A frank claim based on direct experience and bolstered by studies that theoretically support the claim

I believe artists, high in real-world creative achievement, have a tendency to implicitly engage writing strategies that facilitate toggling up and down various internal cognitive, affective, and psychopathological risky conditions that contribute to various phases of creative processes, persistence, and provide some backbone for breaching social conventions. Is writing the the only act to facilitate switiching, emo reg, and identity coping and cohesion? Of course not. But based on the shear prepensity of visual makers to make, i believe their acts of writing are important in bolstering their other assets that lead to high creative achievement. Sure there are exceptions, outliers (of course, they are artists).

A dissertation to follow, but give me a year or so.

Oh yes, and i believe the same thing is happening across creative domains–artists and scientists alike. Perhaps one of the generalities of high creative function that is not domain specific.

Red dotted lines designate LIW2015 hodgepodge composite corpus means–nytimes, novels, expressive writing samples, blogs, twitter, etc.

PS. Those of you that parse the sub-facets of openness, with intellect pointing to science achievements and the more aesthetic but not intellect point to the arts, can kiss my artsy ass. My current natural writing samples numbering 540+ by artists and scientists do not support your claims generated from pre-adulting-students samplings (which likely predicts everyday creativity activity vs achievement). There is not a statistical difference between artists and scientists linguistic cues of analytic thinking styles, cognitive complexities, and cog processes. High achieving artists are highly intellectual, have a strong need for cognition. Rant without my supporting p-values, lmer() modeling, anovas, and such. (Ha, plus English butcheries that stand out like picking my nose in public, are problematic for being taken seriously…alas I will employ the common trope of learning differences to rationalize my linguistic nose picking and this is a freaking blog)

Back to my frank claim, it just happens to align with Frank Barron’s:

The creative… may be at once naive and knowledgable, being at home equally to primitive symbolism and to rigorous logic. He is both more primitive and more cultured, more destructive and more constructive, and occasionally crazier and yet adamantly saner than the average person. — Barron (1963)

This should be a graph for its beauty and convoluted complexity at capturing trends in lived experience and exception; alas, it is merely an algae and ick slicked pond surface.