As a visual artist by trade, I have a close connection to the subject of creativity. As part of this, I find that the more energy I devote towards my passion for expressing my true creativity, the more I must struggle to find a way to cross the great divide between the realms of commercial and fine art. Along the way I often stop to contemplate such questions as: where does all this creativity come from, what am I really supposed to be doing with it, and what importance does it have to the world that I live in? These types of questions have been pondered by people for  as long as they have manifested their creative ideas, yet sadly our fast-paced consumer-oriented world does not often see the need to support such seemingly frivolous interests as creativity and the arts. What does this say about the state of the soul in the Western world and what does the future hold for creativity and  the artist?

The relationship between society's connection to soul and its ability to appreciate art was pointed out by Wassily Kandinsky almost a century ago. Kandinsky was a Russian abstract artist who took part in a German art movement called "Der Blaue Reiter" (the Blue Rider) whose members included "painters, poets, musicians, dramatists, critics, all working to the same end–the expression    of the soul of nature and humanity" (Sadler xiii). In 1911, Kandinsky published a book entitled Concerning the Spiritual in Art in which he noted that "at times when the human soul is gaining greater strength, art will also grow in power, for the two are inextricably connected and complementary one to the other. Conversely, at those times when the soul tends to be choked by material disbelief, art becomes purposeless and talk is heard that art exists for art's sake alone" (54).

Caring for the spiritually strangled souls of the modern Western world has to a great extent becomes the responsibility of psychologists. It is therefore only natural that present-day post-Jungians, such as James Hillman and Adolf Guggenbühl-Craig, would be interested in the relationship between creativity and the apparent soul loss within our contemporary society. According to James Hillman, the mission or "world intention" of archetypal psychology is to re-awaken consciousness to a "sense of soul." He believes that Freud and Jung both began the work of attempting to understand the underlying reasons for the "misery of man trapped in the decline of the West," and that modern psychologists have finally identified the "mistake" of Western culture that has caused so much unhappiness. According to Hillman "[...] archetypal psychology specifies this mistake as loss of soul which it further identifies with loss of images and the imaginal sense" (AP 31).

The concept of "soul loss" is far from contemporary. It has long been known to the spiritually adept members of societies, such as Shamans, who have treated this condition for centuries. As Hillman explains: "In this condition a man is out of himself, unable to find either the outer connection between humans or the inner connection to himself. He is unable to take part in his society, its rituals, and traditions" (Blue 17). However, before the search can begin, we must know exactly what it is that we are looking for. Hillman believes that: "We have not only lost soul; we have lost even the idea of soul" (Re-Visioning 119).

To Hillman, the soul is not just some "thing" that exists outside ourselves, but it is the way in which we perceive the world. The soul is what allows an experience to become a meaningful event, because it carries with it the ability to communicate love, and connect us with death. Hillman further defines the soul as the "imaginative possibility in our natures, the experiencing through reflective speculation, dream, image and fantasy–that mode which recognizes all realities as primarily symbolic or metaphorical" (Blue 21).

Soul or psyche is a concept that is difficult to define, because it continues to exist all around us whether we are aware of it or not. It is what many religions attempt to explain through their teachings and it is the central focus of the field of psychology. Archetypal psychology considers it its job to "provide soul with an adequate account of itself," and to help patients connect with the anima mundi or "soul of the world." When it is successful, it helps people "hear psyche speaking through all things of the world" and it plays an important part in "recovering the world as a place of soul (q.v. soul–making)" (Hillman, AC 25).

Part of the recovery process is to help people regain their "imaginal sense," their ability to see the meaning in the numerous images they encounter in their dreams and daily lives. Yet, learning to "see" again is not purely a visual feat. It is an act of the imagination. As professor of philosophy Edward Casey is quoted as saying in Archetypal Psychology, "image is not what one sees but the way in which one sees" (Hillman 15). It is the way in which one responds to an image, and allows it to transmit its pure essence without being manipulated by the ego. "An image always seems more profound (archetypal), more powerful (potential), and more beautiful (theophanic) than the comprehension of it," which Hillman also believes is "the driving necessity in the arts, for they provide complicated disciplines that can actualize the complex virtuality of the image" (AC 18).

It was my own need to discover new ways to see more soulfully that led me to study at Pacifica Graduate Institute. What at first seemed like a long and twisted foray through unrelated interests, now, in retrospect, seems like a focused exploration of a variety of educational means to improve my inner visualization skills. Along the way I entertained the thought of getting a Masters degree in Fine Art and almost enrolled in the Graduate Theological Union, where I would have received a Masters in Divinity. To some people, the contrast in directions may seem almost ludicrous, but I was attempting to find a school that would allow me to work with the numerous archetypal images that I have possessed me for years, and at the same time fully explore their true nature. The Mythological Studies Program at Pacifica turned out to be just the place.

In my opinion, bringing images to life is what creating artwork is all about. As an artist, I must interact with the flood of images that enter my mind, and make sure to give them the time and attention they need to grow. When these images are strong enough to stand on their own, I consider it my job to find the most suitable means for their truest expression. Not every idea that comes to mind is manifested, but I feel that it is important not to intimidate the images, by judging them before their time has come. When an image comes to me, I often create a vague sketch of its essence and tuck it away in some dark spot (like my file cabinet) to let it germinate. I come back and sift through the numerous scraps of paper again and again, until the time is right for us to work together. The actual production of the artwork is usually quite enjoyable, once I have worked through the sometimes arduous process of deciding what to say.

The field of psychology has developed many of its own methods for working with images, particularly archetypal ones. Patients are often encouraged to express their inner imagery through such physically playful forms as art, dance, and writing, or they may be asked to work with an image internally in their own imagination. In either case they are encouraged to "stick to the image" because: "Although an archetypal image presents itself as impacted with meaning, this is not given simply as revelation. It must be made through 'image work' and 'dream work'" (Hillman, AP 23).

Jung believed that the procedure of working with images in psychology, which he called "Active Imagination," has no relationship to the creative process of the artist. "One may aesthetically give form to the images–indeed one should try as best one can aesthetically–though this is for the sake of the figures, in dedication to them and to realize their beauty, and not for the sake of art." It should not "be confused with art for exhibition or publication" (Hillman, AP 57.) He also stressed that Active Imagination is not a spiritual discipline or mystical activity, nor is it for personal betterment. Instead, he believed its intention is to heal the psyche through "self-understanding," and to help the patient through the process of "individuation." Yet, as present day psychologists continue to expand on Jung's notion of the soul and its relevance to society, it is also important to reexamine the role of the creative artist.

It is true that not all artists are able to produce the kind of work that possesses the ability to transmit a soulful message to others, yet by examining the role of creativity in the process we may understand why this is so. Psychologist Adolf Guggenbühl-Craig believes that what most people generally call "creativity" should be further divided into three separate categories: personal creativity, collective creativity, and transcendent creativity.

The pursuit of "personal creativity" often produces the kind of paintings and drawings that one might expect from the psychological process of Active Imagination. The outcome may be profoundly meaningful to the patient, but can be appreciated by few other people, except possibly a few friends and family members. In fact, Guggenbühl-Craig says "we should not refer to personal creativity as creativity at all," preferring to call it "self-development, self-expression, or something similar" (7).

The second category, "collective creativity," is what Guggenbühl-Craig sees as the artistic abilities exhibited by commercial artists, such as those who work in the fashion and advertising industries. He feels "they possess an almost mediumistic gift of detecting what is playing itself out and forming in the soul of the collective" (8). Having spent a number of years working as an Art Director at a New York advertising agency, I can attest to the fact that it is a business of discovering and regurgitating what society thinks it wants. It takes a certain amount of skill and talent, but there is little actual "creativity" involved.

This "collective creativity" is also the motivating force behind many popular fine artists. "Certain artists become channels of the zeitgeist, the spirit of the times. When this kind of force grabs an artist, he or she is possessed. Picasso, Pollock, and Warhol each transformed art in the twentieth century." While their artwork may have been well received by the public, artist and author Alex Grey asks the important question: "Does this mean that their work is spiritually transformative? Not necessarily, but it does mean that their works express important insights into the state of the human soul" (Grey 226).

Guggenbühl-Craig claims that "transcendent creativity," which possesses this spiritually transformative ability, is the only true form of creativity. It "shines through from another world," and manifests itself in artwork that has a message for the world, for humanity at large (8). Transcendent creativity is a rare gift given to relatively few artists. The work produced by such artists is often admired by observers who may also naively believe that the person who created the artwork has the ability to connect them with the divine force that inspired them. This is generally not the case–otherwise most successful artists would also be gurus.

The connection between art and "spirit" or "soul" is a subject of great interest to contemporary artist Alec Grey, the author of The Mission of Art. Grey explains the ability of certain artwork to touch the soul of the viewer, when they recognizes its transcendent qualities:

the viewer first encounters a work of art as a physical object seen by the eye of flesh. Secondly, the eye of reason sees a harmony of sensations that stir the emotions, and a conceptual understanding of the art arises. Third, and only in the deepest art, a condition of the soul is revealed, one's heart is opened, and spiritual insight is transmitted to the eye of contemplation. (82)

Grey believes that art can be a bridge to the "spiritual in everyday life". It is a gift given to some artists, who have the responsibility to transmit it to the world.

Transmitting transcendent creativity to the world is not an easy task. The artist must be in touch with the source of their creativity as well as with him or herself. Many artists give up before they have ever experienced the pure joy that transcendent creativity can bring. They may struggle against the lack of financial support for the arts, a deficiency of emotional support and understanding from their community, or with their own deeper insecurities. It takes great strength to make the commitment to be an artist and it is easy to avoid the call: "The power of the shadow and its intricate alliance with creative energies may frighten artists into distracting activities or responsibilities that safely remove them from the creative encounter" (Grey 89). Some of us still persist, guided by a need greater than ourselves for the images to be seen and their messages to be heard.

Many gifted artists have had the experience of "channeling" their creativity, the feeling that what they were producing is coming through them rather than being created by them. It is an experience that reinforces the fact that we are all part of a bigger picture and that there are many unseen forces there to guide us if we are open to them. Yet, it is not as simple as just being open to the experience, because the driving force that needs to be heard can also destroy the artist if they attempt to block it out or control it. In fact, Guggenbühl-Craig sees transcendent creativity as more of a curse than a blessing: "The message must be delivered, the work must be given form, even when the vessel (the artist) or the tool breaks in the process. Such human beings must be creative, even when this means nothing other than to suffer" (6).

For years I tried to deny my own needs to express such creativity. While I was able to find material satisfaction in the commercial art realm, it began to take a toll on my body, mind and spirit. Eventually it became clear that the only way to regain my physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing was to change my career–to head the inner call. As soon I made the commitment to come to Pacifica and pursue a more creative path, unexpected sources support emerged all around me to encourage my efforts, which proved to me that it is far easier to go with the creative flow than attempting to deny or suppress it.

I firmly believe it is possible for creative artists to learn to work in harmony with the greater forces expressed through them. This will not work if the primary agenda of the artist is fame or fortune, but if they are willing to work together with the source of their creativity, they may find themselves well rewarded for their efforts. It is a humbling experience when an artist realizes that the creativity that allows them to produce a work of art that touches the soul of others is not just a product of their own artistic talent. Kandinsky understood this when he said that: "It is very important for the artist to gauge his position alright, to realize that he has a duty to his art and to himself, that he is not the king of the castle but rather a servant of a nobler purpose" (54). The artist must not let their ego get in the way of the expression of the image.

In addition to talent and humility, it also takes an enormous amount of faith to be an artist. First of all, it takes faith in the process. According to Hillman "Trust in the imaginal and trust in the soul go hand in hand" (Blue 86). The artist must believe that the images will come, especially on those days when they have no ideas or sense of direction, and the inevitable feelings of self-doubt creep in. "The artist's mission is akin to the alchemist's task. The alchemist's great work was the transformation of gross material into spiritualized substance. Holding the goal of a soul-nurturing art in our hearts can sustain us through the trials and failures that are inevitable in the process of creation" (Grey 200). This faith is even more important when it finally comes time to display the end results.

 The final exhibition of any artwork is the only true test of its ability to inspire an audience. Guggenbühl-Craig points out that: "If a work of art never interests someone else, then perhaps it is because it is not art at all, but only the individual expression of the artist" (4). Yet, the artist must not keep his or her work hidden from the public for fear of failure. The process of transcendent creativity cannot be completed if the outcome is not shared with others. Worse yet, if an artist refuses to show their art to others, they may soon find that their muse has left in search of some more suitable partner to inspire with their images. According to Grey: "Art is in essence a gift to the artist from spirit. The drive to share one's artwork with others is healthy and necessary. The gift must be given to the world. Sharing one's work completes the cycle of creative endeavor" (180).

In today's cynical society it takes a great deal of confidence for any artist to display their work. They must have enough faith and understanding to know that there will always be some people who will not, or cannot, be receptive to the experience, even in the face of a divine work of art. In fact, the harshest critics are often the people who are the most out of touch with themselves and the world around them. Yet, the paradoxical position remains that the people who understand art the least, who can not see its hidden potential, or appreciate its inherent beauty are the people who probably need to see it the most.

Creative artists have a big part to play in archetypal psychology's goal of "returning soul to the world." As James Hillman tells us: "The soul is born in beauty and feeds on beauty, requires beauty for its life" (Blue 299). This beauty can be found in nature and in the world that we have constructed all around us. It can also be found in truly creative art, the kind of art that brings images to life and conveys the transcendent messages of soul. It is powerful art such as this that possesses the potential to mesmerize viewers long enough to make them stop, to look, to reflect on what they see.  If they stay with such an image long enough, and if they look deeply enough, they just might find a bit of soul staring back at them.

Works Cited

Grey, Alex. The Mission of Art. Boston: Shambhala, 1998.

Guggenbühl-Craig, Adolf. From the Wrong Side: A Paradoxical Approach to Psychology. Woodstock, CT: Spring, 1995.

Hillman, James. Archetypal Psychology: A Brief Account. Woodstock, CT: Spring. 1983.

Hillman, James. A Blue Fire. New York: Harper Collins, 1991.

Hillman, James. Re-Visioning Psychology. New York: Harper Collins, 1975.

Kandinsky, Wassily. Concerning the Spiritual in Art. Trans. and Intro M. T. H. Sadler. New York: Dover, 1977.

Sadler, M.T.H, Introduction. Concerning the Spiritual in Art. By Wassily Kandinsky. Trans. M. T. H. Sadler. New York: Dover, 1977.