Poetry is not a synthesis, it is a creative art and there is a difference. Synthesis must ultimately come from some previous analysis, it must come from logic, and it must therefore come from the mind.
Mind is just a bundle of notions, picked up from the past.
The mind is made out of the past, the whole system of the mind is concerned with history, it is concerned with events that have occurred, truly the mind is just a method of analyzing the past, analyzing history so that it can confront the future. The very logic of the mind is that the future in some way resembles the past, that history is likely to repeat and that it would be easier to survive in the future if one knew the past well. It considers the past important and valuable; indeed its theory of survival is past-centric.
The mind is well suited for survival, it is a great tool for survival. The whole activity and existence of the mind is survival-oriented, the whole function of the mind is to provide a system for survival. The mind is designed for it.
But the driving force of man isn’t survival, it is creativity. I think that creativity is the true nature of man; all other impulses are subordinate it. The true force is creativity, and the mind is simply a tool to ensure survival so that creativity can happen. And it is important to understand that the higher is dependent on the lower, but that the lower can exist without the higher. Survival can exist without creativity, but then it will be like a walking corpse.
And most people live their lives this way, just like their forefathers, and then they suppress the creativity in the child.
The adult is annoyed by the child because he is unable to understand the restless exuberance that the child tirelessly displays. It irritates him subconsciously, how can someone have fun while he is joyless? The child is annoyed with the parent, how can someone be like a stone? The adult and the child are unable to understand each other; there is no bridge between them. Of course the adults usually win, that is because of their ability to command. They provide survival for the child, and of course survival is a more basic impulse and the creativity is sacrificed at the altar of the mechanical. Survival is lower and so it is important, creativity is an option. As days pass the child is indoctrinated to a so-called ‘maturity’, to fully complete his or her metamorphosis into an adult. The disease of the society spreads through generations.
True art then is a rediscovery of the near-lost creativity in man. Genius, whether scientific or artistic, or sometimes both, operates beyond the limits of linear thinking. True intelligence and great art do not follow the slow, predictable processes of development; they take quantum leaps and introduce radical shifts in their fields. Intelligence and creativity, whatever you prefer, are the aspects of the true nature of existence, apart and more subtle than superficial impulses of survival. Survival itself is worthless and meaningless; to participate in an original and genuine way of life is more meaningful. Artists, dancers and musicians, and people who engage in academic study because they love to do it, have transcended the ordinary way of life, they have transcended mere survival and entered a life of true creativity, and the joy in being what they are is often evident from their gleaming countenances.
The creative process is not a synthesis, for synthesis is the mere production of systems from constituent parts. For synthesis, the whole is equal to the sum of the parts. A car can be easily built if one has the parts and the instruments to assemble it, synthesis is really a process of assembly, a process of construction. In creativity however the whole is not conceived of as a sum of parts,there is no previous analysis, it is guided by no notion, no past, no-mind. It is in the truest sense of the word, spontaneous. And since it doesn’t come from the mind, it comes from true creativity, true intelligence, it comes from the mystical aspect of existence, beyond the limits of logic and explanation.
Therefore a creative work often exists in a discontinuity with the past, and the more discontinuous and radical it is, the more creative it becomes.It is natural.This is simply because creativity has nothing to do with the past, it doesn’t rely on the past,and it doesn’t have anything to do with the future, it is a glimpse into the timeless. Great works of the past are still able to attract newer audiences because; they by their inherent nature are timeless and connect directly to the creative nature of other humans. Thus these works of art, whether sculptures, paintings, poems, or music continue to amaze and enthrall newer generations of people is evidence to the fact that the true creativity is timeless and transcends the limits of culture and country.
Analysis of a work is a restrospective speculation, it doesnt provide a real description of the creative nature of art.'Analyses' of poems for example, often highlight the period of life which the poet was going through, the figures of speech and the sentence constructions used by the poet, the metaphors and the similies employed to produce the desired effect.In reality, artists including poets do not 'design' their works around accepted frameworks of expression, but really reflect in terms peculiar to the artist, their impressions of the world around them.This channeled through the creative process produces a work unbound by any rules or forms of expression, though retrospectively 'experts' often 'analyse' their works to produce their commentaries which are entirely non-sensical though apparently rational, since the very process of analysis is anti-thetical to the approach of creative discovery.It is sufficient to say that the beauty of a rose resides in the entirety of the flower, not its dismembered parts, reduced to such a state by curiousity.It is fine to want to understand what constitutes a rose, however it is important to note that the beauty of the rose is a holistic property and not a mathematical one; that one is inspired to write a poem or make a work of art, a sinewy scultpure, a smiling Mona Lisa, all of these are products of a creative process and not a synthetic one, and hence cant be reduced to how's and why's following a naive logical approach.
The Natya Shastras are ancient Indian treatises on the preforming arts prevalent in that time.Music, poetry, drama and dance are clubbed together in a performance art form in the Natya Shastras, as 'sangeeta' whose prime motive is to evoke a emotive response in the audience, termed 'rasa' which stands for 'essence, mood'. Great art must be able to evoke a strong emotional response in the people experiencing it, and strike chords with the innate creative impulse in others.Thus, though the creative process itself is one of self-discovery, the exposure of the creative work and its dissemination among others tends to turn them discovering and realizing their own creative potential.The great artist then, acts like a catalyst in the creative process of other people, thus rehabilitating certain sections of society towards their original creative natures previously supressed by the unnatural influences of modern education, moral indoctrination and cultural bias.