Although many people seem
determined to resist this fact, it has long been acknowledged by those who have
studied creativity. If liquor and other drugs have been such a boon to original
thought, one researcher ask, why hasn’t the corner saloon (or the backstreet) produced
more creative achievers? No one, as yet, has answered this question
satisfactorily. Nor is anyone likely to. The reason drugs harm creativity,
Brewster Ghiselin explains, is that “their action reduces
judgment, and the activities they provoke are hallucinatory rather than
illuminating.” What is
needed, he argues, is not artificial stimulation of the mind, but increased
control and direction.
The use of drugs and
liquor as stimulants is sometimes part of a larger misconception that might be
termed the bohemian mystique. This misconception
is the notion that a dissipated lifestyle somehow casts off intellectual
restraints and opens the mind to new ideas. Eliot Dole Hutchinson offers an
assessment that most researchers would endorse:
“Narrow streets, shabby studios, undisciplined living and artistic
ballyhoo about local colour may all have their place in pseudo artistry, but
they have little to do with genuine creation. Nor is the necessary creative
freedom clearly associated with them at all. Bohemianism squanders its freedom,
returns from its hours of dissipation less effective. Creative discipline
capitalizes its leisure, returns refreshed, reinvigorated, eager.”
References:
§ Vincent Ryan Ruggiero’s The Art of Thinking: A Guide to Critical and Creative Thought, 8th
Edition (Pearson Education, Inc., 2007) page 89
§ Eliot Dole Hutchinson’s How to Think Creatively (Nashville: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1949)
page 79
Having control and direction increased creativity
Lord, Give
Us Today Our Daily Idea(s)