Comment on Dr Weissman's Paper1

Weissman reminds us of the many fascinating facets inherent in the study of the creative process. Using the ego as a referent he discusses important psychic functions in a sophisticated fashion which emphasizes that he has been creative in his own right. I can do justice to his ideas only by examining some directly with the view of indicating both my agreement, which is for the most part enthusiastic, and where I believe modification and extension would further our pursuit of this appealing topic.

It is obvious that Weissman is very much involved in the study of creativity. I have noticed that whenever this subject is discussed, participation is vigorous. This, in itself, is a phenomenon worthy of study. Why should the creative process stimulate so much interest while other areas of psychic functioning attract some investigators but do not have universal magnetism? In workshops, discussants frequently quote personal experiences revealing that they value their own creativity. Creativity and self-esteem are directly proportional for many persons and the study of the creative process may awaken magical fantasies of becoming one with the subject. Still, this formulation is begging the question because it does not explain why the ability to create is so easily incorporated into the ego-ideal and becomes a topic of extreme interest.

Perhaps an important factor is that producing something that did not previously exist is imbued with magical omnipotent control of both the inner and outer world. The artist or scientist is able to retain his fundamental narcissism but in a sophisticated structured context. The need to master is successfully exercised; autonomy and the sense of controlling one's destiny are enhanced. The creative product is accompanied by an expansion and accretion to the creator's ego. In other words, by creating one is gaining psychic structure. Furthermore, this is accomplished seemingly without dependence upon external objects. To transcend one