New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Tapping the Muse

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

For me, the secret is always the lead—that's journalist jargon for the opening of a story, the one provocative idea that will capture a reader's interest. Once I’ve found that gem, the rest of the narrative seems to flow easily from the gray matter in my head down to my fingers pounding on the keyboard.

Where do such creative sparks come from? How can we conjure them whenever we want? And why can that be so infernally difficult to do, anyway? A complete understanding isn’t here yet, but neuroscientists are already on the trail of where and how creativity arises. They also have some good news for each of us who has ever struggled to ignite those inventive fires. As it turns out, tapping our own muse may be easier than we think, especially if we learn to make a habit of it. For more, turn to “Unleashing Creativity,” by Ulrich Kraft.

Renaissance artist-engineer Leonardo da Vinci, renowned for such paintings as the Mona Lisa, seemed to suffer no lack of novel thoughts. In addition to artistic masterpieces, he designed flying machines, canals, a variety of buildings, and tanks. His successes make it clear, however, that imaginative genius isn’t enough to advance a brainchild. In “Leonardo da Vinci, Neuroscientist,” by Jonathan Pevsner, you’ll see that another critical ingredient is the application of logic and systematic study to a fanciful notion. Leonardo—who lived in an era more comfortable with acceptance of prevailing wisdom than with experimentation—had the then unusual idea of examining and recording human anatomy for himself. As a result, he leaped beyond his contemporaries in developing a truer understanding of the brain.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


We hope you find these and other articles in this issue of Scientific American Mind thought-provoking. And if the articles inspire you to write, please do.

Mariette DiChristina, Steering Group chair, is dean and professor of the practice in journalism at the Boston University College of Communication. She was formerly editor in chief of Scientific American and executive vice president, Magazines, for Springer Nature.

More by Mariette DiChristina
SA Mind Vol 16 Issue 1This article was published with the title “From the Editor” in SA Mind Vol. 16 No. 1 (), p. 3
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0405-3

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe