Listened to "Creativity unleashed" on "Philosopher's Zone"

The Radio show "Philosopher's zone" from Australia do have some interesting topics sometimes, and the programs are quite enjoyable. This morning, I heard a radio show on creativity.

Street Art, Tagging, bombing is by some people considered something bad, and I suppose in most countries it's actually prohibited. But this was the angle the program choosed as an angle to discuss creativity.

First, however, a more general philosophical discussion was made on Creativity, starting with Nietzsche's discussions on the "Dionysian" VS the "Appolonian". Where the Dionysian is considered to be more the artistic, inspirational part of the world, and the Appolonian is the logical, concrete part. Taking parallell from ancient Greec dramas, Nietzsche concludes that it is a mix of the both that is needed for a successful drama. Or life.

The discussion continues with an interview with a university philosopher Rodrigues in Phenomenology from Perth, who argues that the Rational, Dualistic way to look upon the world (Me in here, the world outside) can be challenged by considering the self as a part of the world, challenging the Cogito, ergo sum by Descartes. The world was there before us, we are in it, and we can modify it. The self has to be biased with the world, so to speak, in an orderly mixture.

Finally, the Street Art topic is discussed, Eggleston, head for some street art project in Australia discusses the ways to look upon spaces within the cities, the way they change, the way they are perceived, not just as buildings and streets, but also the way everything appears. And she argues that it is in the change, eg by making different art projects as well as redesigning the cities as such by architects that the city gets life.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/

---------------------------------

Now, what do I think about this? Well, It's easy to say that it is good that people should be creative, realize their inner selfs and so. But then, why don't most people write books or make paintings?

Who does? Quite broadly, Idlers. People who don't have a life story of "work". You are brought up, poor or relatively wealthy, but with your parents firmly in a background of being employees or housewifes. The story of your life is either to get a job or first study and then get a job. (Until the 80's, the story for a woman could also be to take care of a family. Not so any longer in Sweden). To make a life possible. Doing that, and later getting a family will take most of your energy, so even if you have some artistic talent, that's something you dont do.

While people from "good families" do, even if they are rather short on money tries to answer the question "how do I want to live my life" rather than "what will I do for a living".  Most, at least Swedish authors or artists (and Academical Philosophers) do come from a non-job background. Street artists, Taggers and bombers? Are they rich, from good famililes? No - but they are Idle for other reasons.

There is another story then "Rich VS Poor", namely "working VS not-working". The Rich and the poor VS the guys in the middle so to speak. And the working class and the middle class is not supposed to write books, they are supposed to work.

Having said that - of course you should not consider yourself a "victim" if you are born to "work" but have artistic talents. But the journey will be much harder, maybe especially towards yourself, since you are brought up thinking things like "art" is a pastime, at most.

So the challenge, as I see it, is to encourage also the working classes to ask "what do I want to do with my life".