There's a lot of noise on the creativity front. I have started two threads on two seperate forums to get feedback on the following:
The gift of artistic creativity as an enduring personal trait is dependent on at least two different factors. Firstly, there must be an urge, drive or motivation to create something new (Creativity), and secondly, there must be talent to carry out and materialize this creative urge (Skill).
The many individuals who possess only one of these factors may be taken as proof that we are dealing with two different and, at times, unrelated abilities. There are many people who, though possessing an immense urge to create in the various fields of art, never succeed, because they lack the necessary talent. Others, on the other hand, although considerably gifted and with a specific talent in some art, never desire or attempt to create something original of their own.
Pinchas Noy "About Art and Artistic Talent"
What are your thoughts on the this idea that timeless and great art can only be the sum of these two traits?
The first forum is an open forum for artists. The members are from all age groups and backgrounds. The second forum is a closed forum. There is no specific reason for choosing these two forums other than I am a member of both. So I'm simply getting feedback from my peers.
The replies on creativity seem to fall into two polar beliefs:
- The first is that creative thinking is a mundane affair, like not
falling on your face when walking around the house in the dark because
you know your way around.. This thinking tends to believe that the
techniques of creative thinking can be taught to anyone as a rational
and pragmatic affair.
- The other view holds that creativity is a dawning of the inner powers of the individual which can transform him/her from a rational being into a super-rational one through the use of psychedelia, hypnosis, religious or meditation exercises, drugs, mysticism, and what have you. It is as far out as the other is conventional.


. 