Music, Reality and Creativity

A friend recently emailed me about his latest poetry, saying that it was like the band Genesis's lyrics, and that creativity and influences operate on an unconscious level. For me, creativity operates on a conscious, subconscious, and unconscious level, but is primarily and largely a knowable and a conscious process.

Peter Gabriel from the band Genesis said that travelling was very conducive to song-writing, and that it was something to do with lots of imagery rushing past. When I used to travel to another town by bus, I used to listen to fast, wild, complex and technical jazz, and which would influence me when I got back home to compose and write music in my band when we jammed and recorded.

The whole experience of travelling, observing, and interacting with music, life, and people, and the whole experience of music, passing life, and meeting people (like a living song and a musical reality), influenced me to put all the residue chaos, randomness, order, experiences, and influences together, and kind of form a new alchemy of sensations, experiences, and sounds. The experience of reality and the ideal experience of music merge and intermix, and are conducive to creativity and creative writing, and which in turn helps rational thinking and an understanding and a firm and strong grasp of reality.

I'm very interested in music from the point of view of reality and idealism. Does music represent same fantasy world or world of ideals?, or can music be realistic and merge and intermix with reality to form more music and emotional and social realism? The German classical composer Richard Wagner said that he valued music over other art forms, because it was the least materialistic and represented the pure spirit or mind. To me music isn't so pure or devoid of reality, because it can be influenced by the experiences of social reality and realism, and can be influenced by emotional realism as well. Music should also have some otherworldliness or idealism, but it can be also influenced by reality and experience as well. Music can also help us understand creativity and creative ability and intelligence.
One other reason why creativity is sometimes thought of as falsely largely unconscious, is that some ignorant people want to oppress and repress all creativity into the unconscious, thus making one incapable of conscious creative work, understanding, knowledge, and activity. There may be unconscious pauses in some creativity and creative processes, such as when dreams or unconscious sounds or imagery inspire us, but it is still primary and largely a conscious process and can be best understood and explained as such. This is what this article sets out to achieve and do.

Creativity and music, are both conducive to reality, as they improve rational ability, and which includes being sane and understanding and knowing the experiences and facts of life. I like to grapple and also listen to other people's experiences and knowledge on these matters, even if it is usually quite basic or simplistic; but I don't think that finding out what the processes and instrumental knowledge of creativity are in music and people are an impossible task.
I'm intelligent enough to develop and interact the complexities myself, even though I also get some creativity and inspiration from simple human interaction and learning too. I believe in creative relationships and friendships though, and believe that there is a creative skill to interacting with other people well. Simple parts can make up a complex whole, and which then interacts with my own simple and complex learning.

I very much believe in learning from music and people, and that simplicity and complexity are both important, rather than from just learning from constant instruction or books, and I think the mind and creativity very much needs various activities and a choice of them, random breaks and ordered flows, and lots of times to relax and chill out too, especially if you want to be very all-roundly creative.

Maybe I am just a very cool guy, but I don't think that stress is conducive to creativity at all. That was the trouble with my friend Steve's creative and musical ideas in our band, is that he drove us too hard in a way that created mostly anxiety and anxious music, and which was not conducive to much good creativity or good musical playing. He didn't have the sense to see this in a balanced way though, and I think that he is very much lacking in that field.

I agree that some very deep matters are beyond knowing, such as whether an afterlife or a God exists, but those are not intellectual questions, such as what are the emotional, artistic, and intellectual processes and instrumental knowledge of creativity. I like to keep trying and be positive about it, and then the answers all usually come to me one way or another, although I need breaks from purely creative thinking too, in order to re-process things clearer and better. I try to incorporate some creativity and space into my articles too for people to think a bit for themselves.

I couldn't write in a totally flowing stream-of-consciousness like my friend Steve or Jack Kerouac does. This is a creative ability of mine, and of stream-of-consciousness, but these methods and approaches could be falsely described as learning disabilities, because contrary to creative knowledge and wisdom, the mind should have sets of intellectual or physical activities or tasks forced onto itself for long periods, and/or under instruction, but which suppress creativity, discovery, and invention. I believe in some self discipline and routine, but I believe in personal and social freedom and equality too, and because creativity is very important and improves overall feeling, thinking, and artistic, literary, and scientific invention and discovery.
This is why I don't think that the entire school, or adult education system is conducive to either creativity, creative learning, or our knowledge and wisdom about it. The entire education system breeds ignorance, and politicians in particular should wise up to this and change some teaching structures and methods.

Which political party most supports creativity and creative learning, thinking, and teaching is a hard and interesting question. In some ways the Tory party do, because they believe in private education, and which can be a little bit more creative, although most private schools aren't like that in my knowledge and experience of others, and where they are creative, that teaching isn't available to everyone and so it's elitist. So I think that the other two main parties would be much more interested in creativity, creative learning and teaching, although I think that they both focus too much on creative learning, and not also enough on creative teaching. I've found that being with a good friend or a good psychotherapist is conducive to creative learning and teaching, and mutually creative learning and teaching.

I think it's disgraceful how only art is taught in most schools and not also music. I suppose music would be taught in some rich or good schools, but I very much doubt if it is taught to teach people to learn playing by improvisation and ear, instead of playing by written music and which is not the most creative way to play. It's certainly not the creative way to play and appreciate some rock and with most jazz. It's more of a conservative and classical method though I suppose, but I don't think it's a very creative model or method. I love classical music, and agree with some structure, but I still think that jazz is by far much more creative, because it's more emotionally and intellectually positive and free. Jazz is a kind of creative philosophy in itself in a way, and listening to and learning from jazz has helped me to understand creativity and things a lot better.

Regarding jazz again, I think that John Coltrane was very good at putting tunes and a lot of improvisation together at different intervals, and then blending them, rather than Charlie Parker who was very good at making lots of improvisation all from and around one fairly basic tune, and which was his expertise. Paul Desmond on the other hand, flows various tunes together in improvisation to make whole statements and pieces. He is a lot slower and smoother, but also a lot more tuneful than the others. Gerry Mulligan like Paul Desmond puts many tunes together as single pieces and harmonies, but then improvises on them.
My friend Colin's jazz sax playing, is much more like Coltrane's rather than Parker's, Gerry Mulligan's, or Paul Desmonds in this respect. I think he combines cool and hot styles, and creates a tune, then an improvisation, then another tune and another improvisation, and then puts them all together in a stream or a new flow of notes. Intellectually and technically, I think that me and Colin both use both simplistic and complex styles and methods, but then fuse the two together to make part of a song or a set piece. This is pretty much what I do also, in my musical playing and written articles, and I think we have similar styles creatively, and which are very highly creative styles.

Discussion and debate are crucial to creativity and creative learning too, although in themselves are not very creative acts. Discussion and debate includes some creativity and intellectual ability, but also some conversational and practical mental and social skills. Discussion and debate, are still not taught much as mental and social skills by the school education, psychiatric, and mental health system though, as children and psychiatric diagnosed people are mostly encouraged to be compliant, and taught and encouraged not to think for themselves much, nor to ask questions about their own and other people's abilities and minds.

I don't agree with some diagnosis of things like mania and ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), because I think that some diagnosed schizophrenia, mania, and ADHD is a more random and flowing creative way of thinking, but that in some cases it gets misdiagnosed as a deficit, a disorder, and a mental health problem.

There's the whole matter of creative ignorance of some musicians and others, and whether musicians should have creative secrets. I can see a reason for having to have some creative and intellectual secrets, at the stage of the actual creative processing, because one needs some sleep, rest, personal or social relaxation, musical receptivity, meditation, solitude, or peace and privacy of mind; but then after that, I think that those creative secrets must be shared in some way, and ideally come from more than one person's inspiration and knowledge. That is what I try to do when I write, although I don't always achieve this. I think I sometimes need a kind of mental, emotional, and spiritually shared and human transference of creativity and inspiration. I'm trying to look at creativity in both an individual and a collective way, believing in both solitude and social integration and interaction.

Again, I'm interested as to how much creative processes are unconscious. I personally don't think they are primary or largely unconscious, and that by saying they are largely unconscious as some psychiatrists and psychotherapist say, are just a way of saying that you can't understand, explain, know and write and create about creativity, change society for the better for it, and learn and teach from it, when I think that you can. I think that creativity is primarily conscious, but that some rest or unconsciousness operates or comes into play with some creating, playing, or writing, and for having necessary breaks from it. Likewise, I believe that the imagination is largely conscious, and that part of the conscious process of it is to consciously bring out ideas and information from the subconscious and unconscious mind.
I had a great conversation last night with a taxi driver about music and creativity. He didn't come up with any good solutions, but it was just interesting that his idea of creativity very much involved memory for knowing and remembering many, many, tracks and pieces.
I thought that this was interesting from the point of view of how simple or false an idea creativity is to a lot of ordinary people, and that they haven't really thought about it much at all, and basically don't intellectually know or understand much about it.

After just making a cup of tea for my mum's partner Bill, I think that some manual or physical work can be conducive to intellectual and artistic creativity, because it again takes the mind of the intellect for a while and gives it a rest, but it must be work freely chosen, and as to both where and what sort of work it is. It's not like that in capitalist society though, when you are forced to work all hours, how and when you are told to, and then with absolutely no concern for your creative abilities and potential. I suppose it would be the same under a communist system too, but in a social and liberal democracy we can change society for the better in moving towards creating a creative learning environment and society.

Another thing I worry about, is whether my actual discussion, debate, and questioning of people is conducive to their creativity. I think that a lot of it is conducive if it gets them feeling and thinking intellectually or creatively, and if there are spaces of laughter, humour, silence, and small talk in-between.

I do know one thing, that creativity is very conducive to good mental health and is a healer. In this way it is spiritual too. Friendship and social relationships in terms of creative thinking, shared knowledge, and understanding means a lot to me, but I like some simple ordinary people too.

Last but not least, I have been thinking about seriousness and creativity, and because a friend called Colin last night said that me and my friend Luke were so serious about things. Maybe he just wanted to fool around, but I think that both seriousness and humour can be useful and conducive to creativity and creative learning.