In view of this earlier exposure to Rank, it is
hard to realize that when a few years ago I turned
my attention to the problem of creativity I did so
without once thinking of the implications of Rankian theory for the work I was about to undertake.
Insofar as I thought about what psychoanalytic theory or the theories of derivative schools of psychoanalysis had to say about creativity, my thoughts
turned to Freud's theory of primary and secondary
process and his concept of sublimation, to Kris's
notions concerning regression in the service of the
ego, and to Kubie's emphasis on the role of preconscious processes in creative thought and action.
I recalled vividly Jung's ideas on the reconciliation
of the opposites: the dichotomies of consciousunconscious, rational-irrational, sensation-intuition,
thinking-feeling, extraversion-introversion, personaanima, the individual versus the collective, and the
archetypal images and the processes of individuation. And, of course, I thought of Maslow's notion
of the self-actualizing person, of Rogers' concept of
the fully functioning individual, and of Allport's
description of becoming. I was aware of the influence of all these ideas on my own thought as I
planned and undertook my research on creativity.
I even vaguely recalled Adler's concept of a creative instinct, but found not much help in that. But
not once did I consciously think of Rank's theories