The Mind of the Maker is a masterly thesis on how human creativity reflects the triune nature of the Christian God, the ultimate Creator. Dorothy Sayers, an acquaintance of C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien and sometime Inkling, was a brilliant scholar and creative artist as well as a Catholic Christian. This work is not a defense of Christian doctrine in the apologetic sense, but is rather an exploration of whether or not Christian theology "works" in practice as observed in the artist.

Sayers' main contention is that human creativity can be broken down into three parts: the Idea, the Energy, and the Power. These three elements correspond with the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. In human creativity, the Idea (the Father) is the core of the work, the creative seed, perfect and whole, before it is expressed. The Energy (the Son) is the manifestation of that Idea, the medium in which the Idea is clothed. The Power (the Spirit) is that which gives life to the work of art, conveying the artistic vision to its audience.

Sayers explores each of these elements as they relate to human art. The chapter on scalene (unequal) trinities was especially fascinating because Sayers diagnoses artistic problems in light of her Trinitarian premise. She points to Blake as a father-centered artist — which means that he was deficient in the son and the spirit. Son-centered artists are very good at expressing the artistic vision, but the vision itself is not unified or well defined. The spirit-centered artist has power to convey, but the Idea is weak and the Energy flawed. The closer an artist comes to equality among his trinity, the better his work will be.

Like many works which attempt to deal with the Person and role of the Holy Spirit, this book falls somewhat short in explaining the Spirit's corner of the triangle. Perhaps it is just my understanding of it that is deficient, but it seems that the roles of the Son and Spirit are rather similar. I did not see enough distinction between what they do. The Father is the Idea, the Son is the manifestation of that Idea... and the Spirit conveys it? Isn't that what the manifestation does? I think I need to reread that part for clarity.

Not that Sayers is difficult to read! She is often quite witty and funny. I loved the part where she talks about a man named Garrick who rewrote Hamlet to make it (what he considered to be) a better play. Sayers' utter abhorrence of his version is evident, and in her dryly British style, rendered very funny indeed. I imagine it would be even more comical if one had read Garrick's play. But from Sayers' description, it doesn't sound as if we've missed much! And there are many other witty little asides that made the reading fun as well as enlightening.

I do think there are some theological issues here. Sayers claims that human nature "runs true to itself" when not sinning, and this would *appear* to deny the doctrine of man's depravity. Perhaps what she means is that human nature runs true to its original design when not sinning. In one place Sayers quotes the Old Testament passage about the sins of the fathers being visited upon their children, and calls it an observation of the Jews (p. 12). It isn't a mere observation of the Jews; in Christian doctrine, it is the Word of God. I didn't like the implicit devaluing there. I was also not a fan of an author she kept quoting, Berdyaev, who seems to have a very unorthodox view of God and man. I don't know how extensively his work influenced Sayers', but the direct quotes of his that are in this book were, more often than not, theologically problematic.

I found that most of the theological issues occur in the early chapters, and once we really got going I found much less to criticize and much more to appreciate. Sayers makes so many keen observations that I started reaching for pen and paper to note the good stuff around page 22. I'll just give a quick précis of the main points that jumped out to me:

• We are continually tempted to confine the mind of the writer to its expression within his creation (p. 50).

• The vital power of an imaginative work demands a diversity within its unity (p. 53).

• God's work in creation is like the misquotation of a perfect poem; the poet is responsible for the poem, but is not guilty of the misquotation. The poem is still his (p. 104–5).

• "It is the business of education to wait upon Pentecost" (p. 112). We can teach artistic theories and skills, but until the artist is infused with the Spirit (as at the Christian Pentecost), the vision will have no power.

• Man is solidly theistic when it comes to books; he never assumes that the combination of paper and ink, of words and ideas in his hands is a mere accident. He always attributes it to a maker (p. 113).

• It is hard to trace the creative act because even in doing so, we are being creative. It is like trying to follow the movement of your own eyes in a mirror; you cannot (p. 115).

• The likeness between human creativity and God's breaks down — or must be adjusted — when we realize that the response to God's creation comes only from His creatures. It is as if a book were written to be read by its own characters (p. 128).

• Sayers is famous for her defense of her characters' free will, especially that of her detective Lord Peter Wimsey. She defends his right to do as he wishes, apart from her authorial authority (p. 131). Characters cannot be manipulated outside of their natures, or the fidelity to the Idea is corrupted and the entire work is weakened. Sayers gives several convincing examples of this, such as when Mr Micawber gets a very uncharacteristic ending in Dickens' David Copperfield. Most people would agree that something does not ring true there; this is an example of an author dominating his characters to the detriment of their free will and, ultimately, to the work as a whole.

• "The artist must not attempt to force response by direct contact with any response of his own; for spirit cannot speak to spirit without intermediary" (p. 155). In this passage Sayers talks about how the artist must always be in control of himself while creating art. I could not agree more. I think half of art is controlling one's expression of it.

• "The glory of the sonhood is manifest in the perfection of the flesh" (p. 168).

• Artistic Gnosticism, like theological Gnosticism, kills the work. All heresies have disastrous consequences, whether they are spiritual or artistic (p. 169).

• Sayers addresses the question of whether or not the commonalities between Christian doctrine regarding the creative God and human art is a coincidence. She also acknowledges the argument that perhaps Christian doctrine has been formulated from observation of human creativity. But if one advances that point, one must acknowledge that there is nothing alien or strange in the concept of the Trinity, as it is validated by human observation and experience (p. 182).

• Life is the art of the common man. In Sayers' more eloquent words, "Also, he [the common man] supposes that the artist exercises complete mastery over his material. But the average man does not feel himself to be a complete master of life (which is his material)" (p. 185).

• I especially appreciated and am mulling over what Sayers says next about the dangers of thinking of life as a series of problems which need solutions. She posits the idea that instead of seeing traumatic/painful things as problems, to which there exists somewhere a solution, a more realistic approach is to take what exists and make something new of it. It must be transformed by creative power. When someone says, "I can make nothing of my problems," he is speaking more truly than he knows. It is a mark of the creative artist to not think in terms of problems and solutions, but rather to take life as material for the act of creating.

I am still pondering the significance of this view, so different from what we imbibe from our culture. Sayers says, "The desire to solve a living problem by a definitive and sterile conclusion is natural enough; it is part of the material will to death" (p. 208).

Overall, I found this to be a very well-written, thought-provoking read that will influence my view of the creative process. It has also given me something to ponder in the idea of life in general as creative rather than mathematically "problem and solution." It is an intelligent and eminently readable book, whether or not you agree with its premise. I will certainly revisit it. ( )

This is one of the most original books I know. How does the experience of the human creator, especially the dramatic writer, help us to understand the Trinity of the Divine Creator? The question is biblically very justified, since God created Man in his likeness.
Dorothy L. Sayers really knew her craftmanship as a storyteller. That's why "The Mind of the Maker" is not one of those lofty theories about human creativity, which are out of touch with the reality of the artist.
Despite her very unorthodox, original approach, her theology, far from being liberal, is in fact steeped in the creeds of historical Christianity. Her understanding of the laws of storytelling are very helpful. Intelligent, funny, unique reading! ( )

Ms. Sayers begins her preface by stating, "This book is not an apology for Christianity, nor is it an expression of personal religious belief." It's hard to know how to absorb such an astonishingly false utterance. The Christian side of me has decided to plunk for naïveté, in the sense that perhaps it is very difficult to diagnose one's own bias that is based on deep-seated conviction. The thesis of the book is that insight into the divine Creator is accessible to human beings through making an analogy with a creative writer. For example, the doctrine of the trinity is described by analogy with the author's "Idea" (the Father -- the eternally existing "something" that the author knows in his/her soul and which is the essence of what the author needs to communicate), the "Energy" (the Son -- the blood, sweat & tears that are expended in crafting a material object [book]) and the "Power" (the Holy Ghost -- which enables the created object [book] to affect the reader). These concepts are based solidly on St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Arthur Eddington, and Huizinga. But that's OK, they're interesting enough to re-consider. There are some funny moments when Sayers decides to illustrate the doings of the Divine in the light of her own experience as the creator of Lord Peter Wimsey: the explanation of miracles by explaining the process of writing Gaudy Night, for example. I say again, there is more than a little of the ingenuous about Dorothy Sayers. ( )

commentary on the nature of art and why so much of what we read, hear, and see falls short

Not an easy read, but a fascinating theology of the trinity. ( )