The article explores the question of how the ideas about the source of creativity were been changing among European thinkers. In the classical period in Ancient Greece the idea prevailed, coming from Homer, Hesiod and Pindar, that poets derive the content and form of poetic works from Muses, who give them the opportunity to create at their will. At the same time, a common place was the idea that poets do not always bring the truth to the world. Plato, analyzing the work of poets, speaks of two sources – pleasure and inspiration, but only the gods choose when the poet speaks on their behalf. He also clarified the content of poetry by relating it to the different Muses. Aristotle moves away from an external source, placing the source of creativity in the creator of the work, who obtains special abilities, and Aristotle calls imitation (mimesis) the main mode of creativity. Yet at the same time he takes imitation as not limited by visible reality, since the poet speaks of what could have happened, not of what actually has happened. Christian thinkers, from apologists to scholastics and mystics, agree that God is the source of creativity. But their views differ considerably in the details. Thus, for instance, in Thomas Aquinas works we find a peculiar synthesis of the Aristotelian concept of mimesis and Plato’s breakthrough to the divine. The Renaissance desacralization of the world ultimately leads to an exclusively rational conception of association, which allows us to explain the emergence of the new only as the creation of wrong associations. Kant, turning to the theme of genius, finds himself in a difficult situation between two positions: on the one hand, he cannot accept the traditional idea of divine inspiration, on the other hand, the purely empirical idea of association built on tabula rasa material. He had to find some third way. He finds it in the a priori given principle of the ability to think the particular as subordinate to the general, which manifests itself in two aspects – as determining and as reflective. The poet has an idea of some goal and some indeterminate idea of the material and, guided by his genius and not limited by any rules, freely expresses aesthetic ideas.
Read full abstract