Whitney Houston's death and a hollow life.

Whitney Houston is dead. Everyone knows this by now. To me, however, her death, from undeclared causes at just 48, is emblematic of a profound problem some people seem to have, even though they have “made it”. They live hollow lives. I shall explain.

Whitney Houston seemingly had everything. She had wealth, fame, success (at least formerly) and the respect that goes with it. She also had a daughter by Bobby Brown. Yet, for her all of this – which to most people would have been plenty – was not enough. She needed the exquisite pleasures of drugs too...and by all accounts lots of them. She became, for many years, consumed by them. This, to me, indicates that her life, for all its seeming fullness, was hollow. She must have felt there was something profound missing, for her to have to seek solace in chemical pleasures. Only a deep dissatisfaction with her life, its totality and meaning could lead someone down the path of a drugged self-destruction. Happy lives don’t end with drugs. They don’t even begin to take drugs. So, hers, in some way, was not a happy, fulfilled, pleasing life – she needed chemical support to feel what she felt she must feel.

Now, I am not going to single Whitney Houston out for this particular foolishness. Amy Winehouse is another recent example of the phenomenon. She too had a life that would seem to have been full and rich in many ways. She too, however, sought drugged oblivion, though her favourite was alcohol. Both died young, probably for much the same reasons...either the drugs themselves or the health consequences of having taken them, too long, too often.

The history of entertainment and culture in general is littered with examples of the same phenomenon – drug induced or associated deaths of famous, successful people. I should note that we do not know if Whitney Houston’s death was caused by drugs, but it does seem likely that they played a role, even if only as inducers of general ill health. Whatever the case, it doesn’t affect my argument. All of these people led what seem to the outside, to be full, interesting, rich, complete lives, filled with opportunities and experiences few have the chance to have. Yet all of these people were somehow hollow. Their lives were empty of real meaning, because they sought to fill them with the temporary pleasures of chemically enhanced delights. Had their lives been truly meaningful to them, they would not have needed such stimulation and would have avoided it, out of respect for the lives they had.

To me, it seems, that there is a profound failure here, a profound artistic and creative failure. If their artistic work had been pursued as intently as it could have been, then, it seems to me, it should have given their lives the meaning and the rewards they, in fact, sought elsewhere. Had they been absorbed enough in their creative work, then they would have had no need for drugs, because the work itself would have given them all the pleasure, meaning and reward they sought. Thus, their flight into drugs is a kind of artistic failure – a failure of absorption in work, a failure of personal intensity, a failure of drive, and a failure to respect their work and the ability to do it, itself.

So however many people come out to say how “great” Whitney Houston was – just as they said how “great” Amy Winehouse was, there is something which really should not be denied or ignored: they failed as artists and as human beings, because they neither respected and valued their work and themselves enough to avoid seeking self-destruction in drugs. Had they been more fully involved in their artistic work, they would not have craved such artificial pleasures. That they did, means that for all the “greatness” they achieved, that whatever they achieved was less than they could have achieved, had they been more fully focussed on their work.

So what we have with Whitney Houston and Amy Winehouse and the many others before them, are people who probably never reached their true potential as artists, because they were focussed more on passing pleasures than the more profound (one hopes) rewards of their creative work. They could have been so much more than they were, had they had that self-respect and fuller absorption in their work.

However “great” therefore it is decided Whitney Houston was, I cannot help but feel, that the work we saw from her, was not as great as she could have achieved, had she been undistracted by the need for chemical pleasure. It should also be remembered that almost all such drugs induce brain damage of various kinds. Whitney Houston (and Amy Winehouse etc), became much less than they could have. That is the greater pity here, than Whitney’s passing. She could have made an even greater mark on the world, than she did. How much greater, we will never know...for the version we have of her, is the drug damaged one. We don’t know what a dedicated, drug-free Whitney Houston might have achieved. I am sure of this though...it would have been a whole lot more.

Posted by Valentine Cawley

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Amy Winehouse's Death: a Preventable Inevitability.

Amy Winehouse, 27, Is dead. No surprise there, I am afraid. Some deaths are more inevitable than others – particularly some early deaths.

Now, Amy Winehouse was famous for two attributes: her music and her addictions to drugs and alcohol. Indeed, it could be argued that she was more famous for her addictions than her music – since the former won her more tabloid newspaper coverage than the latter. She was always in the newspapers for things no-one would want to be in them for.

I can’t comment on her music, or its ultimate worth, since I didn’t really pay much attention to it. However, I can comment on her life and death: it seems overwhelmingly likely that she did not have to die so young. Her death, whilst an inevitable result of the lifestyle she led – was also preventable. There is a lesson here for all relatives of addicts: don’t stand by and watch – do something. Amy Winehouse would most probably be alive today, if others had been firmer with her on the matter of her addictions. Although the cause of death is not presently known, there are relatively few deaths, in the modern world, in 27 year olds, by natural causes. Given her drug addicted lifestyle, it seems most likely that her addictions contributed to her death – either directly, by overdose, or indirectly, through the health damage they caused.

If drug addicts (and that includes alchoholics) are not to die young, like Amy Winehouse, a certain lack of freedom should be imposed on them, until they are able to control themselves, with respect to their addictions. Amy Winehouse should have been monitored very closely, to ensure that she did not have access to any drugs or alchohol. I know it seems like such a regime would have denied her, her “rights”…but, really, who should have a “right”, to destroy themselves, by drugs? In such cases, it would be more humane, and ultimately less painful, to step in and directly prevent the addict from any access to the substances they would otherwise seek out. This may seem at odds with the belief that people should be allowed to live the lives they please – but, in the case of addicts, the lives they please will, most frequently, lead directly to early deaths. Thus, it seems reasonable to intervene, until such time as the addict is no longer an addict and, perhaps, has come to live their lives as if they value them.

It could be said, that drugs alone, didn’t kill Amy Winehouse, but a lack of love, by those closest to her. If they had truly loved her, they would have stepped in and made sure, beyond any doubt, that Amy Winehouse did not have access to any harmful drugs, legal or otherwise. That they did not, or were not effective in doing so, shows that they either did not love her enough, or did not understand the duties that come with that love. Sometimes, those who love another, feel they should indulge them and let them live the life they please. That is fine, only if the life desired, is not a self-destructive one. In all situations in which the loved one desires, consciously or otherwise, to destroy themselves, those who love have a duty to protect the life of the loved one, from harm. It does seem that that this was not done in this case. Amy Winehouse was famous for her inebriated, intoxicated, “shambolic” performances in the latter years of her life. So, clearly, she was not being denied access to drugs, legal or otherwise. Whatever “care” she was under, was not effective – or did not care to deny her what it should have done.

Amy Winehouse was a musician. This makes her loss more acute than a typical early death – for, in dying, whatever music she would have produced had she lived a normal life, will now never be. It is a pity, she was not protected from the most dangerous person in her life – herself.

Rest in peace, Amy.

Posted by Valentine Cawley.

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.htmland here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here:http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at:http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is athttp://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

Van Gogh's suicide and Fintan's reaction

Yesterday, Fintan learnt of the life story of Vincent Van Gogh. He was very interested to hear about how this famous painter had lived. He rather liked the art, too.

When his mother told him about Van Gogh cutting off his ear, he was stunned and appalled that anyone could do such a thing. His reaction was distinctly emotional – as are most things with Fintan. Yet, that is nothing compared to how he reacted when he learnt that Vincent Van Gogh had eventually given up on his life and shot himself. This time he was greatly puzzled.

“Why wasn’t it enough for him to know that his paintings were nice?”, he asked, completely unable to accept Van Gogh’s act as a reasonable one.

Why, not, indeed? One day, no doubt, Fintan will understand how a life of non-acceptance and of “failure”, could wear a man down. Evidently, Van Gogh’s own view of his work was not enough to sustain him against all that negative weight. Perhaps, in fact, he may have imbibed some of what other people thought of his work and no longer been able to see how great it was. If everyone fails to appreciate one’s work, perhaps, in time, it is quite easy to start to lose an appreciation of one’s own work. Then again, even if one knows one’s own work to be wonderful, but NO-ONE IN THE WORLD thinks so, too, that must be too hard to bear, after a while.

Van Gogh did not kill himself. The society in which he lived and failed to appreciate him, did. Had his immediate environment appreciated him and his work, he would, most probably have lived out a full life and painted a lot more than the 900 works I read once, that he had painted in his life. So, ironically enough, the world lost thousands of paintings, because it didn’t appreciate him, whilst he lived. We all, therefore, lost because of this – not just Van Gogh, who lost many years of life.

There is a lesson in this, of course. We should not be too quick to dismiss the works of any creator for their novelty or strangeness, or difference from current perceptions. Anyone whose work is new is trying to show us all a new way of seeing the world. One day, that view will be better appreciated than it is at first, once people have had time to become accustomed to it. Thus, it is, we should habitually forestall negative comment and just observe carefully the new works – and should encourage the creator with judicious words meant to support them in their struggles to bring their inner world, into the outer one. One should never do what was done to Van Gogh: scorn his works, ignore them, underestimate them, for the lack of understanding them.

In fact, it should be that all who might have genius, should be supported in their endeavours by the world around them. It is too costly to us all, not to do so. For if a true genius is not supported, is scorned and spurned, discouraged and ignored, much as Van Gogh was, then it is altogether likely that they might cease to produce their works, or, end much in the same way as Van Gogh. A genius might, thereby, lose their life, but we all lose a world that shall never be fully known: the one within the mind and heart of the genius who could no longer bear life.

There are quite a few examples of geniuses, or at least highly creative people who taken their own lives, whilst still relatively young – often for just the same type of reason as Van Gogh presumably did: despair at the reception to their work. John Kennedy O’Toole, for instance, killed himself shortly after the rejection of his famous work, “The Confederacy of Dunces”. He was just 31. How much more would he have written had he lived a full life? Had he not been rejected, he probably would have done so.

Gatekeepers to “publication”, or the equivalent in each creative world, whether they be publishers, agents, movie producers, or art galleries, should be kinder to creators, more encouraging, more accepting and more open-minded. They should make an effort to see value in the new, quality in the different – and not impose too narrow an aesthetic point of view. The loss can be too great, if they are blunt in their criticism or harsh in their assessment. In the creative worlds, narrow-mindedness kills and short-sightedness is deadly.

What is forgotten by gatekeepers, is that the artist, of whatever kind, will have invested much of themselves in their work. Thus a rejection of the work, is a rejection of the core of the artist: their inner depths are being spurned. The pain of such rejection is enough to kill many artists. They should not suffer in this way. Creative work must be assessed with greater gentleness, insight, compassion and humanity. Though, it must be observed that these qualities are often lacking in gatekeepers, who themselves lack creative ability and, perhaps, lack a true understanding of what artists go through.

Do you want to know who killed John Kennedy O’Toole? Not O’Toole himself. Robert Gottlieb of Simon and Schuster provided the motivational trigger, by rejecting The Confederacy of Dunces, on the basis that it needed extensive revision and was “pointless”. Eventually, Dunces was published essentially unaltered by Louisiana State University Press in 1980. It went on to sell 1.5 million copies and O’Toole received a posthumous Pulitzer Prize for Fiction, in 1981. It would seem that Robert Gottlieb didn’t really know what he was talking about. However, his erroneous views killed a great writer.

Sadly, it was O’Toole’s mother, Thelma’s, constant efforts to publish his work after his death, that got it published. She saw it as a means to prove her son’s talent. She was right. Simon and Schuster were wrong.

So, when faced with the work of a new writer, artist, musician, film-maker, poet, scientist or the like, don’t be a killer critic…be a kind-hearted supportive opener of the way – and do what you can to bring new work to the world, instead of doing your best to persuade artists and other creators that life is not worth living.

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here: http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks. You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)

A world of unrealized potential

Have you ever paused to consider how much unrealized potential there is, in the world? Many gifted people never fully express what they are capable of. Indeed, I believe that more of the world’s potential, in human ability, is forever unexpressed, rather than realized. Many people, for a start, never discover their greatest talents: they do not have the opportunity to explore those hidden areas, as they grow up, and never come to understand how gifted they would be, in them, if only they had tried. Others know full well what they are good at, but the nature of the world itself frustrates them, from expressing their skills. Great actors never get to act much, because they lack connections, lack understanding of the industry, or are lost in the vast hordes of others trying to act, too. The same applies to writers, artists, musicians and the like: many are unable to navigate their way to success, through lack of access to the right arenas that would allow them to show what they can do.

Then there are those who have to sideline their core creative talents to make a living, to support themselves and their families. They are thus forced to live frustrated unfulfilled lives, in order just to survive. Often, their talents are never realized.

There are those, too, who have many talents and have to choose which ones to attend to. In such cases, the quantum of unrealized talent may be many times the quantum of realized talent. The only theoretical solution to such a problem would be for people to live extended lives, to allow the time for all talents to be developed and addressed. That, however, is not presently possible, so such multi-talented individuals shall continue to live partially frustrated lives.

Then there are those brought up in poverty, or in countries whose infrastructure is too rudimentary to offer them the opportunities they need to be exposed to what would naturally interest them. It is almost certain that such people will never realize their innate gifts.

The world does not lack talent or potential. However, it does lack the universal access to the tools and setting that would allow those talents to flourish. As a result, most of the world’s talent is never expressed and never leads to any concrete result (I believe). Thus, it is clear, that simply by making the means to express such talents more readily accessible, to more people, would result in a kind of renaissance, throughout the world. By simply allowing more people to become what they could be, we could build a better world for us all.

So, if you can help someone, somewhere, realize the talents within them, then why not do so: every talent that you help flourish, will add, in some way, to the beauty that is human life, human culture and human society.

(If you would like to support my continued writing of this blog and my ongoing campaign to raise awareness about giftedness and all issues pertaining to it, please donate, by clicking on the gold button to the left of the page.

To read about my fundraising campaign, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-in-support-of-my.html and here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/01/fundraising-drive-first-donation.html

If you would like to read any of our scientific research papers, there are links to some of them, here: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2011/02/research-papers-by-valentine-cawley-and.html

If you would like to see an online summary of my academic achievements to date, please go here: http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11136175

To learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, 10, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, 7 and Tiarnan, 5, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html

I also write of gifted education, child prodigy, child genius, adult genius, savant, megasavant, HELP University College, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, Malaysia, IQ, intelligence and creativity.

There is a review of my blog, on the respected The Kindle Report here: http://thekindlereport.blogspot.com/2010/09/boy-who-knew-too-much-child-prodigy.html

Please have a read, if you would like a critic's view of this blog. Thanks.

You can get my blog on your Kindle, for easy reading, wherever you are, by going to: http://www.amazon.com/Boy-Who-Knew-Too-Much/dp/B0042P5LEE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1284603792&sr=8-1

Please let all your fellow Kindlers know about my blog availability - and if you know my blog well enough, please be so kind as to write a thoughtful review of what you like about it. Thanks.

My Internet Movie Database listing is at: http://imdb.com/name/nm3438598/

Ainan's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3305973/

Syahidah's IMDB listing is at http://imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

Our editing, proofreading and copywriting company, Genghis Can, is at http://www.genghiscan.com/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication is prohibited. Use only with permission. Thank you.)