What do you think?
Rate this book
The Midnight Disease: The Drive to Write, Writer's Block, and the Creative Brain
Why is it that some writers struggle for months to come up with the perfect sentence or phrase while others, hunched over a keyboard deep into the night, seem unable to stop writing? In The Midnight Disease, neurologist Alice W. Flaherty explores the mysteries of literary the drive to write, what sparks it, and what extinguishes it. She draws on intriguing examples from medical case studies and from the lives of writers, from Franz Kafka to Anne Lamott, from Sylvia Plath to Stephen King. Flaherty, who herself has grappled with episodes of compulsive writing and block, also offers a compelling personal account of her own experiences with these conditions.
307 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2004
About the author
Alice W. Flaherty
4 books14 followersAlice Weaver Flaherty is an American neurologist. She is a researcher, physician, educator and author of the 2004 book The Midnight Disease, about the neural basis of creativity. She writes in various genres, including “scientific papers, humorous essays, and picture books”. Her book, The Massachusetts General Hospital Handbook of Neurology is the most "widely used neurology text in its class".[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_W...]
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 119 reviews
January 13, 2019
I am far too great a snob to read a book like this except by accident – I found it at the Salvation Army. Snobbery is its own punishment, however, and I found I could not put this book down. It was fascinating, and unlike virtually all the “popular science” books I have ever read, its author (a neurologist and Harvard professor) never condescends to the reader and yet never blinded me with science. The act of writing (and in the case of writer’s block, not writing) is now just as weird to me as sex and social hierarchies among mallard ducks. This book really screwed me up. Now when I can’t write, I try to feel whether my limbic system is glowing green or blue, just like a mood ring.
Flaherty’s writing style is a bit quirky, sometimes a bit breathless, but mostly very companionable. Her references, even for such an accomplished scientist, are almost funny – she read exactly six bazillion books to write this one. I’d love to talk to her about writer’s block and anything else that comes up. I’d let her put electrodes on my feverish, ineffectual little brain.
Flaherty’s writing style is a bit quirky, sometimes a bit breathless, but mostly very companionable. Her references, even for such an accomplished scientist, are almost funny – she read exactly six bazillion books to write this one. I’d love to talk to her about writer’s block and anything else that comes up. I’d let her put electrodes on my feverish, ineffectual little brain.
Shelved as 'non-review'
December 18, 2015It is midnight.
You’ve been searching, searching, searching,
down long hallways, past still and silent spaces,
finding nothing, nothing, nothing,
climbing flights and flights of stairs,
moving through galleries of images,
not what you’re seeking,
turning corners, crossing passageways,
through blue rooms, through red rooms,
rooms with cupboards, rooms with shelves,
rooms with desks, rooms with drawers,
in one drawer, a gleam of gold,
just what you’re seeking,
you turn it over and over,
you press it, you knead it,
but no,
it is too firm, too unyielding,
you want gem-like, yes, but soft, soft enough to shape,
you put it back, close the drawer,
leave the room, try next door,
in the gloom, a figure beckoning,
an old woman, haloed hair,
hands cupped, a gift she is offering,
a gift, soft as an unlaid egg,
you step back, you can’t accept, too fragile,
you back out, close the door,
run up a stairs, the same stairs,
no, different stairs, the door at the top wasn’t there before,
you open the door, a white room,
a little bundle lying in the corner,
you know what it is, you cannot approach,
no, no, no,
escape, escape,
down the staircase, two by two,
the staircase rising not descending,
rising, rising,
merging into a labyrinth,
a yellowish gleam in the distance,
an exit, around the corner,
no, no, no, not yet,
around the next,
further on, how much further,
you’ve turned this corner already,
you’ve been turning in circles, the spooky light just out of reach,
you hear drumming, louder and louder,
heart beat thrumming,
you crawl through a narrow canal,
emerging into a shell-like opening,
dawn is breaking,
but you have nothing to show for your night of brain storming,
nothing, nothing, nothing.
Wait.
In all the circling through the final passages,
you’ve been kicking something ahead of you,
something soft, pliable, amber-like,
a wwixnanirniggot
It will do, it will serve your present purpose.
You mould it into a more recognisable shape,
wwixningirnatgo
wixgnani writong.
Just another little tweak,
there, you've finally unplugged the midnight block.
You have created your very own
Waxing on Writing
You’ve been searching, searching, searching,
down long hallways, past still and silent spaces,
finding nothing, nothing, nothing,
climbing flights and flights of stairs,
moving through galleries of images,
not what you’re seeking,
turning corners, crossing passageways,
through blue rooms, through red rooms,
rooms with cupboards, rooms with shelves,
rooms with desks, rooms with drawers,
in one drawer, a gleam of gold,
just what you’re seeking,
you turn it over and over,
you press it, you knead it,
but no,
it is too firm, too unyielding,
you want gem-like, yes, but soft, soft enough to shape,
you put it back, close the drawer,
leave the room, try next door,
in the gloom, a figure beckoning,
an old woman, haloed hair,
hands cupped, a gift she is offering,
a gift, soft as an unlaid egg,
you step back, you can’t accept, too fragile,
you back out, close the door,
run up a stairs, the same stairs,
no, different stairs, the door at the top wasn’t there before,
you open the door, a white room,
a little bundle lying in the corner,
you know what it is, you cannot approach,
no, no, no,
escape, escape,
down the staircase, two by two,
the staircase rising not descending,
rising, rising,
merging into a labyrinth,
a yellowish gleam in the distance,
an exit, around the corner,
no, no, no, not yet,
around the next,
further on, how much further,
you’ve turned this corner already,
you’ve been turning in circles, the spooky light just out of reach,
you hear drumming, louder and louder,
heart beat thrumming,
you crawl through a narrow canal,
emerging into a shell-like opening,
dawn is breaking,
but you have nothing to show for your night of brain storming,
nothing, nothing, nothing.
Wait.
In all the circling through the final passages,
you’ve been kicking something ahead of you,
something soft, pliable, amber-like,
a wwixnanirniggot
It will do, it will serve your present purpose.
You mould it into a more recognisable shape,
wwixningirnatgo
wixgnani writong.
Just another little tweak,
there, you've finally unplugged the midnight block.
You have created your very own
Waxing on Writing
July 18, 2010
This is a strange, interesting, sometimes bizarre look into the psychology of the drive to write, written by a psychologist who has struggled with depression and mania that affected her drive to write. It is a highly erudite book; the references ramble between psychology studies and classical literature -- Flaherty is certainly well-read, and her book is easily readable by those who are not well-versed in psychology. She explores the links between madness and creativity, religion and inspiration, the uncertainties of the mind and the aberrations of the brain, both beautiful and horrific. The last chapter has one of the most beautiful and vivid descriptions of hypomania I've ever encountered, where she describes how on an ordinary day, everything suddenly becomes too vibrant and meaningful beyond reasonable explanation, as if her metaphors have become too intense. A strangely beautiful book, it is part science, part speculation, part memoir, that tentatively celebrates the brain as a diverse and powerful organ, and writing as a complex and intense activity that defies easy explanation. It is worth reading to anyone who has struggled with the desire to write, and anyone who wonders how that desire can be related to a disordered mind.
April 10, 2012
The Midnight Disease: The Drive to Write, Writer's Block, and the Creative Brain is written by Alice Flaherty, a neurologist. Her medical training has a profound impact on the book, but even more so weighs the event that changed her life: the premature birth and death of twin boys. Her subsequent postpartum disorder brought on depression and mania, including hypergraphia--the constant need to write. But this isn't a memoir, even though her voice and experience are integral. This is about the very nature of the human brain and how mental states and trauma impact our ability to read and write, causing crippling writer's block or the inability to step away from the pen or keyboard.[return][return]I loved this book. It's not an easy read, though. You need a basic understanding of the brain and what does what, though Flaherty does a wonderful job of elaborating. The temporal lobe is essential to the writer. I was amazed at how conditions such as epilepsy and bipolar disorder directly impact how prolificly a person writes. It also delves into depression and autism, issues within my own family.[return][return]If you write and want to understand why, read this book. It won't give you direct answers, but you'll have a lot to think--and write--about.
June 13, 2013
A neurologist's take on writing.
I don't know what a non-writer would think of it, but I found it fascinating.
She starts out with a discussion of hypergraphia which is the compulsive need to write. It's associated with temporal lobe epilepsy and with maniac-depression and it's probably not what drove you to write so much at some point. Doctors discovered that they had a simple test for epileptic patients as to whether they were hypergraphic: ask them to write a letter describing their health. Non-hypergraphics wrote under a hundred. Hypergraphics wrote thousands.
It's so compulsive that -- well, she tells the story of a Chinese woman who had hypergraphia. She wrote, compulsively, and then she burned it all because it was criticism of the Chinese regime at the worst possible time to be caught. (And then she would bring the ashes to a relative's house because it had a flush toilet and she could flush the ashes.)
And then she goes on about other quirks of writing. The introduction of rifle bullets did much to advance neurology. Musket bullets tended to diffuse damage, so the survivor ended up with lots of generalized problems. Rifle bullets could hurt much smaller portions of the brain. So you end up with people who have alexia -- and can't read, but can write. (Very rare. Much more common to have it with agraphia.)
And writers' block. The author had suffered from manic and depressed states after she gave birth to twin sons who died; she was hypergraphic while maniac, and didn't write when she was depressed. Then she had twin daughters, who lived, and suffered the same mood swings, but this time she really needed a mood-stablizer. And when she took it, in her depressed mood, she would earnestly desire to write, and be unable. That's writer's block. Not enough to not write -- it has to cause suffering.
Lots of writers have suffered it. Some writers have suffered writer's block and hypergraphia simultaneously. Coleridge couldn't write poetry while being able to pour out essays and letters. And she talks about habits and how they help -- not individual ones, the fact of having habits.
The interactions of the cortext, where we think and know how to write, and the limbic system, which drives us to write. Problems that make people unable to communicate, some of them horrific -- patients in severe pain who can not communicate how much they are suffering. And that people with damage to their limbic system do not think more logically than more emotional people with intact limbic systems; it chiefly seems to make them dither. (Take that, Spock! 0:) Metaphor and metonymy, and how they relate to pathological conditions -- and innate ability to speak.
Good book.
I don't know what a non-writer would think of it, but I found it fascinating.
She starts out with a discussion of hypergraphia which is the compulsive need to write. It's associated with temporal lobe epilepsy and with maniac-depression and it's probably not what drove you to write so much at some point. Doctors discovered that they had a simple test for epileptic patients as to whether they were hypergraphic: ask them to write a letter describing their health. Non-hypergraphics wrote under a hundred. Hypergraphics wrote thousands.
It's so compulsive that -- well, she tells the story of a Chinese woman who had hypergraphia. She wrote, compulsively, and then she burned it all because it was criticism of the Chinese regime at the worst possible time to be caught. (And then she would bring the ashes to a relative's house because it had a flush toilet and she could flush the ashes.)
And then she goes on about other quirks of writing. The introduction of rifle bullets did much to advance neurology. Musket bullets tended to diffuse damage, so the survivor ended up with lots of generalized problems. Rifle bullets could hurt much smaller portions of the brain. So you end up with people who have alexia -- and can't read, but can write. (Very rare. Much more common to have it with agraphia.)
And writers' block. The author had suffered from manic and depressed states after she gave birth to twin sons who died; she was hypergraphic while maniac, and didn't write when she was depressed. Then she had twin daughters, who lived, and suffered the same mood swings, but this time she really needed a mood-stablizer. And when she took it, in her depressed mood, she would earnestly desire to write, and be unable. That's writer's block. Not enough to not write -- it has to cause suffering.
Lots of writers have suffered it. Some writers have suffered writer's block and hypergraphia simultaneously. Coleridge couldn't write poetry while being able to pour out essays and letters. And she talks about habits and how they help -- not individual ones, the fact of having habits.
The interactions of the cortext, where we think and know how to write, and the limbic system, which drives us to write. Problems that make people unable to communicate, some of them horrific -- patients in severe pain who can not communicate how much they are suffering. And that people with damage to their limbic system do not think more logically than more emotional people with intact limbic systems; it chiefly seems to make them dither. (Take that, Spock! 0:) Metaphor and metonymy, and how they relate to pathological conditions -- and innate ability to speak.
Good book.
Want to read
September 21, 2010Hope to find this soon....in the meantime a review I found on google books. =
Editorial Review - Reed Business Information (c) 2003
Flaherty (The Massachusetts General Handbook of Neurology) mixes memoir, meditation, compendium and scholarly reportage in an odd but absorbing look at the neurological basis of writing and its pathologies. Like Oliver Sacks, Flaherty has her own story to tell a postpartum episode involving hypergraphia and depression that eventually hospitalized her. But what holds this great variety of material together is not the medical authority of a doctor, the personal authority of the patient or even the technical authority of the writer, but the author's deep ambivalence about the proper approach to her subject. Where Sacks uses his stylistic gifts to transform illness into literature, Flaherty wrestles openly with the problem of equating them, putting her own identity as a scientist and as a writer on the line as she explores the possibility of describing writing in medical terms. She details the physiological sources of the impulse to write, and of the creative drive, metaphorical construction and the various modes of stalled or evaded productivity called block. She also includes accounts of what it feels like to write (or fail to write) by Coleridge and Joan Didion as well as by aphasiacs and psychotics. But while science may help one to understand or create literature, "it may not fairly tell you that you should." To a student of literature, Flaherty's struggle between scientific rationalism and literary exuberance is familiar romantic territory. What's moving about this book is how deeply unresolved, in an age of mood pills and weblogs, that old schism remains. Writers will delight in the way information and lore are interspersed; scientists are more likely to be divided. (Jan. 6)
Editorial Review - Reed Business Information (c) 2003
Flaherty (The Massachusetts General Handbook of Neurology) mixes memoir, meditation, compendium and scholarly reportage in an odd but absorbing look at the neurological basis of writing and its pathologies. Like Oliver Sacks, Flaherty has her own story to tell a postpartum episode involving hypergraphia and depression that eventually hospitalized her. But what holds this great variety of material together is not the medical authority of a doctor, the personal authority of the patient or even the technical authority of the writer, but the author's deep ambivalence about the proper approach to her subject. Where Sacks uses his stylistic gifts to transform illness into literature, Flaherty wrestles openly with the problem of equating them, putting her own identity as a scientist and as a writer on the line as she explores the possibility of describing writing in medical terms. She details the physiological sources of the impulse to write, and of the creative drive, metaphorical construction and the various modes of stalled or evaded productivity called block. She also includes accounts of what it feels like to write (or fail to write) by Coleridge and Joan Didion as well as by aphasiacs and psychotics. But while science may help one to understand or create literature, "it may not fairly tell you that you should." To a student of literature, Flaherty's struggle between scientific rationalism and literary exuberance is familiar romantic territory. What's moving about this book is how deeply unresolved, in an age of mood pills and weblogs, that old schism remains. Writers will delight in the way information and lore are interspersed; scientists are more likely to be divided. (Jan. 6)
December 27, 2020
What saves this book for me is the sheer breath of knowledge that Flaherty brings to the table.
I wanted a bit more concrete references when it came to writing or maybe even a little more nuance, but all things considered this is hopefully just the first step into this sphere of research.
I'll more than likely return to this book in the future.
I wanted a bit more concrete references when it came to writing or maybe even a little more nuance, but all things considered this is hopefully just the first step into this sphere of research.
I'll more than likely return to this book in the future.
September 10, 2022
Apparently I read this in 2008 (I found some old journals the other day in my old closet) and wrote about it then, "...very interesting study of the psychology of the writer. Lots of interesting facts and anecdotes about the mental health and habits of famous writers."
August 31, 2019
I couldn’t put it down! It’s a niche topic- the neuroscience behind creativity and writer’s block- but I found it fascinating and appreciated the author’s engaging, scholarly writing.
September 27, 2020
Well written but not as revelatory or insightful as I'd expect
July 26, 2009
What I learned from this book" --
1) I am a writer. There were too many times I recognized myself when Flaherty discussed the act or the desire or the joy in writing.
2) When reading a piece written by a scientist, I expect it to be point-driven, logical, and to build upon previous conclusions. This work is not.
Frequently I found myself reading, "And the third idea is ..." only to reply, "Huh??" The author seems unable to stay away from rabbit trails, coming back to the argument at hand only after several paragraphs.
3) I have to confess I found her personal anecdotes exceptionally intrusive. Looking for a scientific work, a guide in understanding the clinical aspects of creativity and an exploration of a writer's good and bad states (with perhaps even some helpful tips on overcoming the bad), I was not overjoyed to be forced into reading long stretches of another person's hypergraphic delineation of her mental state. (If I wanted to do that, I'd read my own.) The funny thing is, I seemed to find Flaherty's personal journaling actually more logical and cohesive than her scientific prose.
Is that a reflection upon me, or her?
(Hm, sounds like I've been reading too much in the Psychiatry Section ....)
1) I am a writer. There were too many times I recognized myself when Flaherty discussed the act or the desire or the joy in writing.
2) When reading a piece written by a scientist, I expect it to be point-driven, logical, and to build upon previous conclusions. This work is not.
Frequently I found myself reading, "And the third idea is ..." only to reply, "Huh??" The author seems unable to stay away from rabbit trails, coming back to the argument at hand only after several paragraphs.
3) I have to confess I found her personal anecdotes exceptionally intrusive. Looking for a scientific work, a guide in understanding the clinical aspects of creativity and an exploration of a writer's good and bad states (with perhaps even some helpful tips on overcoming the bad), I was not overjoyed to be forced into reading long stretches of another person's hypergraphic delineation of her mental state. (If I wanted to do that, I'd read my own.) The funny thing is, I seemed to find Flaherty's personal journaling actually more logical and cohesive than her scientific prose.
Is that a reflection upon me, or her?
(Hm, sounds like I've been reading too much in the Psychiatry Section ....)
May 12, 2014
The book tried and failed everything. My complaints?
1. The writing was horrible. It needed a heartless editor. It rarely left the hypergraphic stage-- incoherent and longwinded.
2. I'm highly skeptical of all the posthumous diagnoses. (You know Moses' metal illnesses? Really?)
3. The science didn't seem to hold up, mainly relying on the above. (If there was much behind it, it stayed behind).
4. The author's experience was annoyingly invoked and abandoned. It interrupted the rest of the book, but was dropped before it could be interesting itself.
5. The "effective help" which the book wanted to suggest was denied. Any remedy was denounced (medicine has side effects, therapists don't understand).
The book said effectively nothing. Even the author said that, though she was driven to write this, she often doubted that what she wrote was true. I learned one interesting thing from this book. (That the relatives of the mentally ill might have creative advantage.)
But two stars, not one, because the book had its charms. They did not make it worth reading; they only made me think that it was worth reading, until the rushed ending.
1. The writing was horrible. It needed a heartless editor. It rarely left the hypergraphic stage-- incoherent and longwinded.
2. I'm highly skeptical of all the posthumous diagnoses. (You know Moses' metal illnesses? Really?)
3. The science didn't seem to hold up, mainly relying on the above. (If there was much behind it, it stayed behind).
4. The author's experience was annoyingly invoked and abandoned. It interrupted the rest of the book, but was dropped before it could be interesting itself.
5. The "effective help" which the book wanted to suggest was denied. Any remedy was denounced (medicine has side effects, therapists don't understand).
The book said effectively nothing. Even the author said that, though she was driven to write this, she often doubted that what she wrote was true. I learned one interesting thing from this book. (That the relatives of the mentally ill might have creative advantage.)
But two stars, not one, because the book had its charms. They did not make it worth reading; they only made me think that it was worth reading, until the rushed ending.
February 14, 2008
I read this book shortly after it came out. As a writer, I wonder at what drives me to sit for hours staring at a blank page, or at a computer screen, waiting--not always patiently--for words to come. When they do, it is frequently a near-orgasmic experience, and in reading this book, written by a neurologist who became a writer, I learned why.
I also learned why writing is so tied into grief, and why, when my lover died, the only place that I found real solace was with fountain pen in hand.
For non-writers, this book provides a decoding of parts of the brain that control emotion and creativity. For writers, it helps to unpack crucial parts of who we are and why we do what we do.
I also learned why writing is so tied into grief, and why, when my lover died, the only place that I found real solace was with fountain pen in hand.
For non-writers, this book provides a decoding of parts of the brain that control emotion and creativity. For writers, it helps to unpack crucial parts of who we are and why we do what we do.
May 25, 2022
كتاب ممتع جدًا والترجمة أعدها رائعة لكن يوجد إغراق في التفاصيل الطبية المتعلقة بالموضوع ذا العلاقة بالكتابة من منظور نفسي /عصبي فوردت تفاصيل طبية أفقدت الكتاب متعته
شخصيًا على الرغم من أني مهتم بهذه المواضع وجدتني مضطرًا لتجاوز بعض المواضيع المغرقة في التفاصيل الدقيقة والمملة
لكن أجزم أنني سأقوم بقراءة الكتاب مرة أخرى بغية معرفة بعض النقاط وربما إثارة الاهتمام أكثر بالمواضيع التي تجاوزتها مللاً
لو لديك إهتمام في الكتابة والعلوم النفسية العصبية عمومًا ستجد في هذا الكتاب ما يثير فضولك ويفيدك
شخصيًا على الرغم من أني مهتم بهذه المواضع وجدتني مضطرًا لتجاوز بعض المواضيع المغرقة في التفاصيل الدقيقة والمملة
لكن أجزم أنني سأقوم بقراءة الكتاب مرة أخرى بغية معرفة بعض النقاط وربما إثارة الاهتمام أكثر بالمواضيع التي تجاوزتها مللاً
لو لديك إهتمام في الكتابة والعلوم النفسية العصبية عمومًا ستجد في هذا الكتاب ما يثير فضولك ويفيدك
November 24, 2019
An intriguing look at how creativity and creative inspiration work. Some of the medical jargon was hard to get through, but it also helped explain links between creativity, mental health, writing, and brain functions. Would recommend if you are someone who enjoys learning about the science behind what compels is to write.
December 20, 2018
Alice Flaherty writes with deep love for both writing and neuroscience. Her writing is of such great quality! So thoroughly researched and informed by a wide range of thought, from philosophy and political science to psychology and hard sciences of the brain. It is written with care and respect for the reader, subtle humour, and so much attention to detail ("the sounds and shapes of words”). Grounded in Flaherty’s experience of postpartum mania and clinically obsessive writing spells, the book is really unique in its approach to writer’s block. The author searches for the origins of such abstract things as inspiration or the feeling of meaning in states and processes of the brain. While this is definitely not a how-to book on writing, I find it incredibly helpful in understanding the writing pains. So deeply enjoyable!
February 14, 2008
This book tells of the "disease" of writing and compulsive writing. It really gives a layman's perspective on writers throughout history that have written classics we are all aware of, but that their mental state while writing is "different" from just the run-of-the-mill person. It really delves into the psychology of writing, why we write, and what is different in the brain chemistry of those that "have to" write vs. those that do it because they are just "wired like that." For anyone who is a writer, an author, or really interested in a different kind of psychology, you have GOT to read this. It is an real eye-opener.
April 7, 2009
I was reluctant to start this book until I suffered a case of true writer's block. I don't think I wanted to hear that writing happened through a bunch of gobs of brain gunk in my head. As it turns out, this is the most informative, enlightening, and useful book about writing that I've ever read. It didn't cure my block, but helped me to understand what was happening in my specific case. The neural geography behind creation only makes the process more entrancing. I highly recommend this book, especially to writers.
May 13, 2009
This is one of my all-time favorite books! I bought this book years ago and have read it at least 4 times.
The book is fascinating in its descriptions of writers who had The Midnight Disease - an untamable urge to write, as well as authors who suffered with writer's block who could prolifically write notes to friends but could not write a page in a book without agony.
Ms. Flaherty makes complex brain processes understandable and interesting in this great book about creativity.
The book is fascinating in its descriptions of writers who had The Midnight Disease - an untamable urge to write, as well as authors who suffered with writer's block who could prolifically write notes to friends but could not write a page in a book without agony.
Ms. Flaherty makes complex brain processes understandable and interesting in this great book about creativity.
August 1, 2018
“Beauty drives copies of itself, whether in art, or when we want to make children with someone we love.” (p.4)
“Nearly all of us, artists or not, feel the terror of work as well as the joy of work.” (p.5)
“Most procrastinators are very aware of exactly what they are not doing.” (p.16)
“When two people are given a project, one paid to do it and the other not, the former’s creativity seems to be inhibited by the reward. Surprisingly, at least when studied in schoolchildren, the inhibiting effect of external reward seems to be greater on girls than on boys. If this is true,, we should perhaps be ruthlessly pleased that so many female writers were spared this inhibition by being essentially ignored in their lifetimes.” (p.25)
“Words fled out of my head like rats from a sinking ship.” (p.34)
“the need to fight that seductive tug to stay ill, to fight the freedom that is doing nothing but daydream” (p.35)
“We write to escape our prisons.” (p.36)
“Sometimes I wonder whether the inability to broadcast your suffering is what separates the mentally ill from the sane.” (p.36)
“The goal should not be to protect ourselves from suffering, but to be strong enough to bear it.” (p.59)
“Some people who become writers or artists may welcome a psychiatric diagnosis that would at least partially remove their responsibility for making such an unsober career choice.” (p.66)
“writers do not take drugs to help their writing, they take drugs because of their tendency to mood disorders, and mood disorders often trigger drug addiction.” (p.68)
“a healthy person solving a creative problem may need to step back from the problem, by taking a shower or a vacation, in order to solve it.” (p.72)
“All the works of spirit are made with corrupt bodies.” (p.73)
“In Albert Einstein’s words, a chemical analysis of a cup of soup shouldn’t be expected to taste like soup.” (p.88)
“Writer’s block requires not just the inability to write as well as you want, but the inability to write anything less than you want. What drives that inability is the belief- usually unconscious- that it is better to write nothing than to write poorly.” (p.94)
“finding a good idea usually requires considering many bad ones with an open mind.” (p.95)
“The difficulty of escaping rigid thought patterns set up over a lifetime is encapsulated in Sandor Ferenczi’s famous statement that the patient is not cured by free association; he is cured when he can free associate.” (p.96)
“Writers write every which way; the only ingredient their habits have in common is that having habits helps” (p.99)
“The intellect of man is forced to choose/ Perfection of the life, or of the work, / And if it take the second must refuse/ A heavenly mansion, raging in the dark.” (p.101, quoting Yeats)
“Some psychologists have proposed that the apathy of severe depression is a protective mechanism run wild, that it was originally intended for cases of grief that would otherwise cause overwhelming agitation. After extreme loss, depression can be less an illness than a relief.” (p.120)
“There are worse things in life than painful desire; one of them is to have no desire.” (p.205)
“Life stories, often touted as the basis for our sense of self, can also lock us into a self that is too rigid. Sometimes the goal of psychotherapy is not to help people make sense of their lives, but to help them make less sense of them –to break a few links in the narrative chain so that behavior can be more unpredictable and creative.” (p.219)
“The only way we know we are not delusional, of course, is to see if other people approve of our thoughts. How melancholy.” (p.235)
“Perhaps the feeling of inspiration is merely a pleasure by which your brain lures you into working harder. From an evolutionary standpoint, it is not surprising that creative activity should be so intensely rewarding, given that the innovations that are its fruits have been so useful for human survival.” (p.242)
“The moments when everything made sense, if only to me, made the suffering irrelevant.” (p.243)
“I think that when you work hard enough on any work, everything of value in you goes into that work. When you finish it, it leaves you, and you are empty.” (p.254)
“The scientist asks how I can call my writing vocation and not addiction. I no longer see why I should have to make that distinction. I am addicted to breathing in the same way. I write because when I don’t, it is suffocating. I write because something much larger than myself comes into me that suffuses the page, the world, with meaning.” (p.266)
“Nearly all of us, artists or not, feel the terror of work as well as the joy of work.” (p.5)
“Most procrastinators are very aware of exactly what they are not doing.” (p.16)
“When two people are given a project, one paid to do it and the other not, the former’s creativity seems to be inhibited by the reward. Surprisingly, at least when studied in schoolchildren, the inhibiting effect of external reward seems to be greater on girls than on boys. If this is true,, we should perhaps be ruthlessly pleased that so many female writers were spared this inhibition by being essentially ignored in their lifetimes.” (p.25)
“Words fled out of my head like rats from a sinking ship.” (p.34)
“the need to fight that seductive tug to stay ill, to fight the freedom that is doing nothing but daydream” (p.35)
“We write to escape our prisons.” (p.36)
“Sometimes I wonder whether the inability to broadcast your suffering is what separates the mentally ill from the sane.” (p.36)
“The goal should not be to protect ourselves from suffering, but to be strong enough to bear it.” (p.59)
“Some people who become writers or artists may welcome a psychiatric diagnosis that would at least partially remove their responsibility for making such an unsober career choice.” (p.66)
“writers do not take drugs to help their writing, they take drugs because of their tendency to mood disorders, and mood disorders often trigger drug addiction.” (p.68)
“a healthy person solving a creative problem may need to step back from the problem, by taking a shower or a vacation, in order to solve it.” (p.72)
“All the works of spirit are made with corrupt bodies.” (p.73)
“In Albert Einstein’s words, a chemical analysis of a cup of soup shouldn’t be expected to taste like soup.” (p.88)
“Writer’s block requires not just the inability to write as well as you want, but the inability to write anything less than you want. What drives that inability is the belief- usually unconscious- that it is better to write nothing than to write poorly.” (p.94)
“finding a good idea usually requires considering many bad ones with an open mind.” (p.95)
“The difficulty of escaping rigid thought patterns set up over a lifetime is encapsulated in Sandor Ferenczi’s famous statement that the patient is not cured by free association; he is cured when he can free associate.” (p.96)
“Writers write every which way; the only ingredient their habits have in common is that having habits helps” (p.99)
“The intellect of man is forced to choose/ Perfection of the life, or of the work, / And if it take the second must refuse/ A heavenly mansion, raging in the dark.” (p.101, quoting Yeats)
“Some psychologists have proposed that the apathy of severe depression is a protective mechanism run wild, that it was originally intended for cases of grief that would otherwise cause overwhelming agitation. After extreme loss, depression can be less an illness than a relief.” (p.120)
“There are worse things in life than painful desire; one of them is to have no desire.” (p.205)
“Life stories, often touted as the basis for our sense of self, can also lock us into a self that is too rigid. Sometimes the goal of psychotherapy is not to help people make sense of their lives, but to help them make less sense of them –to break a few links in the narrative chain so that behavior can be more unpredictable and creative.” (p.219)
“The only way we know we are not delusional, of course, is to see if other people approve of our thoughts. How melancholy.” (p.235)
“Perhaps the feeling of inspiration is merely a pleasure by which your brain lures you into working harder. From an evolutionary standpoint, it is not surprising that creative activity should be so intensely rewarding, given that the innovations that are its fruits have been so useful for human survival.” (p.242)
“The moments when everything made sense, if only to me, made the suffering irrelevant.” (p.243)
“I think that when you work hard enough on any work, everything of value in you goes into that work. When you finish it, it leaves you, and you are empty.” (p.254)
“The scientist asks how I can call my writing vocation and not addiction. I no longer see why I should have to make that distinction. I am addicted to breathing in the same way. I write because when I don’t, it is suffocating. I write because something much larger than myself comes into me that suffuses the page, the world, with meaning.” (p.266)
March 5, 2024
يكاد موضوع الكتاب صادما علميا/أدبيا ولولا تلك النماذج الأدبية والفكرية التي دعمت بها المؤلفة فرضياتها لكان الأمر أشد وطأة وأصعب تصديقا من نواح عدة، إضافة إلى تجربة المؤلفة نفسها مع تحديات فرط الكتابة (الهايبغرافيا) ونقيضها حبسة الكاتب كانت هي الأخرى مثالا آخر للتأثيرات المرضية على دماغ الإنسان والتي تسهم في زيادة إنتاج الكاتب أو حبسته.
مع تطور العلم والبحوث المختبرية بدأ علماء الأعصاب يحصلون على إجابات/ تفسيرات لحالات مرضية لم تكن معروفة بشكل كبير، وذلك من خلال التعرف على مهمات أجزاء مختلفة من الدماغ ودورها في توليد حركات/ مشاعر مؤثرة على الإنتاج الأدبي والكتابة تحديدا انطلاقا من القشرة الصدغية: الفصان الصدغيان الأيمن والأيسر والجهاز الحوفي وتأثيراتهم على الكتابة الإبداعية وتكوين حبسة بروكا (عدم القدرة على القراءة) وحبسة فيرنكه ( عدم القدرة على الاستيعاب) وحالات غير طبيعية مثل الاكتئاب والصرع وغيرها.
النماذج المبدعة بطريقة غير طبيعية (مرضية) تتجاوز دويستويفسكي مثلا الذي كان يعاني من الصرع والذي ألهمه غزارة الانتاج والتحليل العميق والغرق في تفاصيل الشخصيات والأحداث التي تدور حوله، أو نيتشه الذي ترك عدة كتابات وهو في حالة مرضية لدرجة يغمى عليه بسبب حدتها وأيضا الفنان الشهير فان غوج (قطع أذنه في إحدى النوبات) وغيرهم ممن احترف الأدب والفن والكتابة بطريقة هوس (فرط الكتابة) واختلفت دوافع الكتابة لديهم من ناحية عاطفية وبيلوجية كتعبير عن الحاجة، إذ تؤكد المؤلفة على أن دور الدافع وراء الكتابة يصل تأثيره إلى نسبة 99% في حين يمثل الإلهام نسبة 1% فقط من الحالة الإبداعية.
يحتوي الكتاب على كم هائل من المعلومات القيمة المبنية على دراسات طبية/سريرية لتفسير حبسة الكتابة التي أفردت المؤلفة فصلا كاملا لتحليلها وأيضا للإجابة عن سؤال مثل لماذا نكتب ومدى ارتباط عسر الكتابة/ القراءة بوصفه حالة عصبية. واستخدام الاستعارات ومدى تأثير الصوت الداخلي على الإبداع الأدبي.
بقي أن ندرك بأن الكُّتاب (الأسوياء) من يكتبون بشكل طبيعي ليسوا أبرياء من بعض التأثيرات الدماغية التي تحفزهم على الكتابة وتحديدا فرط الكتابة وخاصة أولئك الذين لا تعد الكتابة مهنة احترافية بالنسبة لهم ومع ذلك يستمرون في الكتابة بغزارة ودون توقف، عوامل مثل الألم والخوف والفقد والبحث عن الذات كفيلة بأن تكون دوافع قوية لإطلاق الكتابة الإبداعية بعيدا عن تشخيصات الأمراض العقلية.
تقول: " إن استخدام الأدب لمساعدتنا في فهم العلم خطير، بطبيعة الحال، بقدر استخدام العلم لفهم الأدب".
مع تطور العلم والبحوث المختبرية بدأ علماء الأعصاب يحصلون على إجابات/ تفسيرات لحالات مرضية لم تكن معروفة بشكل كبير، وذلك من خلال التعرف على مهمات أجزاء مختلفة من الدماغ ودورها في توليد حركات/ مشاعر مؤثرة على الإنتاج الأدبي والكتابة تحديدا انطلاقا من القشرة الصدغية: الفصان الصدغيان الأيمن والأيسر والجهاز الحوفي وتأثيراتهم على الكتابة الإبداعية وتكوين حبسة بروكا (عدم القدرة على القراءة) وحبسة فيرنكه ( عدم القدرة على الاستيعاب) وحالات غير طبيعية مثل الاكتئاب والصرع وغيرها.
النماذج المبدعة بطريقة غير طبيعية (مرضية) تتجاوز دويستويفسكي مثلا الذي كان يعاني من الصرع والذي ألهمه غزارة الانتاج والتحليل العميق والغرق في تفاصيل الشخصيات والأحداث التي تدور حوله، أو نيتشه الذي ترك عدة كتابات وهو في حالة مرضية لدرجة يغمى عليه بسبب حدتها وأيضا الفنان الشهير فان غوج (قطع أذنه في إحدى النوبات) وغيرهم ممن احترف الأدب والفن والكتابة بطريقة هوس (فرط الكتابة) واختلفت دوافع الكتابة لديهم من ناحية عاطفية وبيلوجية كتعبير عن الحاجة، إذ تؤكد المؤلفة على أن دور الدافع وراء الكتابة يصل تأثيره إلى نسبة 99% في حين يمثل الإلهام نسبة 1% فقط من الحالة الإبداعية.
يحتوي الكتاب على كم هائل من المعلومات القيمة المبنية على دراسات طبية/سريرية لتفسير حبسة الكتابة التي أفردت المؤلفة فصلا كاملا لتحليلها وأيضا للإجابة عن سؤال مثل لماذا نكتب ومدى ارتباط عسر الكتابة/ القراءة بوصفه حالة عصبية. واستخدام الاستعارات ومدى تأثير الصوت الداخلي على الإبداع الأدبي.
بقي أن ندرك بأن الكُّتاب (الأسوياء) من يكتبون بشكل طبيعي ليسوا أبرياء من بعض التأثيرات الدماغية التي تحفزهم على الكتابة وتحديدا فرط الكتابة وخاصة أولئك الذين لا تعد الكتابة مهنة احترافية بالنسبة لهم ومع ذلك يستمرون في الكتابة بغزارة ودون توقف، عوامل مثل الألم والخوف والفقد والبحث عن الذات كفيلة بأن تكون دوافع قوية لإطلاق الكتابة الإبداعية بعيدا عن تشخيصات الأمراض العقلية.
تقول: " إن استخدام الأدب لمساعدتنا في فهم العلم خطير، بطبيعة الحال، بقدر استخدام العلم لفهم الأدب".
Read
June 3, 2021I checked this out when looking for books that might be useful for learning more about how to structure novels--not because I thought this would do that, but because it came up in the library list of books on writing, and it sounded interesting. I was definitely curious what a neurologist could tell us about how and why we write, especially if we write a lot.
Well, not saying that this wasn't interesting in its own way, but it did not at all live up to my hopes for it. The author had had the experience of a pathological state of extreme need to write, and this made her curious--so there are some memoir-type moments in it, but it's not a memoir. Basically, for the most part she focuses her attention on pathologies relating to writing, whether they involve writer's block or compulsively writing meaningless drivel. I wanted to know more about those of us who are able to write a lot in a productive and enjoyable way, and how to maximize that. I'm only mildly interested in the pathological forms of writing and not writing, and there was way too much on those for my taste. It was also hard for me to get through the book because with the Kindle version I had no idea where I was in the book apart from, apparently, nowhere near done. But, finally, I really was done and there were endless pages of notes to leaf through (as a scholar, I appreciate notes, but I would have liked some sign that I was close to the end of the chapters). Maybe I just don't have a good handle on how to navigate on a Kindle yet.
Well, not saying that this wasn't interesting in its own way, but it did not at all live up to my hopes for it. The author had had the experience of a pathological state of extreme need to write, and this made her curious--so there are some memoir-type moments in it, but it's not a memoir. Basically, for the most part she focuses her attention on pathologies relating to writing, whether they involve writer's block or compulsively writing meaningless drivel. I wanted to know more about those of us who are able to write a lot in a productive and enjoyable way, and how to maximize that. I'm only mildly interested in the pathological forms of writing and not writing, and there was way too much on those for my taste. It was also hard for me to get through the book because with the Kindle version I had no idea where I was in the book apart from, apparently, nowhere near done. But, finally, I really was done and there were endless pages of notes to leaf through (as a scholar, I appreciate notes, but I would have liked some sign that I was close to the end of the chapters). Maybe I just don't have a good handle on how to navigate on a Kindle yet.
December 21, 2023
تكتب فليْرتي ( وهي تعمل كطبيبة أعصاب في مشفى ماسَتْشُوسِتْس العام، وتُدَرِّس في كلية الطّب بجامعة هارفرد)ما بدأ يُطلعنا عليه علم الأعصاب بشأن الدافع إلى الكتابة والإبداع، والحُبسة الإبداعيّة ومعالجتها والأسس اللحائيّة والحوفيِّة لهذه الدوافع والـحُـبسات، وأخيراً الجوانب العصبيِّة للعلاقة بين الاستعارة والصوت الداخلي والإلهام. تسبر فليرتي في «داء منتصف الليل» أغوار الكتابة بوصفها الإنجاز السّامي، وتكشف عمّا تنطوي عليه الحالات الذهنيّة المؤثِّرة في الإبداع من تجاذب وتناقض يتمثل في العلاقة بين العقل والجسد ومصادر الخيال. لكنّ اهتمامها الرئيس لا يتركّز على الكتابة بصيغها المعرفيّة بقدر ما يتركّز على الآليّة التي يمكن بموجبها لكلّ من طب الأعصاب والأدب أن يرتبطا لا بما يجعل الكُتَّاب قادرين على الكتابة وحسب، بل برغبتهم في ذلك وحاجتهم إليها أيضاً؛ إذ توصّل أطباء الأعصاب إلى أنّ التغيّرات الحاصلة في منطقة معيّنة من الدماغ يُمكن أن تُثمر ظاهرة فرط الكتابة أو الهايپرغرافيا، وهو مصطلح طبيّ للتعبير عن رغبة عارمة في الكتابة. فالهايپرغرافيا ونقيضها المعروف باسم حُبسة الكاتب، تنجمان عن أوضاع شاذّة ومعقّدة في الدافع البيولوجي الأساس إلى التواصل. ويُركِّز هذا الكتاب على اكتشاف العلاقة المعقّدة بين العاطفة والكتابة، مستعيناً بأمثلة من الأدب، ومن المَرْضى، ومن بعض تجارب فليرتي الذاتيّة.
والمترجم هو هيثم رشيد فرحت، فهو مترجم وأكاديمي سوري، وُلد وتعلّم في سوريا، وحصل على إجازة في اللغة الإنجليزية وآدابها من جامعة تشرين في عام 1984. أوفدته جامعة تشرين إلى بريطانيا عام 1986، للتخصص باللسانيات (النحو)، فحصل على شهادة دكتوراه في عام 1992.
والمترجم هو هيثم رشيد فرحت، فهو مترجم وأكاديمي سوري، وُلد وتعلّم في سوريا، وحصل على إجازة في اللغة الإنجليزية وآدابها من جامعة تشرين في عام 1984. أوفدته جامعة تشرين إلى بريطانيا عام 1986، للتخصص باللسانيات (النحو)، فحصل على شهادة دكتوراه في عام 1992.
November 13, 2020
This book is the ultimate answer to the question Why I Write, which was the title of two separate essays by George Orwell and Joan Didion. Alice Flaherty, a medical doctor and a writer, takes us inside the brain to explore the reasons, the biological-cerebral reasons, why people are compelled to scribble, scrawl, and revise. The book reminded me in a way of that old Sci-Fi silliness called Fantastic Voyage. This is not at all to say her book is anything but an interesting read as she takes us through the brain's regions, folds, and crevices. Her style blends scientific fact and wit and her own account of her hospitalization for manic depression personalizes her account in ways an "objective" rendering would not. She explores hypergraphia, a condition that I didn't even know existed but which seems to be basis of much of our literature, at least in my reading. At times, I only wished for the ghost in the machine, for something other than the impulse to write to be explained as the result of a complicated Epiphenomenalism. Still, for those interested in the subject, a really interesting read
February 25, 2019
I feel like this book was written for a very niche audience-- it's a neuroscience and clinical perspective on inspiration and the desire to write. Though Flaherty attempts to explain the science behind it, I can see how her explanation may still be confusing for those without a background in the field. An interesting read, I did find it rather obvious that Flaherty is trained as a clinician rather than a writer, and I thought the book was a bit unorganized. In my opinion, Flaherty also discussed her personal life a bit too often. While these glimpses were at times insightful, other times she seemed to be flaunting belief in her uniqueness. I definitely was not a fan of the ending section, where she compares writing inspiration to religious inspiration-- though she doesn't try to dissuade religious belief, there was definitely a strong under current that connected religion as a creation of fiction.
November 14, 2023
This book is a personal research of the author about writing, inspiration, hypergraphia, metaphors, religion... you name it. The author is a scientists, but she also had a very traumatic experience which led her to write more. I liked that Alice, despite providing a lot of personal information, could argue sober about her experiences and the topics in general. A lot of her arguments were well educated and researched and she also reflected on why her arguments might be wrong or false. She often provided both sides of the spectrum.
The only downside for me was that sometimes the author was too "sciency" and as I was reading the pages of dry science facts I already knew that I would forget that information afterwards.
The only downside for me was that sometimes the author was too "sciency" and as I was reading the pages of dry science facts I already knew that I would forget that information afterwards.
February 11, 2020
Fascinating read of the psychology and neurology of writer's block. The book details the effects of multiple different types of brain injury and disease that can lead to loss of writing ability or cause the inverse compulsive writing.The anatomy of the brain and influence electrical stimulation and SSRI drugs can have on mood and personality. Writer's block, states of depression, sleep deprivation, and manic writing are all extreme ends of the highs and lows in the creative process. With plenty of interesting examples to support her assertions.
May 10, 2018
I don't have writer's block, but the book did not seem to be very helpful with that problem. There is a lengthy discussion of various areas of the brain, with the conclusion that no part of the brain is dedicated to writing (unlike speech), or the drive to write. The best advice I've heard is that you must know why you write. Then you can decide how much of your time, energy and life you want to devote to it.
January 12, 2024
5 stars because this is all I want to read: neurology, passion and need for creative writing, poetry, litature analysis, exploration of mental health, and memoir. I would love to read a newer version with all the advances there must have been in the research and to hear more about Flaherty's life and writing.
August 31, 2017
A neurologist's personal exposition centred around the intriguing condition of hypergraphia that involves a good deal of Brain Science 101 that's easy to understand. The kind of book that makes you want to read more about the subject.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 119 reviews