Week 1: On “On Creativity” by Joseph Racca

As mentioned in lecture, “the further art advances the closer it approaches science, the further science advances the closer it approaches art.” (Buckminster Fuller).  So as I see it, this quote states that science and art are following the path of the circumference of a circle, with art never being able to catch up with science and vice versa, science never being able to catch up with art.

Science and art have went hand in hand, sometimes clashing and sometimes clicking.  And in both art and science, creativity is the most important aspect as it continually takes a new, creative point of view or thought to bring about new forms of art in the realm of art and new hypotheses in the realm of science.  

For me, I see art as a science and science as an art.  In science, as I mentioned earlier, scientists need to be creative in order to formulate new hypotheses that they must test.  And as in science, in art, artists acquire knowledge of past techniques in order to create new ways to express their artistic ability.

In “On Creativity,” Bohm speaks of Helen Keller and the process in which Anne Sullivan creatively devised to teach Helen to learn and understand the world around her.  Because many of us are accustomed to teaching and learning through what we consider the norm, we “therefore [...] miss the opportunity to be creative and original” (Bohm).  Anne Sullivan did get this chance to be creative as she was in a situation that she, as well as the majority of people had never before been in.  She had to find ways to teach a young child who was blind, deaf, and mute, to understand the world around her.

It is unfortunate that we often do not get opportunities such as this to be creative which in the end ultimately inhibits our creative abilities.  Artists and scientists seem to always be in situations where they get that opportunity.  In “Creativity in Science and Engineering” by Ronald B. Standler, he states “One of the principal ways to be creative is to look for alternative ways to view a phenomena or for alternative ways to ask a question.

I found something very interesting in his article, and he described instances of bipolarity and creativity.  “There seems to be a higher incidence of bipolar disorder (i.e., manic-depressive disease) in highly creative people than in the entire population. This disorder causes neither creativity nor intelligence, but it seems to enhance creativity, perhaps by removing inhibitions and barriers to radical or complex thoughts.“  This is interesting when looking at it metaphorically, it compares to the struggle that many continue to face.  We sometimes find ourselves stuck between art and science.  We don’t know which to embrace and which to suppress.  And as he states, this disorder proves to be beneficial in “enhanc[ing] creativity.”  Some people are lucky enough to find a balance between the arts and sciences and some people aren’t as lucky, either having to choose between the two, or being left without the option of not being able to choose between either.



Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.