In an overview to fly over the incredible capacities of a creative mind: these to be dwelling in a surrounding of - so seeming - limiting forces of more or less independent interference factors - is certainly not too easily done.

Traditionally, we would begin with what is closest to us, in form of adjectives, rather than nouns: being creative. Being open, flexible, curious, testing, playful, being wide in horizon, being playful with our change of position, with creating shapes and ways of reaction and interaction, with creating. Oh, horizon, oh range: oh tiniest field of applying!

Then, on the other hand, we would make a resolution of the "other side", so that both hands go for the task.

What is organization but ministry? What is organizing but ministering? Now, the daily tasks - the multitude and overlapping of duties and life necessities, social, personal or otherwise - are not to be done by themselves. What is our general approach to "the ministered" when we now try to coordinate it with being creative?

In which way is creativity searching for another river bed? And where can we use it for - ministry?

So, here we see, how much "both hands" serve the task, as well as a Deity Absolute might encounter the Unqualified Absolute, while the Universal Absolute answers the question for how to face a - former? - tension.



A next step (after having carefully approached the basic choices of independence in both our hands) would be so search for the key areas of testing application. How conscious are we of our possibility to influence their key factors?

Spontaneously I would like to suggest two areas of difficulty, one in minor and one in major creativity fields. Here we see how much life is not a task, but a field of exploring, to the evolving god, while exploration may become and absolute task to the individual, it may also be a challenging, or painful, or rather creative - co-creational - cocreational in very personal colours - experience for another individual.

The imagination of "what else" could I form the shape of this situation is often the answer on: I cannot compare my flexibility to my own static view onto non-static "things".

Even the words of this writer could be static to himself; but he explores, now, without losing the texture of an internet narrative, that language - spirit stream - knows different coordination potentialities with an interferent - communicating - being.

To say it differently: How have you solved problems, that I try to deal with in a better way? How much is your answer valueing my being in its specific needs - am I ready for a dialogue with you?

So, the same space where we encounter the very individual way of sight and experience of the material and supermaterial levels of reality brings us to a way deeper ability of reaction towards "the obstacle", the "minor time factor", the "commitment to duty". It is dangerous to say that we should develop besides this two-handed approach, because we could easily be limited in developing "split brains". We smile, when we leave work, we press the lips together, when we begin? The flow of creativity - while continuously exploring changing (- expanding -) riverbeds - is not to be suppressed by such a surrounding. A man can write symphonies in his mind, while his hands do sort different types of screws under a neon lamp. As well as a screw can be a symphony for appropriate cocreators. Maybe I should imagine that I need people (beings) whom are creative on a very different level than my personal one.

This leads me to an amazing viewpoint. If I am not counting screws today: where is my actual, where is my potential river bed?
Is it different from where I see it?
Is there communication between where I see it and where it may be?

Should it have needed all these introductory textual movements, to ask these questions?

Answers cannot be generalizing. But they can be expanded in time, as creativity can expand time - within time-space-realities - to some sort of content or into more realized potentials. How individual such an attempt must be! What way does it see, in you? And what way do you see in it? And is there a bridge, for communication?

The persons I was able to watch in my life whom I associated a certain "freeflow" of activated spirit potentials and operating creativity activity where professors in their subjects, even if not titled as such. A natural interest has helped them to shape the river beds without the force and duty of high payment and respectable standing in society: They could concetrate on their form of real content, hereby developing an unreflected, open and direct response to a meanwhile differently confronted society. Their relationships where so free as their scientific or personal interest (subject) allowed them to be in this directness. Freeflow is established as a quality in - during life phases or lifetimes - not having to roll against non-qualities of others (or, far-fetched, the Unqualified Absolute), but simply be adequately qualitative in interaction. The real interaction, thereby, may have happened with their subject.

Party. People. Something like the feeling, maybe, cited from Max Frisch (1969): "Einige waren sehr nett, fand ich, sehr anregend..."

So, what is your subject? Is it responsive to you? What are those liquid shapes in your inner mind picture screen saying, when you are trying to align - what, when you're listening?

The adjectives are not far away; I have mused about this sentence: "Doing by learning". The wrong one?