I'm about 200 pages into Rubin's book. It's difficult for me to evaluate objectively as I'm seeped in Buddhist thought and work in multiple creative channels. I find myself nodding at his observations, but wondering if someone "trying" to venture into something creative would understand. Or if his observations are sticky.
Contrary to his claims that everyone has the ability, I think not. I also think that he needed an editor. There's repetition and occasional wandering. It's all readable, but still, I wonder about its voice. I hear a guru, but question whether gurus can teach creativity. You're either cursed/blessed with the gift from birth or not. Rubin, as accomplished as he is, leaves a certain hollowness in his advice -- then again, it is Rubin or his co-author?
Readable, but ultimately, it repeatedly states the obvious. By repeatedly, I mean over and over. This one won't find a permanent place on my shelf. But, Franklin, a good recommendation as a ASBC read.
To state the obvious first; this was a fast, easy read after Schreyachs’ “Totality”.
Throughout The Creative Act: A Way of Being, I was hoping for more anecdotes from Rubin about the creative process working with musicians. As a life-long music enthusiast, I was looking for them with every turn of the page. As Franklin states: “Unsurprisingly, his remarks about music are the most interesting passages.” When Rubin did, his love and understanding of the creative process producing music was ever present.
Having listened to his lengthy interview with Joe Rogan (there are also many short clips on Instagram and Youtube) he comes across as a guru or mystic. His physical appearance and personality feeds this persona, knowingly or not.This is less obvious in the book, but palpable. He is engaging to the point of making the creative act sound easy. For the uninitiated, it is a book one can easily be taken in by. Perhaps this is a good thing, I’m not sure. I agree with Franklin’s point: “This book could have used less lotus and more mud.”
Rubin draws a somewhat fuzzy distinction between being creative and being an artist. He mentions many ways one can be creative that have nothing to do with art. However, it’s a book which might lead one to think ‘I’m creative , ergo, I am going to be an artist.’
As a painter, I found his ideas about creativity fairly general, but certainly worthy of keeping them in the fore. As Franklin states, The Creative Act may be “too remedial” for some, but there are plenty of insightful observations that are tried and tested.
For critical thinking about painting and criticism, I often reach for Fairfield Porter’s: Art In Its Own Terms” (perhaps a future read for this group?) and Walter Darby Bannard’s Aphorisms for Artist, both written by accomplished painters and critics in their own right. There are others too: Andrew Forge’s Observation: Notation and Hilton Kramer’s The Revenge of The Philistines.
I appreciated Rubin’s Mingus quote: “Making the simple complicated is commonplace. Making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that’s creativity.”
Sounds like Rubin should have stuck to what he knows from personal experience and used that to make his points about creativity. Instead, he cast his net too wide, tried to grasp beyond his reach, and eschewed the focus that pertained to his own trajectory, thus diluting and weakening his presentation.
Darby's book is better because he was a visual artist addressing visual artists, being intimately acquainted with the turf in question and able to speak to it from dealing with it his entire adult life.
Hmmm, yes, I've not read this book BUT it looks interesting -- Perhaps as a general call to someone who is NOT actively practicing but wants to? Whereas the hallowed DARBY book speaks/argues/exhorts directly to readers who ARE engaged. Good to get your reflexions. 😺
I'm about 200 pages into Rubin's book. It's difficult for me to evaluate objectively as I'm seeped in Buddhist thought and work in multiple creative channels. I find myself nodding at his observations, but wondering if someone "trying" to venture into something creative would understand. Or if his observations are sticky.
Contrary to his claims that everyone has the ability, I think not. I also think that he needed an editor. There's repetition and occasional wandering. It's all readable, but still, I wonder about its voice. I hear a guru, but question whether gurus can teach creativity. You're either cursed/blessed with the gift from birth or not. Rubin, as accomplished as he is, leaves a certain hollowness in his advice -- then again, it is Rubin or his co-author?
Readable, but ultimately, it repeatedly states the obvious. By repeatedly, I mean over and over. This one won't find a permanent place on my shelf. But, Franklin, a good recommendation as a ASBC read.
To state the obvious first; this was a fast, easy read after Schreyachs’ “Totality”.
Throughout The Creative Act: A Way of Being, I was hoping for more anecdotes from Rubin about the creative process working with musicians. As a life-long music enthusiast, I was looking for them with every turn of the page. As Franklin states: “Unsurprisingly, his remarks about music are the most interesting passages.” When Rubin did, his love and understanding of the creative process producing music was ever present.
Having listened to his lengthy interview with Joe Rogan (there are also many short clips on Instagram and Youtube) he comes across as a guru or mystic. His physical appearance and personality feeds this persona, knowingly or not.This is less obvious in the book, but palpable. He is engaging to the point of making the creative act sound easy. For the uninitiated, it is a book one can easily be taken in by. Perhaps this is a good thing, I’m not sure. I agree with Franklin’s point: “This book could have used less lotus and more mud.”
Rubin draws a somewhat fuzzy distinction between being creative and being an artist. He mentions many ways one can be creative that have nothing to do with art. However, it’s a book which might lead one to think ‘I’m creative , ergo, I am going to be an artist.’
As a painter, I found his ideas about creativity fairly general, but certainly worthy of keeping them in the fore. As Franklin states, The Creative Act may be “too remedial” for some, but there are plenty of insightful observations that are tried and tested.
For critical thinking about painting and criticism, I often reach for Fairfield Porter’s: Art In Its Own Terms” (perhaps a future read for this group?) and Walter Darby Bannard’s Aphorisms for Artist, both written by accomplished painters and critics in their own right. There are others too: Andrew Forge’s Observation: Notation and Hilton Kramer’s The Revenge of The Philistines.
I appreciated Rubin’s Mingus quote: “Making the simple complicated is commonplace. Making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that’s creativity.”
Sounds like Rubin should have stuck to what he knows from personal experience and used that to make his points about creativity. Instead, he cast his net too wide, tried to grasp beyond his reach, and eschewed the focus that pertained to his own trajectory, thus diluting and weakening his presentation.
Darby's book is better because he was a visual artist addressing visual artists, being intimately acquainted with the turf in question and able to speak to it from dealing with it his entire adult life.
Hmmm, yes, I've not read this book BUT it looks interesting -- Perhaps as a general call to someone who is NOT actively practicing but wants to? Whereas the hallowed DARBY book speaks/argues/exhorts directly to readers who ARE engaged. Good to get your reflexions. 😺
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-ifjIAoleI