Panel on 'Creativity'

Chairman: León Grinberg, Buenos Aires

Members: D. J. de Levita, Amsterdam; Bernard C. Meyer, New York; Michel de M'Uzan, Paris; Richard Sterba, Detroit

Panel Discussion at the 27th International Psycho-Analytical Congress, Vienna, 29 July 1971

After introducing the members of the panel, the chairman, Dr Grinberg, delivered a brief but comprehensive historical survey of previous approaches to this subject, citing mainly the work of Freud, Sachs, Rank, Hartmann, Kris, Melanie Klein and Phyllis Greenacre. Grinberg felt it would be most profitable for the present panel to discuss those aspects of the creative process which have not yet been sufficiently clarified, to reconsider the validity of some concepts, to consider new perspectives, and to discuss certain antitheses such as the innate opposed to early object relations or creativity and psychosis.

His own contribution dealt with the latter, noting that while every individual is endowed with creative capacity, at least two types exist: (1) the ordinary one, i.e. the exclusive patrimony of the human race, and (2) the exceptional creativity and originality characteristic of certain remarkably gifted individuals. The theoretical understanding of the second category is still in a highly controversial state, e.g. the relation to severe psychopathology, the role of the unconscious in creativity, etc.

Grinberg then presented his own views which stemmed largely from the work of a study group coordinated by him.1

All humans have potentialities which may develop into true creativity or genius, depending on certain ego capacities and the quality of internal and external object relationships. The creative act is the outcome of a process in which current structures undergo a state of transitory disorganization in order to reintegrate later on a different basis. Both the disintegration and the reorganization are parts of the creative process and are condensed in the creative act.

Since the passage through the chaotic disorganizati