if only i'd been allowed to craft myself...

[wingwizard]

what is it, in the opinion of the multitude, that creates that which the foolish differentiate as genius?

i have heard many factors put forward as muse wombs

some more ridiculous than others

in music for instance, the irish are the preponderant race in terms of popular songwriting (ill ignore other less notable musical achievements-when in rome)

could race be a factor? or perhaps the cultural malaise of poverty that drives imigration is a less convenient but more likely solution

i'll wager the greatest artisans never had the opportunity to become their elevated selves-mired as they were and are in comfortable upbringing, enjoyable and well paid vocation and the abject horror of emotional stability

chance does love to foil itself

but then

weeds do sprout from even the most immaculately tended garden

bringing with them an enlightening grotesque

[chasestalling]

gosh, i feel dumb: SAY WHAT??????

[Granny5]

i'll wager the greatest artisans never had the opportunity to become their elevated selves-mired as they were and are in comfortable upbringing, enjoyable and well paid vocation and the abject horror of emotional stability



There could be many great artisans out there who just don't have the drive, even if they have the ability. So, maybe drive, the 'want to' is a part of being an great artisan?

[stlukesguild]

So the question is... what exactly leads to the creation of artistic "genius"? Don't we all wish the answer were simple. Wouldn't we then just go out and buy the appropriate product or take the prerequisite courses thereby assuring ourselves of certain artistic immortality. But its not so simple, is it? We might throw out some ideas about personality traits conducive to artistic "genius": a certain level of intelligence, a willingness to take chances, the drive and persistence... but none of these alone or together is a guarantee of anything. There are artistic geniuses who have risen from the most impoverished and dysfunctional backgrounds... and there are those who have come from the most nurturing and supportive. There are "prodigies" of almost effortless grace and ability... and there are artistic geniuses who struggle every step of the way. If one is seeking some common thread or element present in every artistic genius... all I can suggest is that all have the ability... through whatever means and as a result of whatever experiences... of creating works of true artistic resonance.

[PeterL]

I think that it is a matter of personal interests and background. Because writing is a purely cultural activity, race would not be a factor.

[AuntShecky]

In the U.S. there have been some good songwriters of Irish ancestry, but Tin Pan Alley and its progenitors were
of Jewish heritage: the Gershwins, Arlen, Berlin. African Americans created Jazz--THE American art form. Some art arises even against the society's Herculean effort to stamp it out. To think otherwise -- that art/culture grows more readily among certain favored ethnic groups is a bit of a sweeping statement. Emmanuel Kant's philosophy isrife with this kind of generalizations.

and I forgot to add that in a overwhelmingly materialistic
societysuch as the one in which I live, the artist is --or should be -- thoroughly at odds with commerce.

[FacialFracture]

I think genius is created in fractions: Half of genius is defined by the person labeled "genius," and half is defined by that person's audience...So I don't really know how anyone is supposed to define it; it's at least half subjective.

Anyway, the argument for cultural dominance over specific areas of genius requires, I think, to be sub-divided (again, culturally) to be relevant, for example; Americans certainly enjoy music with Irish roots, but America has a high population of people with Irish heritage; Maybe they recognize the themes easily, maybe there's something inherently familiar in it. Do Malaysians enjoy Irish-based music? Maybe, but probably not as much; the songs are still good, but they are missing an audience willing to label them as works of "genius."

Poverty and war, throughout history, have proven themselves to be wombs for ingenuity--after all, nothing breeds brilliance like a need for it...and nothing creates an appreciation for brilliance like a need for it. Even if you look at Hollywood, it reached what many believe was its creative pinnacle during the Second World War. Most of the studio owners, producers, and directors were men who had fled from war-torn Europe; they had something to say, and they had an audience who understood it. It was an inversion of (to paraphrase) "weeds growing in an immaculate garden"--it was flowers growing out of rubbish.

The "enlightening grotesque" is only "enlightening" when someone is there to recognize it, right? That someone, (when it comes to assessing "genius") has to speak for a reasonably large group who can, in some way, articulate what is enlightening about a thing.

I don't know...I have the suspicion that this post wasn't very well thought out, but it's my two cents.

[Etienne]

All you need is a pinch of salt and and a cast iron pan. It makes all the difference.

[chasestalling]

there's only one number: one; the rest are variations of said number.

[I AM JINX]

Genius? Just a word, making lots of money does not make you a genius, making a change to the world would parhaps make you one, such as Martin Luther King, he made a change for blacks by non-violent protests, Albert he made a change by find out information no one else knew, you have to go againt the crowed, and brake some rules to become a genius.
People forget about must or artists sometimes, but people are always reminded and the world know about Albert and Martin.
However it depends on your own interprataion of the word genius.