break, after which I will undertake to summarize as best I can the proceedings of the whole two days. This will be followed by such responses as you may have to my summary, and an evaluation of the proceedings.
I will now ask Len Shengold to talk with us on issues of creativity.
L. Shengold: I should like to begin by commenting on Dr Spruiell's paper. I have had the advantage of reading the full version of it, and the paper is, as Dr Spruiell says of Freud's ‘The Moses of Michelangelo’, itself a work of art. It describes, as Spruiell puts it, Freud's fascination with Michelangelo's Moses, and then Freud's fascination with his own fascination. In his twenty-m