Is there such a thing as a creative writing gene? A recent Yale-Moscow State University Study has found a modest heritability to creative writing. An intriguing idea to be sure but the author of the linked article, Austin Allen, argues the study results are way overblown.
The famous literary parents who produce famous literary children are really few and far between. Austin notes that there are many more famous sports and acting families than there are writing families and suggests that an aspiring writer’s best bet might be to have a rich parent. After all, creative use of language is a cognitive skill. Being born to a healthy mother and growing up well-fed, well cared for, and well educated, will probably give you better odds at being a creative writing genius than having a particular gene. Plus, if your parents are rich, you don’t have to worry about getting a job to pay the bills. And what about all the famous authors whose parents were not writers? Besides, if creative writing is heritable then what about families with generations of doctors or lawyers in them? Is some study going to tell us next that there is a doctor gene and a lawyer gene?
It seems doubtful to me that a gene would make one more likely to be a creative writer. The study, after all, did not do gene sequencing but evaluated writing samples from parents and children. That doesn’t say genetic to me at all, that says environmental. Show me the DNA and I will concede, but a study that simply evaluates writing samples and then jumps to creative writing gene, nope, can’t go there. Just another example of researchers trying to ascribe everything to genetics.
And think of all the eminent spouses who were both highly regarded writer who did NOT who followed in their footsteps.
I meant to say “who were both highly regarded writers whose children did NOT follow in their footsteps.
Sorry.
Richard, if only we could edit our comments after pushing that post button!
You are right. And then there are all the highly regarded writers without parent or even grandparent writers.
Stefanie, such an interesting thing you are discussing here. Just yesterday I wrote a blog where I shamelessly blame my parents DNA for my own lack of concentration levels. But I have no scientific data for it, other than the rest of my family suffer from it even worse than I do.
But when it comes to the “writing” thing, and the creative DNA being passed down, I immediately think of father and son, Kingsley Amis and Martin Amis. The neat thing about it is how much Kingsley despised his own son’s writing. [Yet both became very famous!] When Martin’s father read his novel Money, he threw the thing across the room. His opinion of his offspring’s writing was that he was “…breaking the rules, buggering about with the reader, drawing attention to himself.”
I myself am very much a writer, and creative in that area, yet none of my four siblings are.
The only other great writer-offspring I can think of is Mordecai Richler. His daughter Emma is quite an excellent author, as her father definitely was. Is this evidence of natural selection? Survival of the creativist? I don’t know….
Cipriano, the fact that you can only think of two famous parent-child writers is good evidence that creative writing is not genetic. As is the fact that you consider yourself a creative writer when no one else in you family is. That’s a pretty funny story about Kingsley disliking his son’s writing so much!
I think you’re right, creative families are the exception rather than the rule. I wonder if children are put off the creative life sometimes if they have highly creative parents? I mean, by seeing the mental and spiritual struggles it may involve, the need to place the writing (or whatever) first, the frequent lack of financial stability. often emotional stability too… Probably not all creative people suffer these drawbacks but I’m sure quite a few do. And then, if your father or mother were a genius, would you really want to invite comparison with them? I am thinking here of Hartley Coleridge, a poet who never escaped his father’s shadow. The temptation to rebel and become an accountant must be strong.
Environment wins out I think and there is the fact that highly creative families in such different ways. Look at Henry, William and Alice James. The comparative neglect of Alice James whose gender surely restricted her literary creativity severely is about culture and not DNA.
What about writers like Bunyan and Clare who were great writers who seemed to come out of nowhere as writers (DNA wise, no doubt they were inheritors of rich oral culture) and certainly were not from wealthy families? More important would seem their historical contexts. A writer like Dreiser could have only be prominent in his context of the raw and booming society of his America and his take on Darwin and Freud.
Ian, yes, poor Alice! And you are quite right about great writers who seem to come out of nowhere. Really it seems that if there is a creative writing gene it is more likely to be a spontaneous mutation from being bitten by a radioactive spider or something (drinking too much ink?) than something passed on from parents.
Helen, I suspect there are lots of children with creative parents who want the normalcy of routine and a steady job. And a genius parent, you are quite right, how can the child ever live up to it? I can see how accountant might sound like an excellent career choice!
“Just another example of researchers trying to ascribe everything to genetics.” Although I haven’t read the research study, I tend to agree with you that this is the trend, isn’t it? And I thought we’ve come through and gone passed ‘determinism’, and ascribed some of the factors to understand ourselves through factors in upbringing, nurture, education, the social effects. Interesting topic for discussion though.
Arti, sadly I think the pendulum has swung back to determinism thanks to genetics and neuroscience. I think people are starting to feel as though it has reached a point of being ridiculous though, at least I have! It is interesting though to consider what goes in to making a person a good creative writer even if I lean heavily to the environmental, there is lots to think about in terms of what sort of environment.
I think the idea is to have a dreadful childhood in order to become a writer, isn’t it?
I must say there is no creative writing gene in my family, although we do all tend to like staying within four walls, on our own, and engaged in our hobbies, so I guess the conditions were right for it!
Litlove, ha! That seems to help more often than not! I came from a somewhat outdoorsy family and while reading was always encouraged it was only encouraged for so long before I was told to go outside and play. There was also lots of camping in the summers during which I learned the art of reading in a hammock while fending off my sister from dumping me out of it.
And I always know it’s you
Oh and by the way, it’s Litlove here. Lord knows what’s gone wrong with my stupid commenting feature now, but it’s determined to put me down as Sukey. Sigh.
It is interesting to think about where creativity does come from–must be a combination of things, but it seems a bit unfair to think it might all come down to just genetics. Environment must surely play a huge role–think of great acting families–children are just in the right place with the right people and right environment to eventually take on that ‘role’ themselves. In any case, if it is a gene I most certainly didn’t inherit it.
Danielle, I know, right? I mean, what about all the famous writers who come from non-writing families? How are we to account for them? And think of what it would do to all those MFA programs if it were genetic. There would be a lot of writers out of work.
I can understand the concept of actor families and singer families…probably because these people are more accessible to their children? They probably see their parent’s performances and practice and get inspired to try it. Whereas writing is a much more solitary, inward profession. Most kids would only absorb that their mom/dad is in a study working.
I don’t buy the genes aspect one bit.
Nish, it’s pretty questionable, isn’t? And it doesn’t explain why there are more writers who don’t come from “writing families” than there are ones who do.