Doubt & Fear: Do they play a role in your own creative process?

[carbon_dragon]

<p>Everyone has fears (even DC Comic's Green Lanterns admit to fear these days, they just say they have the potential to overcome them). Most people find a way to make their character flaws work for them, or they find a way to work in spite of them. Paralyzing fear can keep you from accomplishing anything -- sometimes you just have to take a breath and do <strong>something </strong>even if you aren't sure what the right thing to do is. My job as an software engineer for an aerospace company is creative, but there is more engineering in it than photography, so it's a little easier to find that "something" to do when you feel overwhelmed, but I think the process is similar. Fear and doubt can be motivators, but only up to a point -- mostly I think they are obstacles.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p><strong>Wouter</strong>, I also find Plato and Descartes similar. These two Idealists thought Knowledge superior to the senses. Yes, quests for bigger answers. Also, Plato's Socratic method (dialogue and staring out not knowing) and Descarte's meditative doubt both invite the viewer on their journey. Each starts off knowing what he doesn't know. Plato remains there, with Knowledge still never quite satisfactorily defined. Descartes reaches more of a conclusion.</p>

<p>As you say, they both thought humans don't and can't <em>see</em> it all, but (I'd phrase it) we can strive to <em>know</em> it all. They seemed both to think Knowledge was attainable but rare. It's here I disagree with them, following contemporary philosophers who claim they both assumed the wrong questions. Many now think there is no ALL, no objective perspective from which Knowledge can come. Knowledge doesn't take place "inside" our heads (as opposed to the outside world).</p>

<p>Plato was tougher on the senses (vision, etc.) than Descartes. Descartes's skepticism of what he saw led him to Doubt. For Plato, trusting the senses was a matter of Ignorance, a bit stronger. But Plato had an optimistic streak. We can be led by Desire to the Good. And Knowledge is Good. Where Descartes's work is filled with building (the building blocks of logic Julie refers to), Plato's writings are filled with <em>longing</em> and <em>striving</em>.</p>

<p>I think your bringing up Plato's cave, with its shadow world of mere Opinion (close to Ignorance), is significant because this allegory almost begs to be photographic. It's got reflections, shadows, fakery, levels, depth, and is extremely visual.</p>

<p>Photographic truth and essence come up in discussions here. Truth can be a photo that represents accurately what is seen. Truth can be a photo that seems to penetrate the surface and, with or without accuracy of representation seems to reach to the essence of the subject or story. Plato and Descartes would slam me for this, but I think there's a <em>sensual</em> photographic truth that can be sought. One that doesn't concern itself with accurately mirroring the real world and one that doesn't bother with essences and "deeper" places. There's a photographic truth that is the <em>visual</em>. It resides in what I <em>see</em> and not in what I <em>think</em> or what I might <em>know</em> is "really" there.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Without doubt I think I would be less challenged to do better or unique things. When things are too easy to access or accomplish, the result seems and probably is less valuable (whether it really is or not). Doubt is my pre-requisite for wanting to overcome obstacles and to achieve things I might not have done in the absence of it. It becomes a driving force for obtaining a better knowledge of the problem before me and ultimately for channelling creative or counteractive actions.</p>

<p>Fear? I guess I fear that I may never get to where I aim to be. That's a big one, but I live with it and know that it is not something that really stops me. I can handle doubt easily, as it suggests to me what to do to ease those doubts, but fear is more emotional and rather non-productive in the sense that it consumes personal energy that I would rather apply to doing things rather than simply worrying about them. It is also present in degrees. The fear of making a mess in handling a darkroom project or of missing the last mail before the weekend are relatively minor fears. That of possibly losing one's life on icy roads in a major blizzard is much greater. Having a bad review by a critic is also a fear of failure, although in real terms might not mean too much. Both doubt and fear arouse the senses and the will to respond, but I find doubt to be a friendly partner, whereas I find fear to be an albatross of sorts.</p>

[fullmetalphotograper]

<p><strong>In your camera, all I see is "fear"</strong><br>

When you shoot, “<em>I’m afraid of failing”.</em><br>

Even when you try to serve a client; <em>“I’m afraid of letting them down”.</em><br>

Yes, your camera only speaks to me of absurd fear.<br>

That’s not good.<br>

What’s neccesary in a photography isn’t fear.<br>

Nothing can be born from that.<br>

If you serve a client, <em>“I won’t let them down”.</em><br>

If you release the shutter, “I will get the image”.<br>

Well can’t you see…<br>

… the <strong>resolve</strong> to shoot is reflected in my lens?</p>

<p>A good photo shoot should be like a dance, but danced seriously. A good photographer does not become tense, but ready. Not thinking, yet not dreaming. Ready for whatever may come. When there is an opportunity, I do not shoot. It shoots all by itself.</p>

 

[dan_south]

<p>Fear of getting arrested has stopped me from making a few photographs. Other than that, I have no doubts. I know what I like and I shoot it.</p>

[gaule]

<p>In speaking of doubt, it’s natural to think of Descartes, as some contributors have done, but I find his ‘methodical doubt’, with its attendant fear that the reality of the world and of his own being may be a fiction, is one that, despite appearances, does not go very deep. For Descartes, the ‘methodical doubt’ is simply an intellectual stratagem (exacerbated by his theory of the <em>génie malin</em>) to help him to jump quickly to the solid ground of the <em>Cogito</em> and begin the recuperation of all he had chosen to doubt before. It’s an intellectual feint that had few if any consequences for his personal life as he lived it.<br>

<br />I am convinced that a thinker who has much more to offer when it comes to an analysis of doubt and fear and their necessary role in human development is Kierkegaard. Even the titles of some of his works are already pointers in that direction: “Fear and Trembling”, “The Concept of Anxiety” (sometimes translated, too, as ‘Anguish,’ or ‘Dread’). The phrases from Heidegger, quoted by Fred, take us back, in reality, to his 'existentialist' mentor, Kierkegaard. For the latter, our journey to true individuality and even self-transcendence always means grappling with a deep sense of anxiety or dread that is, in fact, much more than simple fear. Fear relates to something very distinct and definite, whereas the <em>Angst</em> he speaks of relates to the indefinite, the unknown. Ultimately, ‘anxiety is the possibility of freedom’. It is experienced as a menace to our present security, our complacency or self-sufficiency. It both attracts and repels, but if this ‘dread of possibility’ is not embraced, whatever the consequences, there is no true personal development. Without self-commitment to this uncertainty, without a leap into the unknown, we remain trapped in a world (and perhaps even a very comfortable one) of half-truths and inauthenticity. It’s true that, for Kierkegaard, this journey becomes a religious one in the end, but even for those who decline to follow him in that, there is much in his analysis – particularly in that of what he calls the ‘aesthetic’ stage in life – that is helpful in accepting to go beyond our present limits, whatever they may be, and enter a deeper phase of self-commitment. That holds good as much for the photographer as for anyone else.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p><em>"had few if any consequences for his personal life as he lived it."</em></p>

<p><strong>PJ</strong>, it's certainly interesting to bring up Kierkegaard here and his very different approach to doubt, which one might as readily say was only a strategem to arrive at faith all the more readily, though I wouldn't. I think Descartes was really as genuine as Kierkegaard. And, of course, Descartes was only mentioned in relationship to doubt, not fear. In any case, Descartes' doubt surely did have consequences for his personal life. His devotion to Catholicism was seen to be undermined by what many in the church, certainly Pascal, saw to be a less than faithful understanding of God in his writings. Pascal actually accused Descartes of dispensing with God. Doubt and the primacy of "<em>I</em> think" left him wanting in the eyes of many in the church, though he professed his faith until he died.</p>

[gaule]

<p >Fred, if you will allow me a follow-up comment on your last posting, I hope it won’t prove altogether unrelated to the present thread.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I, too, think that Descartes was quite sincere in his philosophical intent, just as much as Kierkegaard was to be, but his philosophy is far more a matter of the mind than a matter of life. In fact, one can easily think of Descartes’ rationalism as an autonomous system, without reference to the philosopher’s life, whereas Kierkegaard’s thought is inextricably bound up with his individual, ‘existential’ experience. Descartes’ initial methodical doubt is an abstract construct of the mind. Kierkegaard’s self-doubt, expressed in terms of anguish, is tremendously personal and leads to a more deeply committed way of living life.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >When we approach our own pursuits – one of them being photography – in search of development, perhaps that difference in emphasis is a relevant one. There is a form of engagement that only touches the mind. And there is another form that grips our whole being and presses us to change, not just our perceptions, but even our way of life. </p>

<p ><br>

This difference in emphasis, I would add, is also visible in the different approach of Descartes and Kierkegaard to their separate religious backgrounds. In the opening pages of his <em>Discourse on Method</em>, Descartes, tongue-in-cheek, quickly excludes from scrutiny the ‘revealed truths’ proposed by theology. This leaves him free to attempt the construction of an implicitly all-embracing rational system of explanation. It is precisely this exclusively rational project that Pascal could not accept, because he is deeply convinced of the finite nature of human reasoning and of the human need for transcendence. There is, in fact, a strong parallelism between Pascal’s attitude and that of Kierkegaard, when the latter, a few centuries later, poured scorn on the pretence of Hegelian Idealism to construct a vast dialectic that would enfold everything in its self-explanatory rational arms. </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>I don't think Kierkegaard's religion is any more a matter of life than Descartes' rationalism. D's rationalism was bound up in his life, his outlook, and his relationship to the church. I imagine for him, it was real life. A religious bent is no more real than a rational one. Rational philosophy is every bit as much life as religious faith. Descartes' background as a mathematician should tell us how much his rationality was tied to how he lived and experienced the world. Religion is not only method humans can use to grip our whole being. </p>

[gaule]

<p>Have a read of Paul Johnson’s <em>Intellectuals: From Marx and Tolstoy to Sartre and Chomsky,</em> if you want to see how deeply the lives of many would-be mentors of humanity diverged from the philosophies they proposed. Nothing is easier than separating one’s intellectual life from the life one leads. Descartes was no different in this regard, if the biographical detail we have about his life is anything to go by. His relationship with his church, by the way, is pretty much summed up in his motto: <em>Larvatus prodeo</em>, “Masked, I advance”.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p><em>"Nothing is easier than separating one’s intellectual life from the life one leads."</em></p>

<p>Actually, separating one's spiritual life from the life one leads has been quite easy as well . . . the moral hypocrisy of church leaders throughout history.</p>

<p>I can't distill Descartes' relationship with the church into a single quote. It's complicated when one tries to nudge forward a powerful institution while maintaining allegiance to and hope in that institution.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>I appreciate your relating these matters to photography, so I'll say that I think just as some thinkers are more rational and some more emotional, the same is true with artists. We tend to emphasize the more poetic sides of people like DaVinci, but there was a lot of science and use of the mind involved there as well. I never underestimate the power of rationality, in my own work as well.</p>

[jtk]

<p>Luis G, quoting Fellini: <br /><em>“What if it’s the end, of a big fat liar without talent or genius?”</em><br /><em>and...</em><br /><em>“Fear is a feeling you have to cultivate. A man cannot do without being afraid. A fearless man is, I think, a fool. Fear is inseparable from being human.”</em></p>

<p>As to Fellini's "what if?" : Unless given by <em>significant </em>others, the labels "talent" and "genius" have no meaning or value. I doubt Fellini was honest about those doubts. He did his work for its own sake...his expression of doubt was posturing. Even great men are allowed a little posturing. Perhaps he wondered if he'd led his life as fully as he once hoped: more likely from a great man than worrying about primative labels.</p>

<p><em>cultivating fear</em>: reportedly standard, sensible practice among bull fighters.</p>

<p>How do we know we're not vegetables if we're not sometimes fearful?</p>

<p>If we sense fear, and then overcome it, isn't that an engine ...onward to the next fear and the next success? If failure follows, didn't we confirm our bravery? ("brave" is a better lable than "fearless," "genius," or "talented"...ymmv)</p>

<p> </p>

[jtk]

<p>My current photographic <em>fear</em> is self-imposed and it is driven by a deadline. Within two weeks I need to do something new-to-me, with certain visual characteristics and implications...and I have no idea what it will be.</p>