What do you think?
Rate this book
Solidão: a conexão com o eu
This study challenges the widely-held view that success in personal relationships is the only key to happiness. It argues that we pay far too little attention to some of the other great satisfactions of life - work and creativity. In a series of biographical sketches it demonstrates how many of the creative geniuses of our civilization have been solitary, by temperament or circumstance, and how the capacity to be alone is, even for those who are not creative, a sign of maturity.
384 pages, Board book
First published July 18, 1988
432 people are currently reading
8734 people want to read
About the author
Anthony Storr
49 books166 followersAnthony Storr was an English psychiatrist and author. He was a child who was to endure the typical trauma of early 20th century UK boarding schools. He was educated at Winchester, Christ's College, the University of Cambridge and Westminster Hospital. He qualified as a doctor in 1944, and subsequently specialized in psychiatry.
Storr grew up to be kind and insightful, yet, as his obituary states, he was "no stranger to suffering" and was himself allegedly prone to the frequent bouts of depression his mother had.
Today, Anthony Storr is known for his psychoanalytical portraits of historical figures.
Storr grew up to be kind and insightful, yet, as his obituary states, he was "no stranger to suffering" and was himself allegedly prone to the frequent bouts of depression his mother had.
Today, Anthony Storr is known for his psychoanalytical portraits of historical figures.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 225 reviews
October 13, 2021
Some of these reviews disappoint the hell out of me in terms of their reflection of how some modern people tend to read books. One of the positive notes in a fairly positive review was that it's "quite validating." Is that a positive? Is that why we read books? To validate what we already feel?
Another reviewer called it discordant. It was not discordant--it eased itself back and forth between argumentative methods as it went along. Is that really too sophisticated of a technique? It seems pretty simple to me. He moves from one technique, lets it work on you a little, then moves to another technique, lets that one work on you. The substance, even as the techniques shift, is still concordant--it doesn't bounce around randomly. In the end, the effect is tremendous.
Someone also said that it "seems old." That may be more to the point. This is a classic academic style, although written with more popular appeal than many academic works. Someone who doesn't have much patience or read much academic stuff might get bored. It is pretty subtle, it doesn't overtly package its message within a lot of bells and whistles like most commercial books today do. This I consider an advantage. This, to me, means it cuts out the rhetorical bulls**t contained in many supposedly profound books today. The ideas speak for themselves.
Storr is telling you, steadily, with each new chapter building up his evidence, that solitude is just as valid an approach to creativity and greatness as sociability.
Why does he answer Freud so often in the pages of this book? Because society (and even most likely you too, whether consciously or not) places FAR more credit on sociability than on solitude. And this notion absolutely originated with Freud. This has never been more true than it is today, in 2012, the digital age. Solitude is anathema to modern life. Standard validation is still in the form of approval or judgment from others. Our quality of and ability to deal with social relationships are still the barometers by which most of us are judged as being either "well-adjusted" or not. This needn't be the case. It shouldn't. Storr tells us why, and inspires us along the way.
post-the-reign-of-the-orange-duke, fake-post-covid edit:
Looking back, I agree with my review of the book, but I wouldn't be so snarky about other reviewers' opinions today. My bad 😅 All in good fun/knowledge!
Another reviewer called it discordant. It was not discordant--it eased itself back and forth between argumentative methods as it went along. Is that really too sophisticated of a technique? It seems pretty simple to me. He moves from one technique, lets it work on you a little, then moves to another technique, lets that one work on you. The substance, even as the techniques shift, is still concordant--it doesn't bounce around randomly. In the end, the effect is tremendous.
Someone also said that it "seems old." That may be more to the point. This is a classic academic style, although written with more popular appeal than many academic works. Someone who doesn't have much patience or read much academic stuff might get bored. It is pretty subtle, it doesn't overtly package its message within a lot of bells and whistles like most commercial books today do. This I consider an advantage. This, to me, means it cuts out the rhetorical bulls**t contained in many supposedly profound books today. The ideas speak for themselves.
Storr is telling you, steadily, with each new chapter building up his evidence, that solitude is just as valid an approach to creativity and greatness as sociability.
Why does he answer Freud so often in the pages of this book? Because society (and even most likely you too, whether consciously or not) places FAR more credit on sociability than on solitude. And this notion absolutely originated with Freud. This has never been more true than it is today, in 2012, the digital age. Solitude is anathema to modern life. Standard validation is still in the form of approval or judgment from others. Our quality of and ability to deal with social relationships are still the barometers by which most of us are judged as being either "well-adjusted" or not. This needn't be the case. It shouldn't. Storr tells us why, and inspires us along the way.
post-the-reign-of-the-orange-duke, fake-post-covid edit:
Looking back, I agree with my review of the book, but I wouldn't be so snarky about other reviewers' opinions today. My bad 😅 All in good fun/knowledge!
March 11, 2023
"Conversation enriches the understanding, but solitude is the school of genius."
-Edward Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
=====
“Reading is that fruitful miracle of a communication in the midst of solitude.”
-Marcel Proust
=================
Marcel Proust, Kipling, P.G. Wodehouse, Graham Greene, Beethoven, Anne Sexton, Beatrice Potter, Goya----are a few examples in Solitude of how creative people benefitted from solitude.
============
"To foster the growth of the child’s imaginative capacity, we should ensure that our children, when they are old enough to enjoy it, are given time and opportunity for solitude. The capacity to be alone is one aspect of an inner security which can be built in the early years. Some children who enjoy the solitary exercise of the imagination may develop creative potential."
Right now, we are caring for our one-year old granddaughter five days a week and have seen this development with her. She likes us to be around, but she will look through books on her own. And stand, for some time, looking out our front window and talk to herself and laugh.
The author observes that the capacity to be alone is linked with self-discovery and becoming aware of one’s deepest needs and feelings.
------
The process of creativity, which I am familiar with from writing, has certain key aspects. First is preparation. One develops some preliminary interest in a particular subject, collects material, and reads everything he can find about it. The next phase is incubation. The material simmers and the brain begins to organize it. Then there is illumination when one develops insights, finds a solution to a problem, and figures out how to order the material into a thesis or a story arc.
=========
Kipling is considered not politically correct to read, but his experiences can be instructive in what I call the creative use of distress....
Kipling, just before his sixth birthday, was left with his sister in the care of a retired naval captain and his wife, Captain and Mrs Holloway. The parents did not inform their children that they were returning to India without them. Kipling was not to see his mother again until April 1877, at age 12.. The five years which he spent in what he later called The House of Desolation’ marked him for life.
He was bullied by the Holloways’ son, a boy some six years older, and ruthlessly punished, both by beatings and by enforced isolation, at the hands of the hateful Mrs Holloway. He was also bullied at the local day-school to which he was sent, and at which he performed badly. Every night he was cross-examined as to how he had spent his day. Each contradiction which the frightened, sleepy child produced was treated as a deliberate lie, and further proof of punishable wickedness.
One of Kipling’s biographers, Charles Carrington, remarks that his long years of suffering at the hands of Mrs Holloway taught him....
"that the mind must make its own happiness, that any troubles can be endured if the sufferer has resources of his own to sustain him."
In his story ‘Baa, Baa, Black Sheep," Kipling gives an undiluted autobiographical account of this dreadfully unhappy part of his life.
Kipling referred to his treatment by Mrs Holloway as ‘calculated torture’; but he also said that its effect was to make him pay careful attention to the lies which he had to tell, and concluded that this was the foundation of his literary effort. He also discovered that, if only adults left him alone, he could, through reading, escape into a world of his own. He was able to cultivate his imagination in solitude.
Like Edward Lear, he was at his best and most relaxed with children. He also exhibited an extraordinary capacity for inspiring confidence in others, who found themselves telling him their troubles in the assurance that he would not betray them.
This particular trait seems to depend upon an unusual capacity to put oneself in other people’s shoes, to identify oneself with others. It often originates in the kind of premature concern with the feelings of others which Kipling describes himself as having had to develop as a child. Kipling became watchful and wary; alert to the changing moods of adults which might presage anger. This prescient awareness of what others were feeling and of how they displayed their emotions probably stood him in good stead when he came to write.
==========
One book I am re-reading as a Covid sheltering book (4/26/2020) is "The Count of Monte Cristo." Dantes, a framed prisoner in solitary confinement in a French dungeon, is a simple, young, uneducated sailor. (Dantes would go on to become the Count many years hence). It would be 10 years in prison before Dantes connects with his fellow solitary, Abbé Faria who saves his life in more ways than one. For the time being, however, Dantes has no real mental resources of his own to sustain him. For a time, he tries religion but gives up in despair. He becomes self-destructive, but eventually resigns himself to death.
This reminded me of a chapter in "Solitude" that I had not discussed above, "Enforced Solitude." The author uses the example of Dr. Edith Bone, who later published a book "Seven Years Solitary." Storr describes from her book how she coped with her predicament.
"Dr Bone was over sixty when she was arrested in Hungary in 1949. A notable linguist, she had been invited to Hungary to translate English scientific books into Hungarian. She herself had joined the Communist Party in 1919. She was accused of being a British agent, but refused to make a false confession or in any way to collaborate with her interrogators. This elderly lady spent seven years in prison before she was finally released in November 1956. For three of those years she was denied access to books or writing materials. The cell in which she was first confined was bitterly cold and had no window. Worse was to come. For five months she was kept in a cellar in total darkness. The walls ran with water or were covered with fungus; the floor was deep in excrement. There was no ventilation.
Dr Bone invented various techniques for keeping herself sane. She recited and translated poetry, and herself composed verses. She completed a mental inventory of her vocabulary in the six languages in which she was fluent, and went for imaginary walks through the streets of the many cities which she knew well. Throughout these and other ordeals, Dr Bone treated her captors with contempt, and never ceased to protest her innocence. She is not only a shining example of courage which few could match, but also illustrates the point that a well-stocked, disciplined mind can prevent its own disruption."
The contrast to Dantes in "Monte Cristo" is the Abbé Faria. When we first encounter him in the novel, he is on the floor of his cell working on a geometric drawing that the author likens to the work of Archimedes.
Years later, the Abbé explains to Dantes how his store of learning has sustained him all these years, much of which he will pass on to his young protege.
“In Rome, I had nearly five thousand volumes in my library. By reading and re-reading them, I discovered that one hundred and fifty books, carefully chosen, give you, if not a complete summary of human knowledge, at least everything that it is useful for a man to know. I devoted three years of my life to reading and re-reading these hundred and fifty volumes, so that when I was arrested I knew them more or less by heart. In prison, with a slight effort of memory, I recalled them entirely. So I can recite to you Thucydides, Xenophon, Plutarch, Livy, Tacitus, Strada, Jornadès, Dante, Montaigne, Shakespeare, Spinoza, Machiavelli and Bossuet; I mention only the most important …’
and further explains what keeps him occupied.....
"I have to admit that my historical work is my favourite occupation. When I go back to the past, I forget the present. I walk free and independently through history, and forget that I am a prisoner.”
-Edward Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
=====
“Reading is that fruitful miracle of a communication in the midst of solitude.”
-Marcel Proust
=================
Marcel Proust, Kipling, P.G. Wodehouse, Graham Greene, Beethoven, Anne Sexton, Beatrice Potter, Goya----are a few examples in Solitude of how creative people benefitted from solitude.
============
"To foster the growth of the child’s imaginative capacity, we should ensure that our children, when they are old enough to enjoy it, are given time and opportunity for solitude. The capacity to be alone is one aspect of an inner security which can be built in the early years. Some children who enjoy the solitary exercise of the imagination may develop creative potential."
Right now, we are caring for our one-year old granddaughter five days a week and have seen this development with her. She likes us to be around, but she will look through books on her own. And stand, for some time, looking out our front window and talk to herself and laugh.
The author observes that the capacity to be alone is linked with self-discovery and becoming aware of one’s deepest needs and feelings.
------
The process of creativity, which I am familiar with from writing, has certain key aspects. First is preparation. One develops some preliminary interest in a particular subject, collects material, and reads everything he can find about it. The next phase is incubation. The material simmers and the brain begins to organize it. Then there is illumination when one develops insights, finds a solution to a problem, and figures out how to order the material into a thesis or a story arc.
=========
Kipling is considered not politically correct to read, but his experiences can be instructive in what I call the creative use of distress....
Kipling, just before his sixth birthday, was left with his sister in the care of a retired naval captain and his wife, Captain and Mrs Holloway. The parents did not inform their children that they were returning to India without them. Kipling was not to see his mother again until April 1877, at age 12.. The five years which he spent in what he later called The House of Desolation’ marked him for life.
He was bullied by the Holloways’ son, a boy some six years older, and ruthlessly punished, both by beatings and by enforced isolation, at the hands of the hateful Mrs Holloway. He was also bullied at the local day-school to which he was sent, and at which he performed badly. Every night he was cross-examined as to how he had spent his day. Each contradiction which the frightened, sleepy child produced was treated as a deliberate lie, and further proof of punishable wickedness.
One of Kipling’s biographers, Charles Carrington, remarks that his long years of suffering at the hands of Mrs Holloway taught him....
"that the mind must make its own happiness, that any troubles can be endured if the sufferer has resources of his own to sustain him."
In his story ‘Baa, Baa, Black Sheep," Kipling gives an undiluted autobiographical account of this dreadfully unhappy part of his life.
Kipling referred to his treatment by Mrs Holloway as ‘calculated torture’; but he also said that its effect was to make him pay careful attention to the lies which he had to tell, and concluded that this was the foundation of his literary effort. He also discovered that, if only adults left him alone, he could, through reading, escape into a world of his own. He was able to cultivate his imagination in solitude.
Like Edward Lear, he was at his best and most relaxed with children. He also exhibited an extraordinary capacity for inspiring confidence in others, who found themselves telling him their troubles in the assurance that he would not betray them.
This particular trait seems to depend upon an unusual capacity to put oneself in other people’s shoes, to identify oneself with others. It often originates in the kind of premature concern with the feelings of others which Kipling describes himself as having had to develop as a child. Kipling became watchful and wary; alert to the changing moods of adults which might presage anger. This prescient awareness of what others were feeling and of how they displayed their emotions probably stood him in good stead when he came to write.
==========
One book I am re-reading as a Covid sheltering book (4/26/2020) is "The Count of Monte Cristo." Dantes, a framed prisoner in solitary confinement in a French dungeon, is a simple, young, uneducated sailor. (Dantes would go on to become the Count many years hence). It would be 10 years in prison before Dantes connects with his fellow solitary, Abbé Faria who saves his life in more ways than one. For the time being, however, Dantes has no real mental resources of his own to sustain him. For a time, he tries religion but gives up in despair. He becomes self-destructive, but eventually resigns himself to death.
This reminded me of a chapter in "Solitude" that I had not discussed above, "Enforced Solitude." The author uses the example of Dr. Edith Bone, who later published a book "Seven Years Solitary." Storr describes from her book how she coped with her predicament.
"Dr Bone was over sixty when she was arrested in Hungary in 1949. A notable linguist, she had been invited to Hungary to translate English scientific books into Hungarian. She herself had joined the Communist Party in 1919. She was accused of being a British agent, but refused to make a false confession or in any way to collaborate with her interrogators. This elderly lady spent seven years in prison before she was finally released in November 1956. For three of those years she was denied access to books or writing materials. The cell in which she was first confined was bitterly cold and had no window. Worse was to come. For five months she was kept in a cellar in total darkness. The walls ran with water or were covered with fungus; the floor was deep in excrement. There was no ventilation.
Dr Bone invented various techniques for keeping herself sane. She recited and translated poetry, and herself composed verses. She completed a mental inventory of her vocabulary in the six languages in which she was fluent, and went for imaginary walks through the streets of the many cities which she knew well. Throughout these and other ordeals, Dr Bone treated her captors with contempt, and never ceased to protest her innocence. She is not only a shining example of courage which few could match, but also illustrates the point that a well-stocked, disciplined mind can prevent its own disruption."
The contrast to Dantes in "Monte Cristo" is the Abbé Faria. When we first encounter him in the novel, he is on the floor of his cell working on a geometric drawing that the author likens to the work of Archimedes.
Years later, the Abbé explains to Dantes how his store of learning has sustained him all these years, much of which he will pass on to his young protege.
“In Rome, I had nearly five thousand volumes in my library. By reading and re-reading them, I discovered that one hundred and fifty books, carefully chosen, give you, if not a complete summary of human knowledge, at least everything that it is useful for a man to know. I devoted three years of my life to reading and re-reading these hundred and fifty volumes, so that when I was arrested I knew them more or less by heart. In prison, with a slight effort of memory, I recalled them entirely. So I can recite to you Thucydides, Xenophon, Plutarch, Livy, Tacitus, Strada, Jornadès, Dante, Montaigne, Shakespeare, Spinoza, Machiavelli and Bossuet; I mention only the most important …’
and further explains what keeps him occupied.....
"I have to admit that my historical work is my favourite occupation. When I go back to the past, I forget the present. I walk free and independently through history, and forget that I am a prisoner.”
March 25, 2017
As a very solitary person – for example, I once went eight months without having any kind of conversation with anyone whether online or in person which is extreme (not really recommended) - naturally, this book interested me. Truthfully I was hoping, ideally, for something from this book that would click in me so that I would not desire or need any relationships with people because I can't seem to do them but yeah, no, that is not going to happen.
Anyway as it turned out, strangely enough, the book seemed to be more of a psychological discussion of creativity. One message I got was that many creative people suffered and had psychological issues - e.g. depression, schizoid personality disorder - but that if they could create or discover, it is a way to bring order to potential disordered behaviour: it staves that off, and Storr's conclusion is that solitary behaviour or a lack of close and intimate relationships is not to be discounted or disowned, especially if people are able to have more casual relationships such as friends or acquaintances, and also if they create things of value and worth. It doesn't look like it necessarily mean happiness but it seems sensible and sympathetic in recognising that solitude and creation may be just what is positive that the person can do for themselves.
I don't know how much of a theory based on a creative myth this is, as opposed to more rigorous objectivity. For example, is it not so uncommon amongst non-creatives or those who are not solitary that there are people with psychological issues or challenging life circumstances if you study their life just as much as Storr looked at the lives of his examples (Kafka, Newton, Beethoven, Beatrix Potter, etc.). OK, maybe everyone is messed up in some way. That appeals to the misanthrope in me. Or, of course, what about creative people who had close and intimate relationships and were not solitary?
However it is, I fully agree with Storr that times of solitude are positive for a lot of people if they balance it up with contact with other people and that the "happiest lives are probably those in which neither interpersonal relationships nor impersonal interests are idealised as the only way to salvation. The desire and pursuit of the whole must comprehend both aspects of human nature."
Anyway as it turned out, strangely enough, the book seemed to be more of a psychological discussion of creativity. One message I got was that many creative people suffered and had psychological issues - e.g. depression, schizoid personality disorder - but that if they could create or discover, it is a way to bring order to potential disordered behaviour: it staves that off, and Storr's conclusion is that solitary behaviour or a lack of close and intimate relationships is not to be discounted or disowned, especially if people are able to have more casual relationships such as friends or acquaintances, and also if they create things of value and worth. It doesn't look like it necessarily mean happiness but it seems sensible and sympathetic in recognising that solitude and creation may be just what is positive that the person can do for themselves.
I don't know how much of a theory based on a creative myth this is, as opposed to more rigorous objectivity. For example, is it not so uncommon amongst non-creatives or those who are not solitary that there are people with psychological issues or challenging life circumstances if you study their life just as much as Storr looked at the lives of his examples (Kafka, Newton, Beethoven, Beatrix Potter, etc.). OK, maybe everyone is messed up in some way. That appeals to the misanthrope in me. Or, of course, what about creative people who had close and intimate relationships and were not solitary?
However it is, I fully agree with Storr that times of solitude are positive for a lot of people if they balance it up with contact with other people and that the "happiest lives are probably those in which neither interpersonal relationships nor impersonal interests are idealised as the only way to salvation. The desire and pursuit of the whole must comprehend both aspects of human nature."
July 29, 2022
If we are to listen only to the psychoanalytic 'object-relations' theorists, we should be driven to conclude that none of us have validity as isolated individuals. From their standpoint, it appears that we possess value only in so far as we fulfil some useful function vis-a-vis other people, in our roles, for example, as spouse, parent, or neighbor. It follows that the justification for the individual's existence is the existence of others.
In what is, perhaps, Anthony Storr's most highly-regarded work, he presents a counter-argument to the all-encompassing aspects of relational theory. He says, in short, that we do a disservice to humanity to imagine all health and healing take place solely through interaction with others. While such connections are important in the life of the psyche, they are by no means the sole - or even most productive - avenue to recovery from loss, injury, illness, or traumatic event. Like any other well-intentioned treatment modality, its effectiveness depends entirely upon the sort of person it's being offered to.
I find a lot of value in arguments that aim to bring balance to prevailing thought. They tend, in certain instances, to temper the rush to judgment and the enthusiastic over-application of the latest trend. Take mindfulness, for example, which is just about as ubiquitous in the city of Los Angeles as a big old plate of kale. Got an addiction? Practice mindfulness. Panic attack? Mindfulness. Anger issues? Mindfulness. Lacking a wi-fi signal? Mindfulness. Every third person, it seems, is pausing in his or her tracks in an attempt to locate "the present moment." Therapists by the score are adopting mindfulness as a foundation upon which to build a multitude of treatments. And it works so well so very often that a course of mindfulness seems like a genuine no-brainer...until...well, until it doesn't.
Professionals are just now beginning to realize that mindfulness is contra-indicated in cases of post-traumatic stress disorder. I suspect if anyone had taken a 'mindful' moment to actually think about this, they might have recognized that asking a person struggling with temporal distortions to locate the present moment was bound to exacerbate the problem. Which it does. And has. Hence fresh books on trauma-sensitive mindfulness (because heaven forfend we set mindfulness aside for the space of a single second).
Storr's exploration of solitude as a fertile state for healing, especially of the creative mind, brings a similar countervailing weight to the contention that a compassionate second presence is required for recovery to be achieved. He gives both voice and example to the many individuals who were raised in circumstances where repair rested entirely on the child's shoulders, and in which solitude was necessary were there to be any hope of success in such regard. Most used this alone-time to express and process through a form of art - engaging that template not to deny or repress but to confront and resolve through creative reconfiguration.
Written over thirty years ago, Storr's slim volume holds up as a fascinating twist on currently-held theories, and provides a solid component for a more balanced perspective on the manner in which we choose to address those dark nights of the soul.
In what is, perhaps, Anthony Storr's most highly-regarded work, he presents a counter-argument to the all-encompassing aspects of relational theory. He says, in short, that we do a disservice to humanity to imagine all health and healing take place solely through interaction with others. While such connections are important in the life of the psyche, they are by no means the sole - or even most productive - avenue to recovery from loss, injury, illness, or traumatic event. Like any other well-intentioned treatment modality, its effectiveness depends entirely upon the sort of person it's being offered to.
I find a lot of value in arguments that aim to bring balance to prevailing thought. They tend, in certain instances, to temper the rush to judgment and the enthusiastic over-application of the latest trend. Take mindfulness, for example, which is just about as ubiquitous in the city of Los Angeles as a big old plate of kale. Got an addiction? Practice mindfulness. Panic attack? Mindfulness. Anger issues? Mindfulness. Lacking a wi-fi signal? Mindfulness. Every third person, it seems, is pausing in his or her tracks in an attempt to locate "the present moment." Therapists by the score are adopting mindfulness as a foundation upon which to build a multitude of treatments. And it works so well so very often that a course of mindfulness seems like a genuine no-brainer...until...well, until it doesn't.
Professionals are just now beginning to realize that mindfulness is contra-indicated in cases of post-traumatic stress disorder. I suspect if anyone had taken a 'mindful' moment to actually think about this, they might have recognized that asking a person struggling with temporal distortions to locate the present moment was bound to exacerbate the problem. Which it does. And has. Hence fresh books on trauma-sensitive mindfulness (because heaven forfend we set mindfulness aside for the space of a single second).
Storr's exploration of solitude as a fertile state for healing, especially of the creative mind, brings a similar countervailing weight to the contention that a compassionate second presence is required for recovery to be achieved. He gives both voice and example to the many individuals who were raised in circumstances where repair rested entirely on the child's shoulders, and in which solitude was necessary were there to be any hope of success in such regard. Most used this alone-time to express and process through a form of art - engaging that template not to deny or repress but to confront and resolve through creative reconfiguration.
Written over thirty years ago, Storr's slim volume holds up as a fascinating twist on currently-held theories, and provides a solid component for a more balanced perspective on the manner in which we choose to address those dark nights of the soul.
June 6, 2013
The more we broadcast ourselves on a constant basis, the more we chip away at even the concept of solitude. Every meal you eat is a photo meant to be shared, every funny thought you have is a tweet being prepared for the hive mind.
Online communication isn't the same as making a material world connection - but neither is it the same as being alone. Solitude has been the basis for so much of my creative accomplishment (wonderful collaborative efforts notwithstanding). We need connection, and we also need solitude, and online conversation is neither of those things - but does it feed the need to create in some way, or is it more of a false nourishment - all the comfort of basking in inspiration, with none of the impetus to actually create?
I wonder how the author might have seen it.
Online communication isn't the same as making a material world connection - but neither is it the same as being alone. Solitude has been the basis for so much of my creative accomplishment (wonderful collaborative efforts notwithstanding). We need connection, and we also need solitude, and online conversation is neither of those things - but does it feed the need to create in some way, or is it more of a false nourishment - all the comfort of basking in inspiration, with none of the impetus to actually create?
I wonder how the author might have seen it.
March 27, 2018
Into the wild
Una delle paure che maggiormente ci attanaglia e che ci guida nella maggior parte dei nostri comportamenti è quella della solitudine. Se da una parte ben pochi di noi sarebbero disposti ad accettare una vita di solitudine, dall'altra è difficile credere che relazioni interpersonali soddisfacenti ci garantiscano idealmente la felicità. Come diceva Chris McCandless in "Into the wild":
“Ti sbagli se pensi che le gioie della vita vengano soprattutto dai rapporti tra le persone. Dio ha messo la felicità dappertutto, è ovunque, in tutto ciò di cui possiamo fare esperienza. Abbiamo solo bisogno di cambiare il modo di vedere le cose.”
Questo saggio di Storr del 1989 tratta della solitudine in senso lato. Ossia il suo scopo non è tanto quello di verificare se sia meglio o peggio stare soli o in compagnia, cosa che sarebbe alquanto banale, quanto quello di chiedersi le (macro)ragioni (domanda da poco...) per cui stiamo al mondo e il rapporto che c'è tra la "creazione di valore" personale (che richiede riflessione, ragionamento e solitudine) e l'interazione con le altre persone.
La nostra vita è governata da due tensioni opposte e importanti: il bisogno di compagnia e rapporti sociali da una parte e quello di essere autonomi e indipendenti dall'altra. Se da una parte è vero che amore e amicizia siano tra gli ingredienti che rendono la vita degna di essere vissuta, dall'altra la maggior parte degli interessi e delle occupazioni creative possono essere tranquillamente coltivate in solitudine.
Tra l'altro l’importanza che si attribuisce ai rapporti interpersonali (associabile alla paura della precarietà) come criterio di misura della felicità e della salute è un fenomeno abbastanza recente; le generazioni precedenti infatti non attribuivano un valore così alto alle relazioni e la maggior parte dei pensatori era preoccupata più di ciò che si svolgeva nel loro intimo piuttosto che da ciò che pensavano gli altri. Oggi l'importanza data alle relazioni (peraltro virtuali) sui social network (non sei nessuno se non hai 2000 contatti su Facebook) definisce bene la differenza con il passato.
La nostra esistenza si può dividere in fasi abbastanza ben distinte; un primo periodo, ossia quello dei primi anni di vita, dove la sopravvivenza è legata alla dipendenza da altri e da un ultimo periodo dove le cose si invertono; l’anziano, benché soggetto a perdere l’autonomia fisica, sente diminuire la dipendenza affettiva, ha scarso interesse nei rapporti interpersonali, sta meglio solo perché preferisce badare ai propri problemi interiori. Aumenta l’obiettività nei confronti degli altri, ma diminuisce la capacità di identificarsi con essi. Come dice Wordsworth:
"Quando dalla miglior parte di noi ci ha troppo a lungo separato, sempre incalzante, il mondo, e ci accasciamo nauseati dei suoi traffici, sazi dei suoi piaceri, quanto è clemente, quanto è propizia Solitudine!"
Molto interessante nel libro il fatto che questo comportamento ha impatti anche nella produzione artistica, scientifica e letteraria. La vita un autore/artista/scienziato si può dividere in un primo periodo giovanile, in cui si impadronisce delle tecniche e dove è soggetto all'influenza dei suoi maestri, un secondo periodo di maturità, tipico di tutti i grandi e un terzo periodo (a cui non tutti riescono ad accedere per questioni di età; parlando di musicisti ad esempio, Beethoven e Liszt ci entrarono, Mozart, Chopin, Mendelsshon no) in cui gli artisti tendono sempre più a volgersi verso la sfera impersonale e la schematizzazione. Nel primo e nel secondo periodo c'è grande attenzione per il prossimo, c'è voglia di apparire, di piacere, di sedurre, di farsi capire, di comunicare. Nell'ultimo c'è tendenza a chiudersi verso sé stessi, verso l'introspezione. Il desiderio di piacere viene completamente meno mentre i discorsi e le opere si fanno più ardite, complesse, rarefatte, concise, efficaci.
Tanti sono i casi che mi vengono in mente di artisti divenuti involuti e complessi (farsi capire a loro non interessava più) alla fine dei loro giorni; esempi possono essere Delillo (ultimi libri), Beethoven (ultimi quartetti, ultima sonata), Tolstoj, etc.
Il libro, a mio parere molto interessante anche se abbastanza tecnico, evidentemente include una casistica molto allargata, includendo i casi di solitudine forzata (prigionia e/o lutti), patologica e altri. In ogni caso, la conclusione ovvia è che le esistenze più serene sono quelle in cui non vengono idealizzati né i rapporti interpersonali né gli interessi di tipo impersonale. Il desiderio e la ricerca di completezza devono necessariamente comprendere entrambi gli aspetti della natura umana.
March 23, 2015
In the flood of books in all fields about social behaviour, a book extolling the virtues of solitude stands out. Storr critiques the premise of much psychotherapy (esp attachment theory) that we need to be fixed so that we can have fulfilling social relationships and thereby be 'successful'. He argues that purpose and work and, importantly, the ability to be alone, are of equal value and uses creative people as examples.
Thus he says, "The capacity to form attachments on equal terms is considered evidence of emotional maturity. It is the absence of this capacity which is pathological. Whether there may be other criteria of emotional maturity, like the capacity to be alone, is seldom taken into account."
And:
"It is widely believed that interpersonal relationships of an intimate kind are the chief, if not the only, source of human happiness. Yet the lives of creative individuals often seem to run counter to this assumption.”
And he ends with this quote from Wordsworth
Wordsworth The Prelude (1950: 261).
When from our better selves we have too long
Been parted by the hurrying world, and droop,
Sick of its business, of its pleasures tired,
How gracious, how benign, is Solitude.
Thus he says, "The capacity to form attachments on equal terms is considered evidence of emotional maturity. It is the absence of this capacity which is pathological. Whether there may be other criteria of emotional maturity, like the capacity to be alone, is seldom taken into account."
And:
"It is widely believed that interpersonal relationships of an intimate kind are the chief, if not the only, source of human happiness. Yet the lives of creative individuals often seem to run counter to this assumption.”
And he ends with this quote from Wordsworth
Wordsworth The Prelude (1950: 261).
When from our better selves we have too long
Been parted by the hurrying world, and droop,
Sick of its business, of its pleasures tired,
How gracious, how benign, is Solitude.
January 14, 2018
First, this book is magnificently structured. The quality of writing and clarity of concepts laid out from the preface to the last page is well organized and clear without being overly pedantic or repetitive. The author refers to concepts and goals of previous sections of the book - even mentions upcoming areas that will be addressed later - and it all just flows really nicely. Very tightly written book - it's only 202 pages (the rest are notes).
Second - this book does a really great job of talking about the need for solitude as a balance to the need for human relationships and interactions using the experiences of highly accomplished historical figures including Beatrix Potter, Kant, Dostoevsky, Newton and many others.
This was originally published in 1988 - so many watershed events happened in the 80s, and most people in developed countries were on the precipice of previously unknown opportunity for connection, distraction and surveillance of each other's activities.
The premise is that people who want solitude or who are single are missing out and have something wrong with them. We even use the Greek word for a person who lives alone - troglodyte - as an insult to indicate some kind of stupid or defective person.
Storr goes into detail about the intrinsic need for humans to spend time alone -- sleep, for example, and dreams -- they provide our brain with time alone to integrate and heal and process experiences, ideas and thoughts about things. Humans always crave some kind of solitude -- and even in the face of social convention and obligation, we come up with ways to get time to ourselves -- Florence Nightingale feigned a health complaint so she could get time alone to study and write. Victorian women would have time to "rest" in the afternoons after spending so much time being empathically focused on the needs of others.
So - why is it that 30 years after this book was written, it seems like we are still not allowing people to take or make space to integrate their thoughts, experiences and ideas so that they can be healthier, happier and more productive?
I'm thinking specifically here of corporate professional work and the move to crowd people into "open workspace" areas and the retraction of control over where one works (many employers are repealing remote/work from home policies). It seems counter productive to require an "always on", in the office for 8 hours workday when that's not really how human brains function.
Being alone is necessary not just for personal life - but for professional life as well. While corporate culture values ideation, collaboration and consensus for decision-making -- where is the space for integration and problem-solving on an individual level?
Lots of great material to dig into here -- it feels like this is just another spot on the tip of the iceberg of a subject that fascinates me: the psychology of creativity. If you enjoy reading "Finding Flow" and other books by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi -- you'll enjoy this book.
Second - this book does a really great job of talking about the need for solitude as a balance to the need for human relationships and interactions using the experiences of highly accomplished historical figures including Beatrix Potter, Kant, Dostoevsky, Newton and many others.
This was originally published in 1988 - so many watershed events happened in the 80s, and most people in developed countries were on the precipice of previously unknown opportunity for connection, distraction and surveillance of each other's activities.
"At the time of writing, it is generally considered that the highly introverted person is more pathological than the very extraverted person. This is because of the current emphasis upon object relationships, and the disregard of processes which take place in solitude."
The premise is that people who want solitude or who are single are missing out and have something wrong with them. We even use the Greek word for a person who lives alone - troglodyte - as an insult to indicate some kind of stupid or defective person.
Storr goes into detail about the intrinsic need for humans to spend time alone -- sleep, for example, and dreams -- they provide our brain with time alone to integrate and heal and process experiences, ideas and thoughts about things. Humans always crave some kind of solitude -- and even in the face of social convention and obligation, we come up with ways to get time to ourselves -- Florence Nightingale feigned a health complaint so she could get time alone to study and write. Victorian women would have time to "rest" in the afternoons after spending so much time being empathically focused on the needs of others.
So - why is it that 30 years after this book was written, it seems like we are still not allowing people to take or make space to integrate their thoughts, experiences and ideas so that they can be healthier, happier and more productive?
I'm thinking specifically here of corporate professional work and the move to crowd people into "open workspace" areas and the retraction of control over where one works (many employers are repealing remote/work from home policies). It seems counter productive to require an "always on", in the office for 8 hours workday when that's not really how human brains function.
Being alone is necessary not just for personal life - but for professional life as well. While corporate culture values ideation, collaboration and consensus for decision-making -- where is the space for integration and problem-solving on an individual level?
Lots of great material to dig into here -- it feels like this is just another spot on the tip of the iceberg of a subject that fascinates me: the psychology of creativity. If you enjoy reading "Finding Flow" and other books by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi -- you'll enjoy this book.
Read
August 28, 2018I don't know entirely where I stand on this. On the one hand, it features lots of lovely tidbits about how people have dealt with solitude, most of them miserable depressives. The whole thing is a defense of solitude as an essential component of well-being, written as it was at a time when interpersonal relationships were deemed to be of paramount importance, and long before lots of basement-dwelling assholes started claiming that their "introversion" was why they were assholes.
I mean, it is a product of its time. Especially in the beginning, there's a little too much Freudianism for my taste, and the moronic statue of Abraham Maslow is erected at one point, but it doesn't obscure a good argument. And parts of it are downright moving -- the moment towards the end where he mentions that the much-discussed loss of former interests in depressive patients isn't a loss of former interests per se, it's a loss of interests due to the burdens of work and familial requirements, something that terrifies me, deeply.
I mean, it is a product of its time. Especially in the beginning, there's a little too much Freudianism for my taste, and the moronic statue of Abraham Maslow is erected at one point, but it doesn't obscure a good argument. And parts of it are downright moving -- the moment towards the end where he mentions that the much-discussed loss of former interests in depressive patients isn't a loss of former interests per se, it's a loss of interests due to the burdens of work and familial requirements, something that terrifies me, deeply.
June 12, 2021
En líneas generales es un muy buen libro, mi único problema fue que la primera mitad del libro cumple con la introducción del titulo, la segunda mitad se pierde por completo el tema del libro y se centra en biografías de muchos personajes históricos y un gran analisis del psicoanálisis, cosa que no es lo que estaba buscando cuando agarre el libro y por eso me resulto un poco pesado esa parte, sigue siendo entretenido pero no es el motivo por lo que uno abrió el libro.
January 28, 2022
Anthony Storr postulates that a solitary existence, far from being subnormal or lacking in success, offers many opportunities for exceptional achievement and the enjoyment of a fully satisfying life. He offers numerous examples to support his argument, while also acknowledging that a life of isolation is frequently prompted by some form of trauma, misfortune or peculiarity of personality and that such a mode of living often comes with a price.
It seems to me that Storr’s most convincing notion lies in his exploration of that uniquely human capacity of imagination, which makes possible innovation: the creation, out of nothing, of a thing that wasn’t there before, be it a scientific revelation of an Einstein, a symphony of a Mozart or a philosophical notion of a Kant. Most of the examples he explores certainly fall within that category of creative individuals.
Of course, being by profession a psycho-analyst, Storr cannot resist delving into behavioral patterns that are clearly neurotic, psychotic or at least socially bizaare. Those examples help to address potential nay-sayers by acknowledging the non-universality of his notion due to the great variability among personalities and life experiences, thereby setting his case upon grounds of generality and reasonableness — while at the same time tempering the strength of his basic thesis.
I tend to applaud Storr’s willingness to challenges Freud’s notion that psychic success of an individual is characterized by the achievement of sexual maturity, dependent therefore upon intimate interpersonal relationships. Taking issue with Freud on that point is necessary for the validity of his thesis. However, in taking his argument further, Storr at times ‘wanders off into the weeds’, so to speak. To begin with, Storr makes the mistake of venturing a bit too far into the realm of anthropology, which is not his strong suit. His entire discussion is limited to the experiences and traditions of Western Man; his views on individualism, self-expression, social intercourse and values would be foreign to most people in the orient, much of Africa, the Middle East or even many societies elsewhere around the world. In discussing the meaning of song, dance and sculpture, he entirely fails to grasp their significance as means of preserving and expressing a people’s history and beliefs. And his interpretation of cave paintings seems highly questionable.
But in the end, I suppose the foregoing are minor quibbles. His central notion is solid and well explained, perhaps most succinctly at the end of Chapter 6 where he states that many creative activities are predominantly solitary. They are concerned with self-realization and self-development in isolation, or with finding some coherent pattern in life. The degree to which these creative activities take priority in the life of an individual varies with his personality and talents. Everyone needs some human relationships; but everyone also needs some kind of fulfillment which is relevant to himself alone. Provided that they have friends and acquaintances, those who are passionately engaged in pursuing interests which are important to them may achieve happiness without having any very close relationship.
In summary: a book that many who find themselves out of step with the often frantic pursuit of “normality” and popularity or who experience less than ecstatic personal relationships or who treasure periods of solitude, will find reassuring.
It seems to me that Storr’s most convincing notion lies in his exploration of that uniquely human capacity of imagination, which makes possible innovation: the creation, out of nothing, of a thing that wasn’t there before, be it a scientific revelation of an Einstein, a symphony of a Mozart or a philosophical notion of a Kant. Most of the examples he explores certainly fall within that category of creative individuals.
Of course, being by profession a psycho-analyst, Storr cannot resist delving into behavioral patterns that are clearly neurotic, psychotic or at least socially bizaare. Those examples help to address potential nay-sayers by acknowledging the non-universality of his notion due to the great variability among personalities and life experiences, thereby setting his case upon grounds of generality and reasonableness — while at the same time tempering the strength of his basic thesis.
I tend to applaud Storr’s willingness to challenges Freud’s notion that psychic success of an individual is characterized by the achievement of sexual maturity, dependent therefore upon intimate interpersonal relationships. Taking issue with Freud on that point is necessary for the validity of his thesis. However, in taking his argument further, Storr at times ‘wanders off into the weeds’, so to speak. To begin with, Storr makes the mistake of venturing a bit too far into the realm of anthropology, which is not his strong suit. His entire discussion is limited to the experiences and traditions of Western Man; his views on individualism, self-expression, social intercourse and values would be foreign to most people in the orient, much of Africa, the Middle East or even many societies elsewhere around the world. In discussing the meaning of song, dance and sculpture, he entirely fails to grasp their significance as means of preserving and expressing a people’s history and beliefs. And his interpretation of cave paintings seems highly questionable.
But in the end, I suppose the foregoing are minor quibbles. His central notion is solid and well explained, perhaps most succinctly at the end of Chapter 6 where he states that many creative activities are predominantly solitary. They are concerned with self-realization and self-development in isolation, or with finding some coherent pattern in life. The degree to which these creative activities take priority in the life of an individual varies with his personality and talents. Everyone needs some human relationships; but everyone also needs some kind of fulfillment which is relevant to himself alone. Provided that they have friends and acquaintances, those who are passionately engaged in pursuing interests which are important to them may achieve happiness without having any very close relationship.
In summary: a book that many who find themselves out of step with the often frantic pursuit of “normality” and popularity or who experience less than ecstatic personal relationships or who treasure periods of solitude, will find reassuring.
December 28, 2021
A reoccurring them psychological books have is to construct elaborate premises based on a few characteristics that resemble the stability of a game of Jenga. One shaky premise on top of another based on no data or a & b testing. No clinical study which tries to calculate the accuracy of the findings.
Not to mention, psychologist love to break down complex personalities into two binary choices and then extrapolate from there. This author had the decency to admit that this is not always accurate as humans are more complex but if you’re stating it’s not always accurate, how accurate is it? What’s the range? I mean they list all these personal characteristics and I find myself asking “okay what percentage of the trait is displayed?” There’s no way to measure any of this so it just becomes psychobable. The more I read psychological books the more I see them breaking down people into two strict categories but I don’t believe this realistic in any case.
2 stars. Maybe it’s based on my need for numbers or proof to be able to follow along. One thing that reading has taught me is that verbal logic is very rarely played out in scientific testing. Life is very counter Intuitive and if it sounds overly simplistic, we should be hesitant to accept the premise until it’s corroborated by data.
Not to mention, psychologist love to break down complex personalities into two binary choices and then extrapolate from there. This author had the decency to admit that this is not always accurate as humans are more complex but if you’re stating it’s not always accurate, how accurate is it? What’s the range? I mean they list all these personal characteristics and I find myself asking “okay what percentage of the trait is displayed?” There’s no way to measure any of this so it just becomes psychobable. The more I read psychological books the more I see them breaking down people into two strict categories but I don’t believe this realistic in any case.
2 stars. Maybe it’s based on my need for numbers or proof to be able to follow along. One thing that reading has taught me is that verbal logic is very rarely played out in scientific testing. Life is very counter Intuitive and if it sounds overly simplistic, we should be hesitant to accept the premise until it’s corroborated by data.
March 14, 2013
This was such an excellent find...almost lost in the midst of the sidewalk sale at Second Story books in Dupont Circle. Dr. Storr is a psychiatrist as well as a talented writer and researcher. The book is full of fascinating biographical jewels on great minds like Kant, Newton, Henry James, Beatrix Potter, P.G. Wodehouse, Freud, Jung and many more. Storr's main premise is to challenge the predominant theory today that a well-balanced life revolves around deep, significant relationships. He does not dismiss the significance of relationships themselves but proffers that interests, hobbies, work, religion, nature and art can meet the same needs and desires of men and women of all types. My only criticism, which is something that Storr acknowledges but doesn't ever truly answer, is the focus on great creative minds who often had the means to take advantage of solitude rather than offering a potential answer for ordinary people who feel they could benefit from the same. Overall, an incredible, rare find that straddles the fields of psychology, sociology, the arts, religion and science.
April 14, 2008
I love this book. I have read it a few times. It always makes me feel good and gives me new insight into things that are important to me. Maybe it is time to read it again.
The main message it holds is that a person can make their own satisfaction and happiness.
The main message it holds is that a person can make their own satisfaction and happiness.
September 29, 2017
This is not one of those feel good, self help, make me feel okay with the world kind of books.
This piece of work is dense. It's a lot to chew. It's amazing.
These are just my thoughts after finishing the book, not really a review of the book itself.
Our culture tells us that one of the worst things that can happen to a person is to die alone. This is a blatant lie that many of us tend to believe. Working on the self is not placed at any importance and so while immature emotionally, mentally and spiritually we put all our energy towards being loved and loving another being. This usually ends up in mental prisons, dragging each other down to the depths of neurosis before the development of the internal ever had a chance to begin.
We can treat other people in such a better and uplifting way if we don't see them as an ends to a mean. There is so much more to experience and a lot of the wonders (thinking, discovering, creating, observing the mind) can only be done in solitude. Space is needed in your life to notice the amazing elements that we toss aside when we are too busy.
If we didn't start chasing a partner as soon as we could, and sometimes pop out babies before we even know ourselves, we would be able to remove our neurosis and create humans with a far more intelligent DNA, one where they can see clearly and therefore can treat themselves and those around them with unconditional love.
The ecstasy that comes from uniting with another human being while in love is truly amazing and beautiful. It's not a state that be reached and parked on. It's temporary and is truly the highs of life. There are so many ways to get it and there is no need to be desperate about it. You can get it from being aware of your body and taking care of it. You can get it from meditation. You can get it from finding a new interest that opens up a new world to you. You can get it from hiking a mountain. You can get it from creating an art piece. You can get it from reading a book written by an intelligent mind.
The entire world is our playground and solitude can bring just as much happiness as a healthy relationship.
This piece of work is dense. It's a lot to chew. It's amazing.
These are just my thoughts after finishing the book, not really a review of the book itself.
Our culture tells us that one of the worst things that can happen to a person is to die alone. This is a blatant lie that many of us tend to believe. Working on the self is not placed at any importance and so while immature emotionally, mentally and spiritually we put all our energy towards being loved and loving another being. This usually ends up in mental prisons, dragging each other down to the depths of neurosis before the development of the internal ever had a chance to begin.
We can treat other people in such a better and uplifting way if we don't see them as an ends to a mean. There is so much more to experience and a lot of the wonders (thinking, discovering, creating, observing the mind) can only be done in solitude. Space is needed in your life to notice the amazing elements that we toss aside when we are too busy.
If we didn't start chasing a partner as soon as we could, and sometimes pop out babies before we even know ourselves, we would be able to remove our neurosis and create humans with a far more intelligent DNA, one where they can see clearly and therefore can treat themselves and those around them with unconditional love.
The ecstasy that comes from uniting with another human being while in love is truly amazing and beautiful. It's not a state that be reached and parked on. It's temporary and is truly the highs of life. There are so many ways to get it and there is no need to be desperate about it. You can get it from being aware of your body and taking care of it. You can get it from meditation. You can get it from finding a new interest that opens up a new world to you. You can get it from hiking a mountain. You can get it from creating an art piece. You can get it from reading a book written by an intelligent mind.
The entire world is our playground and solitude can bring just as much happiness as a healthy relationship.
December 13, 2011
I was very disappointed in this book. It's description touted it as "a profoundly original exploration of solitude and its role in the lives of creative, fulfilled individuals". It was none of the above. Rather, it is the author's personal rebuttal to most of Freud's philosophy (which I could care less about). It was NOT an exploration of how solitude fueled creative minds, but a depressing litany of all the artists who were neglected, imprisoned, exiled, or institutionalized. While Storr could have given many anecdotes of happy, well-adjusted creative people who enjoy their own company, he chose to highlight the worst-case scenarios. I have no idea where the subtitle "A Return to the Self" fits in, because it certainly wasn't addressed in any meaningful way.
I believe Mr. Storr needs to seek his therapy regarding his conflict with Sigmund Freud elsewhere, and also possibly take a course in basic composition - specifically, "what is a main idea", "what is your supporting evidence", and "remove extraneous details". Complete waste of time.
P.S. I don't leave negative comments unless it is truly abominable, and I honestly can't recommend this for a single person.
I believe Mr. Storr needs to seek his therapy regarding his conflict with Sigmund Freud elsewhere, and also possibly take a course in basic composition - specifically, "what is a main idea", "what is your supporting evidence", and "remove extraneous details". Complete waste of time.
P.S. I don't leave negative comments unless it is truly abominable, and I honestly can't recommend this for a single person.
June 3, 2023
2,5. interesting insight but not captivating nor helpful
April 11, 2018
The summary of the book as written in the last chapter: "This book began with the observation that many highly creative people were predominantly solitary, but that it was nonsense to suppose that, because of this, they were necessarily unhappy or neurotic. Although man is a social being, who certainly needs interaction with others, there is considerable variation in the depth of the relationships which individuals form with each other. All human beings need interests as well as relationships; all are geared toward the impersonal as well as toward the personal. The events of early childhood, inherited gifts and capacities, temperamental differences, and a host of other factors may influence whether individuals turn predominantly toward others or toward solitude to find the meaning of their lives. The capacity to be alone was adumbrated as a valuable resource, which facilitated learning, thinking, innovation, coming to terms with change, and the maintenance of contact with the inner world of the imagination. We saw that, even in those whose capacity for making intimate relationships had been damaged, the development of creative imagination could exercise a healing function. Examples were also given of creative individuals whose chief concern was with making sense and order out of life rather than with relationships with others; a concern with the impersonal which, we suggested, tended to increase with age. "
The writer makes some good points but there are some aspect of the book which i don't like:
1.The book is full of repetition and self refrences. It also repeats lots of the author's opinion about Freud,which he expresses in his book about Freud.
2. It also suffers from some deviation from the topic. For example, the reader can be lost in the details of lives of authors and composers discussed in the book.
3. When I chose this book to read I expected general analysis of the issue. But the book often limits itself to some specific circumstances for example: the role of solitude for elderly people or peole who are not able to establish good relationships with their parents or carer in their childhood.
The writer makes some good points but there are some aspect of the book which i don't like:
1.The book is full of repetition and self refrences. It also repeats lots of the author's opinion about Freud,which he expresses in his book about Freud.
2. It also suffers from some deviation from the topic. For example, the reader can be lost in the details of lives of authors and composers discussed in the book.
3. When I chose this book to read I expected general analysis of the issue. But the book often limits itself to some specific circumstances for example: the role of solitude for elderly people or peole who are not able to establish good relationships with their parents or carer in their childhood.
July 16, 2020
When I finished this book almost two weeks ago, I felt the essay constituted a great analysis worth reading, short but in many aspects dense and detailed, which answered many questions about my own self, someone who enjoys very much the pleasures of solitude and considers that both interpersonal relationships and solitude itself provide happiness, but who is also convinced that the hills of happiness which define solitude outshine and dazzle even the highest mountains of happiness which define interpersonal relationships.
The big question the book tries to answer, and accomplishes in most of the cases, is whether interpersonal relationships are the sole (or main, by far) source of happiness for the human being. The author shows with many examples, convincinly in my opinion, why such needs not/must not be the case. Solitude 'alone' may be the fountain from which common people, geniouses, mentally deranged ones, sexually constrained and/or people deprived of liberty drink. Solitude may also be able to a large extend to quench their thirst (the thirst of happiness). In fact, happiness is not void, is not hollow in the eyes of a human being who enjoys and make a higher use of solitude and a minor use of personal interrelationships. In other words, solitude 'alone' fills and generates all the happiness a human being needs, since solitude doesn't need human relationships to complete happiness or convey the feeling of happiness of a human being (or not in all cases).
Solitary activity is enriching, no doubt. Some people are able to spend most of their lifetime alone however enjoying happy and fulfilled lives. In many cases, interpersonal relationships do have a mere testimonial importance for them and they cannot be considered as feeling empty or being unhappy at all as a consequence. Much on the contrary.
While the book highlights the importance of being alone and the fact that solitude is for many the main source of happiness, the author explores throughout the different chapters a variety or nuisances of 'solitudes' like e.g. the enforced one (e.g. that of people on prison or deprived of liberty for other reasons) and compares them to cases or solitude types/nuisances in which entering a solitary status is rather a voluntary decision. Biographies and lifes of musicians, poets, writters, artists, geniouses of all kinds, are explored and analysed. Solitude in itself, in most of the cases presented, regardless of its kind (enforced or voluntary), seems to become a strong source of creativity, satisfaction and fulfillment for the one making use of or suffering from it if filled with creativity, such creativity appearing thanks to or as a consequence of a solitary status. For instance, geniouses have been making use mainly of solitude in different periods of history in order to develop and progress in their works rather than interpersonal relationships. Without solitude their success and accomplishments would have probably not been achieved. But also solitude is presented as a way of healing which invites people with psychological problems to make use of it as a means for mental repairment with sound results.
In conclusion, solitude may mean for many human beings a great deal of happiness, such happoness not needing to be fed with interpersonal relationships in order to fill the soul of a human with joy to end up with a life fulfilled.
Absolutely recommendable.
The big question the book tries to answer, and accomplishes in most of the cases, is whether interpersonal relationships are the sole (or main, by far) source of happiness for the human being. The author shows with many examples, convincinly in my opinion, why such needs not/must not be the case. Solitude 'alone' may be the fountain from which common people, geniouses, mentally deranged ones, sexually constrained and/or people deprived of liberty drink. Solitude may also be able to a large extend to quench their thirst (the thirst of happiness). In fact, happiness is not void, is not hollow in the eyes of a human being who enjoys and make a higher use of solitude and a minor use of personal interrelationships. In other words, solitude 'alone' fills and generates all the happiness a human being needs, since solitude doesn't need human relationships to complete happiness or convey the feeling of happiness of a human being (or not in all cases).
Solitary activity is enriching, no doubt. Some people are able to spend most of their lifetime alone however enjoying happy and fulfilled lives. In many cases, interpersonal relationships do have a mere testimonial importance for them and they cannot be considered as feeling empty or being unhappy at all as a consequence. Much on the contrary.
While the book highlights the importance of being alone and the fact that solitude is for many the main source of happiness, the author explores throughout the different chapters a variety or nuisances of 'solitudes' like e.g. the enforced one (e.g. that of people on prison or deprived of liberty for other reasons) and compares them to cases or solitude types/nuisances in which entering a solitary status is rather a voluntary decision. Biographies and lifes of musicians, poets, writters, artists, geniouses of all kinds, are explored and analysed. Solitude in itself, in most of the cases presented, regardless of its kind (enforced or voluntary), seems to become a strong source of creativity, satisfaction and fulfillment for the one making use of or suffering from it if filled with creativity, such creativity appearing thanks to or as a consequence of a solitary status. For instance, geniouses have been making use mainly of solitude in different periods of history in order to develop and progress in their works rather than interpersonal relationships. Without solitude their success and accomplishments would have probably not been achieved. But also solitude is presented as a way of healing which invites people with psychological problems to make use of it as a means for mental repairment with sound results.
In conclusion, solitude may mean for many human beings a great deal of happiness, such happoness not needing to be fed with interpersonal relationships in order to fill the soul of a human with joy to end up with a life fulfilled.
Absolutely recommendable.
April 12, 2015
When I started this book, I did not realize the author was a renowned psychoanalyst. Had I known that, I doubt I'd have given it a try. I am, however, glad I read it. Storr's examination of the value of solitude and the role it plays in both creativity and the development and preservation of mental health embodies a warmth and humanity rarely found in psychoanalytic literature.
Storr argues convincingly that modern psychology and psychoanalytics place too much emphasis on the role of interpersonal relationships in mental and emotional health. Even today, nearly 30 years after the books original publication, our culture sees solitude as a sign of instability, pathology, or weakness. Although there have been some popular books lately that seek to rehabilitate the image of introverts, the mere fact that such volumes merit particular notice reflects our cultural preference for gregariousness. Storr uses the lives of famous artists, writers, musicians, scientists, and philosophers to illustrate the importance of solitude for the creative process and also its usefulness in overcoming injuries or handicaps in some people's psyches. He does not argue against the importance of relationships, but rather suggests that a balance of relationships and interests, proportioned according to the individual's unique needs, makes for the most balanced life and the best chance of achieving "happiness."
The book is well written and quite readable, although a basic knowledge of the people Storr uses as examples makes the going easier. Fortunately, he provides enough information that even if one is unfamiliar with the details of, for example, Wittgenstein's philosophy, one can still get the point. Of course, a quick Google search can provide more background if needed.
So, why not five stars? In part, because Storr does go on a bit in some places. He uses three or four examples where one would do. I realize he was fighting an uphill battle against an entrenched psychoanalytic culture and needed to bolster his defenses, but for the lay reader, it does get tedious at times. Another factor is that Storr says he's arguing that solitude is important for average people, not just the great creatives, and that very solitary people need not be pathological, but rather can be quite healthy, but his examples include a preponderance of clearly neurotic people and he devotes no time demonstrating how the experiences of these geniuses can translate into the lives of average men and women. While most readers will be able to find plenty of useful validation for their own need for solitude, the book would be more useful to a lay audience were the uses of solitude in everyday life addressed directly and with examples to whom readers might relate more easily.
Despite these caveats, _Solitude_ is a deeply informative and provocative book. I recommend it strongly to anyone who has felt the need for "alone time" or to anyone who wonders why another person should need such time.
Storr argues convincingly that modern psychology and psychoanalytics place too much emphasis on the role of interpersonal relationships in mental and emotional health. Even today, nearly 30 years after the books original publication, our culture sees solitude as a sign of instability, pathology, or weakness. Although there have been some popular books lately that seek to rehabilitate the image of introverts, the mere fact that such volumes merit particular notice reflects our cultural preference for gregariousness. Storr uses the lives of famous artists, writers, musicians, scientists, and philosophers to illustrate the importance of solitude for the creative process and also its usefulness in overcoming injuries or handicaps in some people's psyches. He does not argue against the importance of relationships, but rather suggests that a balance of relationships and interests, proportioned according to the individual's unique needs, makes for the most balanced life and the best chance of achieving "happiness."
The book is well written and quite readable, although a basic knowledge of the people Storr uses as examples makes the going easier. Fortunately, he provides enough information that even if one is unfamiliar with the details of, for example, Wittgenstein's philosophy, one can still get the point. Of course, a quick Google search can provide more background if needed.
So, why not five stars? In part, because Storr does go on a bit in some places. He uses three or four examples where one would do. I realize he was fighting an uphill battle against an entrenched psychoanalytic culture and needed to bolster his defenses, but for the lay reader, it does get tedious at times. Another factor is that Storr says he's arguing that solitude is important for average people, not just the great creatives, and that very solitary people need not be pathological, but rather can be quite healthy, but his examples include a preponderance of clearly neurotic people and he devotes no time demonstrating how the experiences of these geniuses can translate into the lives of average men and women. While most readers will be able to find plenty of useful validation for their own need for solitude, the book would be more useful to a lay audience were the uses of solitude in everyday life addressed directly and with examples to whom readers might relate more easily.
Despite these caveats, _Solitude_ is a deeply informative and provocative book. I recommend it strongly to anyone who has felt the need for "alone time" or to anyone who wonders why another person should need such time.
August 23, 2017
This is a now fairly old title that is well worth picking up nonetheless. Storr, an Oxford professor of psychology (a Jungian from what I can gather) discusses solitude, its benefits, some of its perils, and its basic impact on the human mind. For Storr, solitude is an important part of a healthy human life, though it plays different roles for different people. He pushes back quite a bit here on psychological systems that only emphasize the significance of relationships in psychological health, pointing out that what we do with the mind when we are alone plays a crucial role as well.
Storr's approach is holistic and theoretical, not heavily research driven, using myriad examples of creative people and artists for exploring how the mind works. I enjoyed his chapter on the unitive function of creativity (especially poetry in this case) in solitude in shaping a human mind capable of dealing with what life really brings--loss, pain, estrangement, and all other forms of suffering.
Storr does not write from a religious point of view, but he has a very healthy respect for religious thought and sees the religious thinkers whom he discusses as examples of psychological health. This is refreshing as the decades since the release of this book have brought ever-greater rejection of religiosity among many psychologists and social scientists.
In the end, this book has given me a much greater capacity to think about the role that solitude plays in my mental life, and how to use solitude as a God-given tool for promoting mental and emotional health.
One small warning to the Christian reader--Jung's approach to free-association, which is discussed very briefly at the end of the book, is something to be wary of. While clearing the mind can be crucial for making a space there for God (as so many ancient ascetics have realized) it is not God alone whom one might find there. This small caution in mind, I highly recommend _Solitude_ for anyone wanting to think more rigorously about what it means to be alone.
Storr's approach is holistic and theoretical, not heavily research driven, using myriad examples of creative people and artists for exploring how the mind works. I enjoyed his chapter on the unitive function of creativity (especially poetry in this case) in solitude in shaping a human mind capable of dealing with what life really brings--loss, pain, estrangement, and all other forms of suffering.
Storr does not write from a religious point of view, but he has a very healthy respect for religious thought and sees the religious thinkers whom he discusses as examples of psychological health. This is refreshing as the decades since the release of this book have brought ever-greater rejection of religiosity among many psychologists and social scientists.
In the end, this book has given me a much greater capacity to think about the role that solitude plays in my mental life, and how to use solitude as a God-given tool for promoting mental and emotional health.
One small warning to the Christian reader--Jung's approach to free-association, which is discussed very briefly at the end of the book, is something to be wary of. While clearing the mind can be crucial for making a space there for God (as so many ancient ascetics have realized) it is not God alone whom one might find there. This small caution in mind, I highly recommend _Solitude_ for anyone wanting to think more rigorously about what it means to be alone.
December 23, 2019
This book was so much better than I even expected it to be. Storr has put together a really comprehensive book representing different aspects of not only solitude, but also research on human well-being in general - the capacity to enjoy one's own company, the reasons forced isolation can wreak havoc on us, various theories on attachment and meaning, and dozens of glimpses into the lives of various interesting people throughout history (from psychologists to composers to scientists).
I think I've highlighted more excerpts in this book than any other.
I think I've highlighted more excerpts in this book than any other.
August 11, 2021
"I want to be alone." There are joiners, clubbers, buddies, BFFs, and then there's the rest of us. Anthony Storr recounts the lives of those giants, from Winston Churchill to Ludwig Wittgenstein, who made a virtue out of their innate loneliness and dislike of multitudes by creative thinking away from the madding crowd. Solitude can border on misanthropy (Winston and Ludwig again) and even depression but not, Storr argues, as long as productivity is still possible.
December 22, 2017
First half of the book is interesting and pretty good. But somewhere along the line the author goes off track and forgets his own topic. Second half of the book seems to be about everything else but solitude. It becomes dreadfully blabbering and boring before you reach the end. Almost not worth the read.
December 29, 2022
One of the best psychoanalysis books that I have read. Gave me a lot of insight into the concept of solitude and how it's related to childhood, creativity, self knowledge, and healing.
February 17, 2022
I had no idea this book was written in the late '80s but it did not matter. Sure, the style was different back then for sciency books when academic writing was more in vogue. Today, it seems almost all sciency books are written for mass appeal and do not have the same intellectual force and detail from previous decades. The author's main argument is that interpersonal relationships is not the only way for human beings to find purpose and meaning in life. Unfortunately, since Freud's time the only message trumpeted has been that interpersonal relationships are the one and only thing that makes humans whole and healthy. I have disagreed with that line of thought most of my life but never really had the words, experience, or examples from history to back it up. This book does the job. Of course, the author is not advocating we all become monks, loners, and recluses. But, rather, to think of balance. It is good and healthy to have solitude in your life. Some of us just like it better than most :).
April 21, 2020
A very perceptive book that can walk you through some unreachable inner places you've never knew they were there in your entire life. Some aspects about yourself you might be ignorant or oblivous of or just afraid to think about you will consider them definitely after reading this book, in the most blatant and spooky way. Using a very technically preceptive arsenal of theories from psychoanalists such as Freud, Jung and Winnicott, Storr gives you a relatable explanatory process of how you became the person you are right now (essentially when it comes to interpersonnal relationships). Illustrating each part of the book with biographical aspects of great men and women of genius; how solitude made poets, philosophers, and great composers came to an understanding of their core and helped their creativeness to leave such considerable achievements behind them (regardless of being succesfully sociable).
Personally, I felt attacked at some point while reading some paragraphs (especially Winnicott's transitional objects theory) from the accuracy and the relatability of my past relationships (I was like Hold the fuck up man. PLEASE stop being so accurate! lol)
Such an important book for any psychonaut out there trying to be in harmony of whatever makes us struggle to understand our ourselves in order to make sense of the outer world and eventually have meaningful and healthy interpersonal relationships.
Personally, I felt attacked at some point while reading some paragraphs (especially Winnicott's transitional objects theory) from the accuracy and the relatability of my past relationships (I was like Hold the fuck up man. PLEASE stop being so accurate! lol)
Such an important book for any psychonaut out there trying to be in harmony of whatever makes us struggle to understand our ourselves in order to make sense of the outer world and eventually have meaningful and healthy interpersonal relationships.
November 9, 2021
I really enjoyed this book. This is an academic writer providing the reader with a well-styled argument on the necessity we need as humans to spend time in solitude. Through the lens of creativity, he draws a beautiful painting with each chapter providing a different hue, brush or technique. Although written almost a quarter of a century ago, this thesis could not ring more true today. And this ultimately furthers his point, spend time in solitude pursuing creative endeavors and finding self. Interpersonal relationships are important. But purpose and value can also be found in creative pursuits and work.
Personally, I think the balance of the two over a lifetime is sufficient and necessary to drive growth and fulfillment. In our ever-connected world, our scales are tipped heavily towards the over-sharing of our lives without connectedness. This reader will be spending some time developing solitary pursuits as well as seeking new and aging relationships.
Personally, I think the balance of the two over a lifetime is sufficient and necessary to drive growth and fulfillment. In our ever-connected world, our scales are tipped heavily towards the over-sharing of our lives without connectedness. This reader will be spending some time developing solitary pursuits as well as seeking new and aging relationships.
May 26, 2024
"Man's adaptation to the world is largely governed by the development of the imagination and hence of an inner world of the psyche which is necessarily at variance with the external world. Perfect happiness, the oceanic feeling of complete harmony between inner and outer worlds, is only transiently possible...
The happiest lives are probably those in which neither interpersonal relationships nor impersonal interests are idealized as the only way to salvation. The desire and pursuit of the whole must comprehend both aspects of human nature."
The happiest lives are probably those in which neither interpersonal relationships nor impersonal interests are idealized as the only way to salvation. The desire and pursuit of the whole must comprehend both aspects of human nature."
abandoned
December 13, 2024Did not finish book. Stopped at 36%.
Far more academic than I realized. It's more of a psychoanalytic book than a philosophy book, which is what I had expected. Storr returns constantly to Freud, and goes on many psychoanalytical tangents that are loosely related to the idea of solitude.
Far more academic than I realized. It's more of a psychoanalytic book than a philosophy book, which is what I had expected. Storr returns constantly to Freud, and goes on many psychoanalytical tangents that are loosely related to the idea of solitude.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 225 reviews