Creativity and Art-In relation to Jung’s Theories
Jung starts off by stating that as psychology is the study of the mind, human cognition must be taken into account while attempting to explain how creativity and art are formed. Jung cautions that his findings are only hypotheses since there would be a scientific field devoted to creativity if psychology had been able to completely explain it. In the same way that other social sciences are, psychology is a science of theories. Even the field of neuroscience, which lies at the nexus of psychology and neurology, has been unable to provide a conclusive explanation for what inspires creativity. This is due to how little is known about the brain. Even with all the scanning technology available and the research on the brain, we still know very little about its complexities and ultimate nature.
Jung notes that the objectives of psychologists and literary reviewers are distinct. The obvious plot is examined by a literary critic, but a psychologist reads "between the lines" to uncover the unconscious narrative and the characters' underlying motives. As an example of a play that begs to be understood owing to its dramatic and sad storyline, Jung mentions Goethe's "Faust" (1808, 1832). Jung divided literature into two subcategories: "psychological" and "visionary." All that the "psychological" conveys are conscious conflicts; I would refer to this as "conscious literature." The second kind is "visionary," which uses literature and art to try to delve into the unconscious. It "emerges from timeless depths; it is alien and cold, multifaceted, demonic, and grotesque" (Jung, 1933).
Jung felt it was crucial to make this distinction because a visionary artist may be compelled to produce deep, illogically inspired narratives and artwork that could be upsetting to our rational, linear view of the universe. In other words, the unconscious brought into consciousness through art could shock our senses. When I read Jung's definition of "visionary" work, I immediately thought of Salvador Dali (1904–1989), my favorite surrealist. In his paintings, sketches, and sculptures, Dali depicts dreams and nightmares, or what Jung called the "dark recesses of the mind," which are sometimes exquisitely graceful and beautiful and other times gloomy, hideous, and dreadful. His work was unquestionably "visionary," coming from the unconscious.
After arguing that both the conscious and unconscious may be expressed via art, Jung reminds us that it is too restrictive to view art just as a reflection of the mental state of the creator. We shouldn't read into art what the creator was like. Rather, it is necessary to see art as a "symbolic expression" of mythology. What does this signify, though?
Jung had a strong spiritual foundation. His overarching psychoanalytical concept, which holds that mythology has historically been the driving force behind human advancement, was born out of his spirituality. Civilization has developed from ancient mythology (Jung identified the Archetypes based primarily on a shared mythology). I believe that what Jung was attempting to say—but was unable to express explicitly—was that all mythology and mysticism derives from a supernatural source that is difficult to understand. He held that the "Collective Subconscious," an infinite and everlasting "library" of human progress, contains all of the unconscious information that we are aware of. It has a record of every idea, speech, and deed that has ever been expressed.
He grounded his concept in a collective unconscious repository on the mythical and universal psychological material of dreams and hallucinations. He came to the conclusion that the artist is guided by the collective unconscious to create the creative representations required at the period in history; these representations are drawn from the collective unconscious and contain our ancient mythology. In the end, according to Jung, the artist is a "subordinate to it" tool of the collective unconscious. "What is essential in the work of art is that it should rise far above the realm of personal life and speak from the poet's spirit and heart to the spirit and heart of mankind," says Jung, encouraging artists to create works of art that would inspire all of humankind.
Commonalities Among Jung and other Artists
In addition to referring to the "subconscious part of the mind," Henry Moore and Carl Jung both emphasize the importance of the conscious mind in the creative process: "...(the artist) he also has a conscious mind which is not inactive" (Moore, 1992). It's stated differently by Jung, who refers to the contributions of the conscious mind as "psychological" and the unconscious mind's artistic renderings as "visionary" (which I find confusing because the definition of "psychological" includes both conscious and unconscious functions).
The definitions of Jung and Moore express the same idea: that art arises from two sources, each serving a distinct purpose, but that neither source can exist without the other, just as a lamp cannot exist without electricity. The manifestation of the two forces depends on one another rather than being in opposition to one another. The domain of the unconscious and the "shadow self" that Jung spoke of are represented in "right-brained" or "visionary" art, whereas "psychological" art may be characterized as "left-brained" art that is logical, linear, and reasonable. Nothing about daily, human life is mentioned in it; instead, Jung (1933) writes that "we are reminded of dreams, nighttime fears, and the dark corners of the mind that we sometimes sense with misgiving."
The group's gentle poet, Author D. H. Lawrence, brought up what psychology regards to as emotional intelligence, or "E.Q.", while Jung and Moore talked about creativity and the psyche. Emotional quotient (E.Q.) measures one's emotional intelligence and insights. While they may have a high I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient), those with poor levels of empathy, such as autistic people who have a pronounced inability to understand other people's emotional states, are considered to have low E.Q. Lawrence makes the case that science should not be used to teach art at art schools. The learner should be taught and evaluated instead in accordance with his or her level of "purity of spirit," which he or she characterizes as "supremely delicate awareness" and "sensitive awareness." He seems to be advocating that educational institutions put more emphasis on helping students enhance their emotional intelligence. This is a challenging, if interesting, job that got me thinking about whether studies have shown a substantial relationship between creative talent and emotional sensitivity (E.Q.).
Lawrence referred to switching from writing to painting as "taking the plunge" and said that it was the most important event in his life: "It was to me the most significant moment, when you have a blank canvass and a big brush full of wet paint, and you plunge" (Lawrence, 1928–1930). He asks himself, "What am I doing bursting into paint? " at the advanced age of 40. Because I write, I should stick to ink. He doesn't appear to know why it occurred, but he believes it was predestined. We know so much and feel so little, and he is pleased he never received a formal education since he finds art theory to be overly cognitive. As a writer, he is approaching the subject of painting with fresh eyes, which adds interest to his article.
The viewpoints of these three artists are all worthwhile. While there are some parallels between them, each one takes a unique stance on the subject of art. Jung analyzes it from a psychological framework and adds a mythical viewpoint, as you might expect a psychiatrist to do. Lawrence addresses the topic as a novelist who is seeing visual arts with fresh eyes, allowing the reader to experience the artist's initiation. When an artist is careful and alert to his environment, he might achieve an integrated completeness, according to Moore's balanced perspective on Gestalt.
Dr. Sigmond Freud is regarded as the father of psychology, making Jung the second most significant theorist in the field since he is the closest thing to a successor that Freud ever had. In addition to being a prolific painter of mystical and symbolic works of art, Jung was a practicing analyst and author. That, however, does not lessen the perspectives of the other artists.
Works Cited
Carl Gustov Jung. Introduction
to Jungian Psychology: Notes on the Seminar on Analytical Psychology. Philemon
Foundation Series, 1925.
Carl Gustov Jung. Modern Man in
Search of a Soul, p.156-57.
Kegan Paul, Trench,
Trubner and Co., London, 1933.
Johann Wolfgang von
Goethe. Faust. Thomas
Boosey and Sons, London, 1808 and 1832.
Carl Gustav Jung. Modern Man in
Search of a Soul, p.156-57.
Kegan Paul, Trench,
Trubner and Co., London, 1933.
D.H. Lawrence. Making
Pictures. William Heinemann Ltd., London,
Alfred
A. Knopf, Inc., 1928-1930.
“Notes on Sculpture.” In Sculpture Magazine. Henry Moore. Da Capo Press, 1992.
https://books.google.com/books/about/Henry_Moore_on_sculpture.html?id=0lTq
No comments:
Post a Comment