Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T02:40:51.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Creativity and mental health

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

J. Schlesinger*
Affiliation:
300 Broadway, Suite 3B, Dobbs Ferry, New York 10522, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Columns
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

After thoroughly enjoying Dr Wills' 1988 book (Reference Wills and CooperWills & Cooper, 1988) I was dismayed to see his recent article (Reference WillsWills, 2003). His book detailed the real, unremitting and often unique stressors faced by those struggling to make a living from music - as opposed to the pop-psychology focus on their (allegedly) inherent psychological flaws.

Although entertaining, psychological autopsies are not valid research tools, as the author fortunately points out in the ‘limitations’ box. Further, the ‘comprehensive literature’ about the psychopathology/creativity link is shot through with badly designed studies and dramatic overstatement.

Like Wills, Jamison (Reference Jamison1989) was the sole judge of her hand-picked sample - 47 creative artists - but few authors dig up her unreplicated original work, preferring to pass along her unscientific conclusions. For example, many introductory psychology textbooks include her contention that 50% of poets have affective disorders, without noting that she had only 18 poets in her sample and moreover diagnosed affective disorder as simply ‘seeking treatment’ for it. And while Ludwig's book (Reference Ludwig1995) is full of charts and graphs, on close and trained inspection they are overwhelmingly meaningless; despite its subtitle, it actually resolves nothing at all.

Unfortunately, the tradition in this field is to pass along any confirmatory ‘mad creative’ conclusions, regardless of any liberties taken with the scientific method. Most of the common research blunders are detailed by Arnold Rothenberg (Reference Rothenberg1990), as well as in my own work (Schlesinger, Reference Schlesinger2002a ,Reference Schlesinger b ). Such flaws should have been fatal, but apparently the public appetite for the doomed artist is too great. It's a shame that so many professionals continue to feed it with their invalid speculation. As Wills understands better than most, musicians don't need anything else to worry about.

References

Jamison, K. R. (1989) Mood disorders and patterns of creativity in British writers and artists. Psychiatry, 52, 125134.Google Scholar
Ludwig, A. M. (1995) The Price of Greatness: Resolving the Creativity and Madness Controversy. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Rothenberg, A. (1990) Creativity and Madness: New Findings and Old Stereotypes. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, J. (2002a) Issues in creativity and madness: part one, ancient questions and modern answers. Ethical Human Sciences and Services: An International Journal of Critical Inquiry, 4, 7376.Google Scholar
Schlesinger, J. (2002b) Issues in creativity and madness: part two, eternal flames. Ethical Human Sciences and Services: An International Journal of Critical Inquiry, 4, 139142.Google Scholar
Wills, G. & Cooper, C. L. (1988) Pressure Sensitive: Popular Musicians under Stress. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wills, G. (2003) Forty lives in the bebop business: mental health in a group of eminent jazz musicians. British Journal of Psychiatry, 183, 255259.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.