The Magic of Creating

paint_brushAll creative pursuits are part talent, part skill, and large part magic. What do I mean by “magic”? That’s simple, it’s the piece of you, your energy, your spark, that you imbue your creation with. Without that little bit of your own energy embedded in your creative work, it won’t have a voice, or at least not a very loud voice.

For instance, I attended a photography display at a local college recently. One of the assignments was to take an image of a sun rise. Seems simple enough, doesn’t it? Well, evidently two of the people found a similar location in a local park and decided to photograph it.

Both captured the image perfectly, framing the rising sun through the rose-covered arched trellis; however, only one of the images had a voice. Only one of the images made you feel as if you were there, standing on the dew-damp grass with the ground-hugging mist encircling your feet and shins. You could smell the rose-scented air, feel the warmth of the struggling sun beams as they climbed over the horizon, and hear the twitter of the morning birds greeting the new day. The other photo was a nice image, but it was silent.

The difference was felt, not just by me, but by most everyone who looked at the two photos side-by-side. Most tried, but couldn’t understand how two such similar images failed to invoke the same type of feelings. My hypothesis, one photographer pushed the energy of their feelings for the scene into the image they created, while the other photographer merely completed the assignment—they took a photo of the sun rising.

So, while one photographer captured an image using talent, skill and magic; the other photographer, forewent the magic and the project fell flat.

Books, paintings, sculptures, stitchery, knitting, any and all creative endeavors need that spark of magic, that little piece of energy from their creator in order to be more than just another object. When you write a story, you have to make those characters live. You have to put enough of yourself, your energy, into the characters and the world you have created for them so that other people can see what you wrote. That world has to form around the readers the moment they open the book, and those characters have to leap from the page and perform their actions with the reader in their midst.

To the readers and viewers (of visual art) it may seem like nothing short of magic. But if they can become involved in the worlds and characters that you have created, they can then add their own spark to it and make it that much more alive. The more energy that gets added to a creative endeavor, the more alive and ‘real’ it becomes. The Harry Potter series is an excellent example of magic feeding on magic. JK Rowling imbued her creations with so much energy, everyone could ‘see’ and experience her world. The readers then added their own spark by becoming so involved in the story that the characters became even more ‘real’, the possibility of that world actually existing became ‘real’. The whole idea grew into something magical, because she used all three ingredients.Starstone_Front_Cover_Only - 1

When I wrote my book, “The Starstone,” I left a large part of me in the story. Danaria was a real world (to me), the characters were real (to me), and I was always concerned about their welfare. I saw the world, I conversed with the characters, and I struggled with their dilemmas right alongside them.

Hopefully, I left behind enough of my energy, my magic, to speak to others; to call them, to entice them to visit Danaria and see what adventures my characters could show them.

Advertisements

Prove It

proofAfter three episodes of Proof, I have to say I’m pleasantly surprised and pleased by the treatment that TNT (and thereby, Hollywood) is giving to the topic of ‘life after death’ and all the related topics (NDEs, ghosts, poltergeist, sceances, mediums, etc.).

They provide enough skepticism and watered-down science to keep it from getting campy and melodramatic; yet, they seem to have an open mind, too. For instance, in the episode pertaining to ghosts and poltergeist, they had the doctor (the primary skeptic) “prove’ that it was a brain lesion causing the dead-wife-sightings. Yet, the poltergeist-type manifestations that were attributed to the ghost of the dead wife continued even after the brain lesion was removed. This left the doctor (and the audience) wondering—were the sightings and manifestations truly caused by the brain lesion; is there something else going on not related to the medical condition of the man who had lost his wife; did the brain lesion only enable the sightings and not cause them; or were the events of ghostly sightings, poltergeist activities, and brain lesion simply random occurrences?

The show leaves it to each viewer to decide these questions, and that’s what makes the show so good. The writers, producers, and actors provide the information and the varying viewpoints, but then they leave it up to each of us to decide what it all means. I enjoy being presented with the information, the different perspectives as to what it all means, and then being allowed to come to my own conclusions. As a partial skeptic myself, I identify with the doctor’s dilemma of wanting proof, and yet I love hearing the explanations from those whose viewpoints rely more on belief and acceptance.

During the past life regression episode I found myself nodding at certain statements made by the skeptics in that particular episode; while at the same time, I know that past lives are real and they do impact your current life (for good or for ill).

So, while I would love for there to be a scientific explanation for everything that occurs in life; I don’t believe that science (or religion) has managed to keep up with all that life has presented to us. Therefore, there are times when we need to say, “Is it possible?” instead of, “Is it provable?”.

As for me, if it seems reasonable and possible, then I’m likely to say, “I’ll consider it.” I don’t always need Proof, but it’s a good show, nonetheless.