Critics and others are usually interested in the beginnings of writers and creators in general.. When did the writer or artist’s talent blossom before it exploded and then worked to its fullest? What contexts was it offensive to her? And how did it develop and grow to lead its owner on the path of self-imposition and excellence, to reach the pinnacle of glory?
However, most of these critics usually ignore the conclusions of the creative experience, how and when the sources of creativity dried up? And when did the flame of the heart fade and the wings of imagination broke? How did the star fall from its height?
The most important question in life as in creativity, as we appreciate, is the question of the ends.
Does creativity have a relationship with the biological time that indicates their aging, or is creativity resistant to time and is not concerned with facial wrinkles or trembling hands? Is there a consistency between biological temporality and creative temporality, or is it otherwise?
And if it happened that the creative experience sag and exhausted its energies with its owner entering the stage of aging, is it not possible for the feeling of the imminent end to become the subject of a creative impact that restores to its owner another life and grants him and his effects a new life?
Some of these questions and others were posed by the French writer Marie-Odile-Andre in her book “On the Social Poetics of Literary Aging.” The author has delved into the experiences of some famous French writers and writers, based on the assumption that aging is an individual existential experience experienced by the creator in particular, but it also represents a socio-cultural experience. The audience and recipients contribute to its construction.
This audience and these recipients are unstable and changeable, and their tastes or prospects may expand or contract, and they may retreat from what was, in the past, igniting their imagination and providing them with an intellectual or artistic pleasure that they are looking for.
The audience may dedicate a writer, an actor, or a creator in a field for decades, but it ends with him shaking his hand and even dropping him; Because of the many and complex transformations, from its psychological, cognitive or artistic space.
Thus, the French researcher looks at the issue of the aging of literature and creativity in general from three angles, namely the angle of the aging of the creator and its impact on his production, and from the angle of the aging of the creative experience, and finally from the angle of the position that the public devote to the creative writer or artist.
On the first level, Marie-Odile-Andre admits that it is difficult to summarize the creator’s human experience in a mathematical equation and to calculate it in years through a linear path, an experience that begins with the youthfulness of the body and its vitality and ends with the infiltration of weakness in its joints.
Through this path, the creator gradually implements the tasks expected of him, such as a soldier in the depths of the battlefield, until the energy is consumed and exhausted and the source of creativity becomes scarce. However, this mechanical view of linking the glow of creativity with the age of its owner is refuted by many cases.
Here I am reminded of the case of the philosopher Edgar Morin, who recently celebrated his 102nd birthday in full health and mental glow. Morin continues to give us lessons in philosophy and in life, and he does not stop writing and giving lectures, and always incites to love and to derive from the pleasures and joys of life.
I listened to Moran at the House of Wisdom Foundation in Tunisia and he had settled at the age of ninety-eight.. The man presented the summary of his thought and the juice of his experience with the happiness of a child playing and the vitality of a young man presenting his first discoveries, and with the confidence of drinking from the nectar of wisdom and extracting the butter of life, and it was not easy, I translate his lecture in simultaneous translation, following the flow of his thoughts in that amazing rhythm.
I am also reminded of the great actor Jean Gabin, one of my top favorite actors, who starred in his presence and acting in the last days of his life, as if he was created only to characterize the roles of those of his age.
We also cannot forget Charles Aznfor, who, at the age of eighty, gave his most beautiful concerts to his Armenian fans.
Bernard Shaw brings us back to the same rejection of the idea of a mechanical relationship between the old age of the creator and the sagging of his creative energy, and he says, in response to his critics who did not satisfy them that Shaw continued to practice writing while he was at a “weak age”: “They are the only ones who made me feel grown up, although I I saw defiance in everything they say, not one of them is able to read or understand what I write, so what if they sat down to write, but if I died, it was not because I was unable to think and create, but because people killed me.”
Yes, it happens that the audience kills its creator in disregard or denial and lack of recognition, as if asking him to die before moving on to his brutal natural death.
Personally, I knew Tunisian and other Arab writers who lived their death before moving to another world that might be more merciful because of the audience’s neglect and the lack of a culture of recognition and loyalty.
Some writers, Marie-Odile-Andre warns us, insist on writing autobiographies in the hope that it will give them a second life.
I remember that Dr. Fadel al-Jamali, the former Prime Minister of Iraq and the great thinker who was granted political asylum by the leader Habib Bourguiba in Tunisia, asked me in the nineties, and he was writing in the newspaper “Al Rai Al Aam” in which I was editorial in charge, to help him in writing his memoirs.
Dr. Al-Jamali used to say, over a cup of tea in my office: “I want Arab readers to know….” He wanted to remain recognition or even just a reminder of the size of the homeland.
I do not know if Dr. Al-Jamali had memos issued to him. Unfortunately, I did not contribute to the time constraints in recording them, but it would undoubtedly give him some joy as he was living a personal tragedy due to the terminal illness of his only son, and because of his national tragedy.
Writing memoirs is then a mechanism or a means of expelling or postponing the death of the writer, it is writing on the verge of death, which is what the French researcher calls “writing redundant”, but it remains an urgent need to achieve the will not to stop writing or to be creative, in general, when Its owner, remains a way to raise the voice of reluctance to praise the silence demanded by some.
The uproar caused by the exit of some hundreds of spectators from about 5,000 spectators while the Tunisian comedian, Min Nahdi, presented his play “We Die on You” falls within the scope of these questions about the relationship of creativity with biological age and its relationship to the audience / audiences.
The play presents the problems experienced by the Tunisian citizen during the black decade, the hero of the play “Alwan Man Show” written by the Almighty, Moncef Dheib, a man on the verge of committing suicide because of these problems, but his surroundings want to employ, each in his own way, this suicide for his benefit.
During about an hour and a half, Lamin Al-Nahdi played the roles of more than thirty characters without stopping, but some of the audience resented the play; Because he came to her begging her for the slugs and salt she was accustomed to hearing from the comedian, and, accordingly, he invited him, in a scornful tone, to stay at his house.
The poet friend Moncef Al-Muzghani wrote an opinion on this subject that we find worthy of consideration: “There is a free artist who cannot be a slave to an audience who is himself fickle and craves as he wants against whoever he wants, and he may not know what he wants, and the artist is the one who is lucky for a while to know the secret of the audience. , who does not know what he wants at all, but he may want what the people of creativity do not think.”
As for the playwright and art critic Anwar Al-Shaafi, he went a long way in diagnosing the audience’s interaction with the artist when he said: “When we were unable to peacefully transfer power, we sought to apply it to artists.”
In any case, “the old man remains undesirable,” says Roland Barthes, perhaps because he represents the truth that awaits us, even if after a while.
This article expresses the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Irm News
#age #creativity..and #praise #silence