Creativity and Charlie Sheen

I don't find Charlie Sheen as fascinating as some, but one can't deny the phenomenon that is Charlie Sheen today. From what I've seen, his act strikes me as a cocky, sexual form of stream of consciousness. Kind of a less cerebral, more Bacchanalian version of Ulysses. It doesn't bother me and it doesn't pique my interest. But the broad-based viral obsession over his antics is real, and that's something that fascinates me.

I stumbled upon this Scott Adams commentary on Sheen, which is great. According to Adams, who has met the man, what makes Sheen noteworthy is his 1) extraordinary acting talent and 2) complete lack of filter. The former is debatable, but not of interest to me. It's the latter that strikes me as both true and worth analyzing. It's common to describe a person as having "no filter," but most people described as such are merely less tactful than most. Sheen, or at least when he's most interesting, appears to not know where his own thoughts are going. And to do that on broadcasts that are seen by millions is a rare.

Adams says (and I'm paraphrasing) that the great artist and the lunatic are the only people who have no filter. Manners are dull, and by avoiding them, an artist has an advantage in making their creativity attractive to others. By saying what they're thinking, artists act on what others only think, but don't do. This is part of the release of experiencing art that makes creativity attractive to others, and why Sheen is so enthralling.

Adams also says that for those who break ground artistically, many teeter on the verge of insanity. Or, at a minimum, that's the way they are perceived. Because insane people and those who live a filterless lifestyle -- let's just say there's overlap in their Venn Diagrams. The only difference, as I see it, is intent. Those who are insane have no choice but to live without filters. They are out of control. But the artist can go back and forth. Still, one can see how the lines could blur.

I'd like to propose two corollaries to the Scott Adams theory: First, it's not easy to be polite and creative at the same time. To avoid offending, you have to err on the side of the conventional. If you're conventional, it's hard to find an edge that will make you worth watching.

Second, one cannot function well in society without a filter. Sheen, an artist whose non-traditional lifestyle choices have been known for decades, lost his job when he let go of the shackles. Most professional workplace situations disallow any display of ad libbing, much less a complete lack of filter. That's why it's inconceivable for someone go from working at Microsoft for ten years and then start working as a professional comedian. Success at the one only comes with the death of the instincts that make you good at the other.

And that's all I have to say about that.