Chapter 3

Music and Creativity

Why do people make music? What incentive or reason encourages some people to perform or compose? Moreover, since nearly everyone enjoys listening to music, why isn't everyone involved in music-making as well? Where does the creative impulse come from?

Throughout history, thinkers have speculated about the origins of art, creativity, and genius. It is impossible to review here all of the pertinent theories of creativity. But it may be helpful to outline some of the basic views. We can identify at least nine accounts or explanations of the origins of music: (1) art as gratification, (2) art as play, (3) art as self-actualization, (4) art as deviance, (5) art as catharsis, (6) art as sublimation, (7) art as communication, (8) art as spirit, and (9) art as craft.

1. Art as Gratification (Chocolate Cake Account)

According to this view, people make music for the same reasons they make anything else -- such as making a chocolate cake. So why do people make chocolate cake? Because (1) it is delicious to eat, (2) it makes a great gift (making a cake can endear you to your friends -- since other people also find chocolate cake delicious), (3) if you are good at it, you can sell it -- in which case you're not just making a chocolate cake, you're making a living.

In other words, music (like cakes) may be made for one of more of the following reasons: (1) personal gratification, (2) the satisfaction of pleasing others, (3) as a livelihood.

PROBLEMS:

  1. This simple account doesn't explain why we like chocolate cake. That is, this account doesn't explain how our tastes work and how they are formed.
  2. The satisfaction of pleasing others and the securing of a livelihood don't conform entirely with music history. Much music is poorly received: whereas some composers have been appreciated and praised, others have been criticized and ostracized. Relatively few people have managed to make a living from creating music.

2. Art as Play

Many writers have emphasized the "play-like" aspects of art. According to this account, music is a form of play -- albeit play done primarily by adults. Dogs will chase their own tails. Kittens will jump and swat at nothing at all. Children play. Composers compose.

In viewing art as a form of play, composers are often regarded as constructing musical "games" that they then play. Like any game, there are rules. But these rules are arbitrary and self-imposed limits. Like the rules of baseball, the rules are meant simply to increase the pleasure of playing the game. Like baseball, the game may be treated with considerable earnestness or gravity -- even though there is little or no cause to be serious.

Although everyone plays games, what distinguishes the creative mind according to this view is the ability and disposition to make-up new games. In the words of the philosopher Immanuel Kant: "genius is what gives art its rules."

If art is a form of play, we might well ask, what is the purpose of play? There are two common responses to this question. According to one response, (1) play is just plain fun; the play serves no useful purpose apart from pleasure. This is a variant of the `art as gratification' view. A second response is to claim that (2) play is utilitarian; play has a value beyond play itself. According to the philosopher Charles Pierce, play is practice for problem-solving. The playful antics of kittens are safe ways of learning the serious business of hunting. Similarly, music-makers learn the process of discovery; music-lovers learn how to listen better, or learn to develop greater emotional maturity, etc.

In some utilitarian accounts of play, play is evaluated entirely in evolutionary terms. According to this point of view, in order to understand the origins of music-making, we must address the question "What evolutionary advantage is conferred by music-making?" This question is associated with the work of Juan Roderer.

PROBLEMS:

  1. There are lots of games we could play. Why should we engage in musical play? We could, for example, devise an infinite number of paper and pencil games to be played with manuscript paper. Why then do games-players persist in writing notes rather than abstract graffiti?
  2. It's not clear that learning music teaches us much about discovery. Is it really the case that exposing engineers to musical composition will make them better at building bridges? Would teaching explorers (such as Columbus) how to play the violin make them better at discovering new continents? If so, how?

3. Art as Self-Actualization

The term self-actualization is associated with the work of psychologist Abraham Maslow. According to Maslow, humans have a hierarchy of needs beginning with basic biological needs (such as food and warmth), to psychological needs (such as love), culminating in higher needs (such as spiritual fulfillment and creative self-expression). The goal of each person is to realize our individual potentials by catering to our innate needs and impulses in non-destructive ways.

Art is a form of self-expression and so is indicative of one of the highest manifestations of self-actualization. All humans are potentially creative, but failing to cater to more fundamental needs in the hierarchy may reduce the capacity for achieving creative self-expression. According to the humanistic psychologist, Carl Rogers, creativity arises when people are well-adjusted and unusually sensitive. (Contrast this notion with Freud's account given below.)

PROBLEMS:

  1. Not all creative artists are well-adjusted. How do we explain the "odd-ball artist" phenomenon? (see below).

4. Art as Deviance

Artists are not "normal" people. Artists are more apt to be homosexual, are more apt to suffer from dyslexia, epilepsy, depression, suicidal tendencies, personality disorders, and a host of other mental problems. Artists are also more apt to be `loners' -- although this may be a result of people avoiding them.

The history of art is full of innumerable examples of abnormal behavior by artists. Satie was a hermit. Van Gogh cut off his ear. Hemingway committed suicide. The behaviors of lesser-known artists are even more bizarre. In the 1980s, a west-coast artist created theatrical works in which the highlight was the dancers vomiting on stage. In the 1970s, a German visual artist progressively amputated his penis and documented it with photographs (he later died). We may or may not recognize these behaviors as works of art. But we can certainly recognize them as being deviant.

Different societies treat deviant individuals in different ways, but most societies provide some opportunities by which deviant individuals can fulfill productive and accepted roles. In many so-called primitive societies, deviant individuals may become shamans, soothsayers, magicians, or priests. According to this view, art provides a socially acceptable outlet for deviant behavior. In short, art may provide a framework within which certain forms of "craziness" are both condoned and valued.

PROBLEMS:

  1. The "odd-ball" characterization of artists is a romantic stereotype. Most artists are normal, reasonably well-adjusted individuals.
  2. Art isn't just deviant non-sense. Most art is beautiful.

5. Art as Catharsis

The ancient Greeks developed a sophisticated theory of drama. In viewing (say) portrayals of revenge, anger, or passion, Aristotle suggested that the audience would be less apt to act according to negative instincts. That is, by seeing someone portray a character who goes into a murderous rage, our own instincts to commit murder are somehow purged. In identifying with the character, we recognize the emotions that may lead to a certain action. But at the same time, we recognize that the action is wrong or inappropriate. This process of purging negative instincts is called catharsis.

According to this view, music stimulates emotions -- in the process, purging us of the need to act out these emotions in real life. Music is a sort of fictional account of the emotional life. Having experienced the "sorrow" expressed in a sad melody, for example, our own tendency to feel sorrowful is exercised -- and so lessened.

PROBLEMS:

  1. The cathartic model suggests that a love song is more apt to get rid of any romantic feelings than to increase or stimulate romantic feelings. Peace activists might be expected to prefer to listen to military marches.

6. Art as Sublimation

One of the most influential theories of artistic behavior was formulated by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). The major tenets of Freud's theory can be summarized as follows:

Notice that Freud's theory of art is essentially a variation of the ancient Greek theory of catharsis -- that is, art purges negative instincts. However, Freud's theory is intended to explain the motivations of the artist rather than of the audience.

PROBLEMS:

  1. Freud's theory might explain why art is created, but it doesn't explain why art is beautiful.
  2. Freud's theory implies that music is merely food, sex, or warmth in another guise. His theory seems to preclude any distinctly musical motivations.

7. Art as Communication

A number of writers have proposed viewing art as a form of communication between the artist and the viewer. According to this view, individual art-forms (such as dance or painting) are akin to distinct languages, and particular works of art convey messages within that language. Unlike the messages conveyed using ordinary languages, the messages in art are typically non-verbal. For example, music has been often portrayed as `the language of emotions.'

One of the advantages of the "art as communication" theory is that it makes the listener an essential part of art. Without someone to receive the message, there is little point in sending a message. In the words of Harold Lasswell, the essence of a communicational theory is the question: "Who says what in what channel to whom with what effect?" (Lasswell, 1948).

PROBLEMS:

  1. As formulated, this account doesn't explain why we like some messages and not others. That is, the theory doesn't explain esthetic taste or esthetic pleasure. Do we appreciate musical works because (1) we understand the message, (2) we agree with the message, (3) we are convinced by the message?
  2. A number of artists have openly objected to the view of art as communication. Igor Stravinsky, for example, poured scorn on the idea that his compositions were intended to convey "some message."
  3. When composers have explicitly imbued their compositions with a particular message, listeners often fail to get the message. Even lovers of a particular work may not understand the intended message; does this mean the work is a failure?

8. Art as Spirit

One of the foremost uses of music throughout human history has been in the service of religious ceremony. In early Judaic, Christian, and Islamic traditions, spirit was associated with breathing (failing to breathe indicated that one's spirit had abandoned or `departed' one's body). Even today, the word "inspire" means both `to receive artistic insight,' as well as `to take a breath.'

There are innumerable views concerning the relationship between art and spirituality. Here we will distinguish just three broad notions: (1) Art may be a manifestation of spirit, where artists provide a `medium' through which the spiritual world speaks to us. According to this view, artists are akin to prophets: artists hold special powers of discernment or close contact with the spiritual world. In some cultures, certain songs are believed to have been gifts to the people by a particular god or spirit, and were simple "received" by a particular person. (2) Conversely, works of art may be purely human artifacts that are created as offerings to the spiritual realm. For example, humans may make music as a way of praising God. (3) Art may be an evocation of spirit, where listening to music draws us humans more closely into the realm of spirit -- or music-making invites spirits to join with us. According to this view, music evokes a reverential state or environment more suited to reception of the spirit.

PROBLEMS:

  1. As in the case of Freud's theory of sublimation, the above spiritual accounts of art do not explain why art is beautiful.
  2. If music prepares the mind to be more receptive to the spiritual realm, how precisely does music achieve this?
  3. Not everyone believes that a spiritual realm exists.

9. Art as Craft

Much of the writing on creativity has focused on the concept of artistic genius. The word "genius" is Latin for "one who begets." The modern usage can be traced to Francis Galton who linked the idea of genius to the creative individual of exceptional or astounding ability. A genius is not someone who is merely talented. It designates someone who is qualitatively different from ordinary mortals.

Several writers have argued that the concept of artistic genius is wrong-headed. Of course there are different degrees of talent, but there is no special "genius" that sets apart one group of people from another; there is no dividing line. According to this view, the popularity of the idea of genius comes from a need to distinguish "true" from "false" musical prophets.

In addition, several writers have suggested that it is wrong to view the arts (music, dance, painting, literature, etc.) as qualitatively different from other pleasurable activities (eating, sports, sunbathing, kissing). Hence, there is no real distinction between "art" and "craft." Some people dig ditches, other people play the violin.

PROBLEMS:

  1. Making music is not the same as making mud pies. Smelling flowers may also be a pleasurable pastime, but music remains a much more popular activity. The "no such thing as creativity" view doesn't account for the immense popularity of music.

* * *

The above accounts do not exhaust existing theories concerning the origins of art. Writings on art and music contain an abundance of interesting ideas. A major problem with these accounts is that they remain speculative. In the past, few attempts have been made to gather pertinent data that might illuminate the causes of artistic impulses and actions, or discriminate between two or more of the above theoretical accounts. Traditionally, music scholars have tended to support one or another theory of art based on their own intuitions, rather than on a dispassionate testing of different ideas.

In recent years, psychologists have begun to test various esthetic theories using experimental methods. The work of Daniel Berlyne (1971) has been especially influential in shaping research on the psychological origins and bases of art. The empirical study of art is often referred to as psychoaesthetics.

References:

Aristotle (1946). Poetics. Translated by E. Barker as The Poetics of Aristotle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Berlyne, Daniel (1971). Aesthetics and Psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Fischer, Ernst (1963). The Necessity of Art; A Marxist Approach. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Koestler, Arthur (1964). The Act of Creation. London: Pan Books.
Lasswell, Harold Dwight (1948). "The structure and function of communication in society." In Lyman Bryson (editor), The Communication of Ideas. New York.
May, Rollo (1975). The Courage to Create. New York: W. W. Norton.
Rogers, Carl (1954). Towards a theory of creativity. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, Vol. 11 (1954) pp. 249-60; reprinted in Vernon (1970).
Sparshott, Francis (1980). Aesthetics of Music. In S. Sadie (editor), The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians. London: Macmillan Publishing, Vol. 1, pp. 120-134.
Storr, Anthony (1972). The Dynamics of Creation. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Vernon, P. E. (1970). Creativity. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Review the following concepts:
Gratification:
Art as play:
Art as deviance:
Catharsis:
Sublimation:
Repression:
Self-actualization:

What evolutionary advantage(s) do you suppose might be conferred by music-making?

What views are associated with the following people?

Sigmund Freud:
Abraham Maslow:
Carl Rogers:
Aristotle:
Charles Peirce:
Immanuel Kant: