Latest Posts

Thursday 4 July 2013

THE CREATIVE NUTBALL


It has always made perfect sense to me why certain famous creative individuals (artists, poets, actors, writers) have gone mad. Take a gander throughout history and when it comes to our famous creative contributors you see a running theme: Sylvia Plath - Haunted. Hemmingway – Drunk. Van Gogh – Nuts. J.D Salinger – recluse. Lindsay Lohan - trainwreck. (Sorry, I find so much humor in including her with this lot). The list is so long, I could literally go on all day. It’s as if tormented madness became synonymous with creativity – I speak from experience, I assure you.

One could happily postulate as to why and I certainly have my theories. For starters, being creative (in any time period) means that the subject is usually spending a great deal inside their own head with a boatload of emotions and ideas. And trust me, it can get very crowded in there. The imagination is a fierce beast and often the very emotions and passions that go along with it, if not properly channeled can end up making a person slightly, well…eccentric is a fond euphemism I like to use. Not to mention, most creativity is sprung from a place of keen emotional observance. If you want to truly depict, describe or bring to life (by way of acting) a three dimensional character, you’re going to have to walk the walk, as they say. And that’s not always an easy road, especially for those around you. (I'm sure Daniel Day Lewis's wife could write pages on this mere topic).

Back in the day (I mean way back in medieval times), being creative meant you could wile away your time entertaining Kings as a court jester (and then probably got your head chopped off if you weren’t funny) or traveling with troubadours performing lyric poetry and there was a certain freeing beauty in that (aside from getting your head cut off). You didn’t have to wait tables at the local diner to finance your craft. Creativity was for creativity’s sake, for the art of it if you will. Nowadays – as life costs more and a bit of medieval bread and water is not going to cut it – creativity has to be shaped around the goal of making a living. Not to mention, in comparison to the doctors and lawyers of the world, there is also a slight stigma with being a ‘creative,’ and you'll find when people often hear singer/writer/painter, they think, 'ah, some flake that lives in their parents garage working for ten years on the next great American 'something' that will never see the light of day.' 

The problem I am finding at the moment with being creative is how to continue on being creative and give in to this unyielding force that has always moved me, if one is not able to channel it the way one wants. For me, the road of a screenwriting has a been a long tumultuous journey and despite grafting like a flipping coal miner, it hasn’t quite worked out the way I had planned (the line of talented, creative individuals with unfulfilled dreams is LONG. I assure you). And yes, I can certainly keep writing in some fashion (although even finding work in that is proving more difficult these days with journalism in the toilet) but trust me, there are days where I yearn to my very core to be an accountant. (I know you're laughing at this point, or gasping). I have secret envy of those that work in professions that are simple and finite with definitive objectives and attainable goals and more importantly that possesses a paycheck at the end of one’s troubles.

Annoyingly, the life of a creative is much more mercurial, unpredictable, and you’re often dependent on a bunch of useless non-creatives that cast their subjective opinions like they’re the most visionary grains of intellect since Einstein. So you suddenly find yourself going through the stages of 'pining to be an anti-creative' just to make things a bit simpler on yourself. You get angry at your craft – ‘Screw you, I’ve had it, I’m becoming a plumber!’ You rationalize with your need to create – ‘so I’ll take up knitting, that’s creative. I don’t need to be the next Monica Ali!’ And you tell yourself, that if you only sit in a room for the rest of your days writing screenplays that no one will ever read or see, well that’s just fine by you. You’re a troubadour, hand me a bread roll and I'll be fine.

You see, nuts…every last one of us. (and King, if you come to me later in life and say you want to follow your creative dreams, my response will be, go to med school and 'write' prescriptions. You'll thank me later). 


Tuesday 2 July 2013

TO THE VICTOR


My husband said it best the other night to a friend of ours when he said, “if my wife and I won the lottery we’d probably do a lot of sitting around watching sports.” The man does know me tremendously well – although I think we’d be watching sports on our flat screen TV on our yacht as we sailed the Med and sipped Mojitos. But he more or less got it right.

I’ve talked a lot about sports on this blog because I have always thought that they are perfect microcosmic example for what occurs in life. Talk about a psychological/sociological cauldron of human behaviour...with prize money! What could be more entertaining. As I watch Wimbledon for instance (as it currently is my favorite time of year being Grand Slam season) it’s all right there in a nutshell: winning, losing, unexpected pitfalls, injuries, loss of composure, the gamut of human emotion, all for our enjoyment as spectators. Not to mention, we witness the adulation of heroes (and we know how much society loves a hero), and what society loves even more, but these heroes subsequent fall from greatness (we're so gross). This being one of the chronic debates in this house as I am the perpetual loyalist (“Okay, so he’s 35, but he still has a great backhand”) as my husband likes to talk about everyone’s downfall (“That’s it! It’s the end of an era, he’s done!”) You see, we're such a fitting metaphor, back forth, back forth, just like a tennis ball.

This year Wimbledon has been anybody’s game, top seeds have been left reeling by young upstarts out of nowhere (or grafters who have been quietly existing with not much glory to speak of) who suddenly find themselves neck deep in their 15 minutes of fame - the dragon slayers as my husband calls them. Funny thing about the dragon slayers, very few end up sticking around; for in any sport (and in life) it’s not just about talent, but consistency of talent. So we’ve seen the underdogs make it one round only to be ousted in the next – which always pisses me off as if my player gets knocked out, I’d like his victor to take the whole damn tournament. Seems only just.

The other thing about sports is that it feeds into the human need to root for something, or conversely to dislike and root against someone. It also of course can play heavily into one’s emotions, because let me tell you, when my player loses (and I have a habit of backing the wrong horse), it can take me days to get out of my funk. I know, I know, it sounds ridiculous, but whole cities (countries even: HELLO ENGLAND) can be dictated by a team’s win/loss record. In fact, some cities become so used to being identified as the city that holds the team that never wins they actually learn to embrace it. England as a country has a long love/hate history with sports, merely ask someone about the English football team (esp. during World Cup) and you’ll get a variety of (rant filled) answers wrapped up in a whole heap of emotion. I think I’d rather be a coal miner than an English athlete on a losing streak.

As for the King, he is quickly realizing the joy, amusement and subsequent inevitable disappointment of watching sports (we’re not quite at the stage of playing team sports, so I’m sure these emotions will increase exponentially as the years go on). He now actually thinks that every time we turn on the TV it is time to yell ‘come on! (or Vamos, if Nadal is playing)’ at the screen, even if there is news on – which depending on the story is very fitting. We’ll make a spectator out of him yet. 




Copyright © 2014 Anthea Anka - Delighted And Disturbed