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.
“Developmental or ordinary creativity” is distinguished from “genius creativity.” The former offers pleasure or distraction. The latter sometimes offers this, but tarrying before the product of genius also brings a new understanding of one's culture, one's self, and even an experience of transcendence. The concepts of Heidegger and of Gadamer are applied to this distinction. All serious artists are seen as manifesting one or more of three aspects: (1) driven by creative genius from the biological furnace of the individual, (2) temporary regressions and exhaustion of ego function, and (3) an anxiety-driven process resting on a constitutional ability to shift levels of ego activities and compromise formations. Falling in love is discussed as another example of creative imagination based on the need to solve psychological discomfort either due to developmental or pathological problems. Creativity in psychoanalytic work is an important factor that needs to be explored in addition to the fact that every country seems to create the approach to psychoanalysis that it needs. Emotional illness is demonstrated as hindering and constricting creativity, not enhancing it as is the popular idea. Some seriously psychopathological artists are able to wall off the pathology and sublimate their conflicts into the production of art, but creativity requires a relatively intact ego; when the ego deteriorates, so does the creative product. An important spring to genius creativity is the nonrecognition of the extremely talented child, which leads to solitary activity and an immersion in ideas and fantasies that, if the person has the requisite talent, is manifested in the expression of truth and beauty through art.