Nekekami said:
There's nothing creative about marksmanship itself, it's more akin to the same process that athletes go through, based on my training and my abilities as a sniper. The process is not the same as when I dance for example, or when I used to spend hour upon hour photographing.
I did not mean to equate marksmanship with creativity, and I apologize for not communicating clearly. The comparison I tried to make was in the joy one can experience in teaching either. I completely agree with your equation between athletics and marksmanship (in terms of preparation).
When you say:
Metaphysically and philosophically speaking, creativity isn't really the same as affirming onself. Rather, creativity is a way of just being oneself, and the outcome of that is just a result.
I interpret that to mean you believe creativity to be the outlet of human expression, the forum in which a human being is capable of communicating to the rest of the world, "This is who I am." If my interpretation is wrong, please bare with me as I try to grasp it--I have difficulties with the English language at times, so please forgive me.
Nekekami said:
One of the reasons why many of the great artists have been what we today would label as sociopaths and even psychopaths. Their creativity and their works of art came very much as part of their lack of inhibition, and their non-conformity to some of the social norms and taboos prevalent at the time. Some historical examples are Rembrandt(obsessive and pedantic) and Van Gogh(Obsessive/Compulsive and manic, although the most likely reasons for why he cut off his ear is that he had Tinnitus). Leonardo Da Vinci was a compulsive/manic individual. And all three of them were geniuses. They all broke with some of the norms within society, and they all created things, which even to this day influences science. Leonardo for his math, physics and architecture, Rembrandt for his studies on light, shadows, reflections. Yet, for them, it wasn't a conscious act of making themselves happy. For them, it was instinctual, an inherent drive.
I see these offered examples as evidence for my interpretation of what you consider to be the value of creativity. You say, "it wasn't a conscious act of making themselves happy," but I imagine they felt some degree of fulfillment (unless they suffered from depression, or some other mental disease preventing such feeling), and its this sense of fulfillment that drives them, that 'instinctual/inherent drive' is toward fulfillment?
Perhaps this was not the case with the more famous artists, but would you grant that the majority of artists do not suffer from such mental illnesses, and are driven by fulfillment? I would think YOUR satisfaction in teaching youth to express themselves creatively would come from seeing that they (the youth) recognize in various particular forums of creativity their preferred method of expression. Perhaps a girl hates to draw, but she loves to compose music... and once you teach (show) her musical composition, she not only discovers her love for it, but you discover her love for it, and then gain a sense of satisfaction from showing this girl what she loves to do. I would think that would lead the girl to a sense of fulfillment, but if you disagree, please elaborate.
And so, although marksmanship is not necessarily creative, like sports are not creative, there is something about marksmanship (and sports, too) that people are capable of finding fulfillment in, and so the two are equal in that it brings someone to a sense of fulfillment. And so, Badshot teaching youth how to shoot may bring the same level of joy as you teaching youth how to do anything creative because you each are teaching specific youths who will one day be fueled by, and receive, a sense of fulfillment from marksmanship or a creative forum.
Scatch Maroo
