You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Dark Side of a Creative Artist
Perhaps I am reading something into this that is not intended but it sounds as though he were a fanciful socio-path.
monomaniacal and exploitative selfishness that he shares with creative people”, or his inability to empathize, his narcissism, manipulativeness, etc… all in the interest of his self-preservation.
Personal experience has told me that these types of individuals have a rapidly shifting psyche and even a fractured one. The shifting awareness can make for greater creativity for sure. But it is a huge price to pay. Quite often they are not aware even of the meaning of the work they translate. I think I prefer a more observational or empathic approach.
Great review here, Yahia:)
Thanks, Pryde, but I think you might be going a tad too far, here :) I think what Gibran had is garden-variety selfishness, common to many great artists (I think of Rilke, by association; but, really, there are far too many to mention). Not sure what you mean by "work they translate" as Gibran was not a translator, but an accomplished artist, poet, philosopher. If you're not familiar with his work, I highly recommend The Prophet or Sand & Foam as an entry point. Cheers, Yahia
I have read some Gibran ... all artist are translating from where all creativity comes from. I have no opinion of my own about Gibran ... I never met him ... but the quote offered seemed severe to me about him and artists in general. So I thought ... what kind of guy was this ... not all artist or even most artists fit the description offered by the biographer, but maybe the ones we like to read about do. Gibran reported problems may have been linked more to his alcoholism and poverty than being an artist. My remark was about how he was described and not who he really was ... I am sure he was more complex than a flawed generalization. I was really looking for some clarification. Whatever the case, there does seem an element of tragedy to his tale.