expression of the inner-self?

i’ve been reading “creative explorations” by David Gauntlett, not that far through, work so gets in the way of this most of the time. it puts some theory around the discussions we’ve been having in my MA thread around creativity though.

feel free to switch off now, because this is just a placeholder for my thoughts (none original i dare say as i’m guessing they will have already been voiced as my research continues) i have on reading DG’s text, so you may find this not very exciting at all, on the other hand there’s a link to the website in my FB page somewhere, if you want to dig a little deeper and find out for yourself.

DG suggests creativity exists on two levels, the first being “… high profile creativity of the kind that wins you a Nobel prize for your unique contribution to human knowledge.” [18], the other is more mundane by comparison but centres on personal feelings of achievement, “… in this broad sense can include everyday ideas, writing, making, management, self-presentation and even creative speech and thought”. [19] by its very nature then DG is suggesting that my own ramblings here on the subject of creativity is in itself an expression of my creativity.

i guess that the way i have internalised creativity is inhibiting my acceptance of this blog as a piece of creative writing. so yes creativity can be this massive ball of fun that touches many people, like becoming a booker bestseller or a multi-platinum recording artist, but it all starts at the grass roots of the individual, but i guess this loops back to what i was saying about selfish creativity in my previous post. DG goes on to talk about Csikszentmihalyi [1997] and his/her traditional view of the creative process and how its too linear it’s a “five step process from preparation to incubation, to insight, evaluation and elaboration” [22] C’s view is that this all takes place in reality but not in that step-step manner.

So how many more times are we going to rename evolution? the last unit looked at learning theory and threw in Kolb’s model of experiential learning, the old “concrete experience”, “observation & reflection”, ”forming abstract concepts”, “ testing in new situations”. now we have move on (supposedly) and are being asked to look at action-inquiry which appears at first glance to be another re-hash of cyclic evolutionary theory, everything around us (organic & person-made) is developed incrementally, whether we “reflect” on it or not. things that work are based on small incremental changes,

people are very reticent about large scale change. consider the poll tax, the dyson, jeez what about twitter, am i the only person that thinks OK so someone has tweaked instant messenger technology, but because it’s the latest “fad”, everyone should use it, i’m criticised for not being an early adopter, in fact i’ve only just joined the ranks of flat screen tv ownership, early adoption is fraught with problems, look at the bunfight between bluray and hddvd, gotta feel sorry for all those people that invested cash in the Microsoft HDDVD player. the point i’m making here is that we are overcomplicating things, simplify it, make it accessible, debunk it stop wrapping it up in shiny new paper and saying its innovation, the emporer isn’t wearing any clothes …

i digress, back to creativity, DG skips around other valid definitions in what creativity is one that sticks for me is his quote from Lumsden (1999) where he suggests that many definitions of creativity “ … carry the unique imprint of their progenitors while suggesting some mild degree of consensus: creativity as a capacity to think up something new that people find significant” [153]. DG calls this the “audience dimension” [25] and seems to be suggesting that this definition is as good as any, but this doesn’t seem to take into account the harshest critical audience, the self, and implies that we should label public displays of our work are creative, whereas those thoughts, concepts ideas that we internalise are not, am i misinterpreting what DG is saying here?

creativity as an expression of self gets more interesting, and for me contradicts DG’s definition when encompassing the audience dimension, he suggests that art has only recently (given that “art” has an apparent 31,000 year history) come to be seen as an expression of self (mid-late 18thC during the advent of the romantic era) and that prior to this point creativity was an attempt by the artist to reproduce nature, i’m not so sure that, for example, the renaissance artists weren’t expressing their inner-self (not withstanding patrons …)

placing this in context with my own interest, transmedia storytelling, we have an interesting dichotomy here, by its very nature it’s not always feasible for an individual to create a complete Transmedia text on his/her own, collaboration is a major aspect of the field, it follows then that we have a creator, expressing a conceptual idea that is a reflection of their inner–self across multiple delivery mechanisms, but aspects of that vision are implemented by another creative with specific domain experience, which will be an expression of his/her inner self. it kind of creates a hierarchy of creativity, especially in the field of gaming where the vision is then passed down to other creatives. for the Transmedia auteur does this represent a thinning of their self-expression, or is it a thinning of creativity for the creators in the sub-domains who are now placed inside a framework in much the same way that artists who have been commissioned in the past by patrons (monarchy, religion etc.), it creates an interesting conundrum …

so does it cease to be creative when, as an artist you are contributing to someone else’s vision, interesting area, need to follow this up

Refs: “Creative Explorations”, David Gauntlett [2007] Lego Serious Play Research Projects, Experiential Learning, “Creativity, Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi [1997], “Evolving creative minds: stories & mechanisms”, Charles Lumsden [1999]

stifled creativity, change and innovation

this last week i’ve tried to put more effort into the forum on my MA, its taken even more of a scarce commodity, time, i still can’t do the short burst thing, i have to think, write, re-think, re-write. The upshot is that i’ve taken to using notepad to blast my thoughts onto pixels before posting (mostly because i’m being thwarted by technology) having been PWNED by vista and worpad last thursday i’m even having to save my work in progress, what a newb …

so i started this thread about creativity, my whole reason for signing up to the MA was all about developing me, i really don’t give a rats arse if i only scrape a pass as long as i can look back and say that doing it has had a positive influence on developing me, i’m lucky to have no paymaster in this so it really is all about me . so many times since starting this journey i’ve wanted to jack it in, but the tenacious partner in my life, the beautiful Gabriela, has just wound me up so much that i can’t, she knows how to push the buttons that make me dig my heels in and scream bollocks i’m not going to let it beat me

creativity – seems so alien to me, what is it, is it about talent, i thought so, to me being creative was all about having a dominant brain function that dictated whether or not you are logical or artistic only the left side (is that the right side?) dominants could be creative and therefore draw, paint, write, create music … that opinion has been challenged though, through the forum. Getting an insight into the creative processes as verbalised by Scott has been insightful

in summary i guess what i’ve tried to understand over the last few days is that creativity is very individual, it’s not all about “talent” as there are basic techniques that can be learned, everyone has the capacity to be creative? but not everyone chooses to exercise their creative identity, being creative seems to me, from discussions, very connected with feelings, about going with the flow, listening to primal instincts. the other misconception i think that was milling around my head was that creativity is for the benefit of others, i’m now thinking that maybe it’s really very selfish and a process that should be selfish, expressing feelings that are inside through some creative pursuit, if that creativity is then shared and appreciated by others then that’s a bonus

what do i do that’s creative? right here and now, i don’t think i do anything, certainly not in my worklife, i’m studying the guitar, but i can’t say that’s me being creative as i’m still learning technique, reinforcing the neural pathways that represent muscle memory and allow me to *sense* where the strings are with my picking hand and make the right chord shapes with my fret hand, i’ve written some stuff, around two chapters of a novel which is currently on hold (a) because when i read it, it doesn’t feel like something anyone else would enjoy reading (b) lack of time, dabbled a bit with photography, the only thing creative i can say with some conviction that i’ve done is the design for a website

expressing myself creatively has so far been limited to body art and appreciation of others work, i tried my hand at sketching some concepts, thankfully my tattoo artist doesn’t laugh too hard when i show her the results of sessions spent with pencil & scribbling away with my tongue stuck out like some mutated, super-sized hairy four year-old (where are the crayons when you need them?), anyway thanks Ana (forever & ever tattoo), she just takes the concepts and creates something beautiful, i’ve got so much respect for tattoo artists in general , drawing something that not only looks right but also follows the lines and contours of the human form on a wobbly canvas that bleeds with every pen stroke is an incredible expression of creativity, if you get it wrong, you can’t just hit undo or reach for an eraser….

i’m delving deeper into the creative process, following through with a little bit of research, i’m also going to abandon all reservations and just do stuff for me, and try not to be stifled constantly by my own barriers that make me feel i should be creating for an audience

what i’m really struggling with at the moment though is creative change, i need to find (and quickly) something in my practice that i can change. for me change is something that i manage on a daily basis, part of my daily routine revolves around controlling change, is this why i find it so difficult to verbalise my thoughts on change, haven’t really looked at change theory to any great extent for the same reason i haven’t plunged headlong into creative theory, i ‘ve wanted to do some independent thinking first, the upshot is that my view of change is that “change is about improvement, in professional life this means changing a process, product or service to enhance its usability/efficacy”, sure there’s some smartass somewhere who’s dedicated a whole book or numerous contributions to academic journals to say exactly the same thing in a more complex way.

another discussion thread has been  innovation, what is innovative? does something have to be novel to be innovative? i don’t think so, innovation to me is a combination of creativity and change, innovation is successful when the idea is introduced to a receptive market (although i like Malcolm Gladwell’s tipping point approach that suggests we can engineer success if we can find the right mix of individuals), but even then for something to be successful there has to be perceived novelty by the marketplace as well as. So does:

creativity + change == innovation

or does it need to be more complex than that, especially in a world where making things more complex seems to me to be the order of the day, does a technological advancement necessarily mean better? is it inherently innovative? what about timing, doesn’t the mood for the consumer have to be right?

Anyways back to change, what to change in my professional practice that allows me to express (more) creativity and doesn’t channel me down a route that makes me feel like i’m trapped in the arena of what I currently do, i guess i need to work hard and fight for my creative freedom, i am Spartacus ….

… i need to get the hang of this

i should blog more, i’ve come through a third of my MA without blogging anything, which is not good.

so my last assignment submission was a total pile of pish, a look at the theory behind professional development and creating an action plan, great; write down a career plan and then get all frustrated when things outside of your control don’t happen, didn’t really warm to that one, so for me things aren’t going to well on the MA. A plan is a snapshot, my life is more fluid than that, my plans are in my head and really difficult to verbalise, they change and change …

scraped a pass on the first assignment, work & time pressures didn’t give me the scope to do the job i wanted to do, the second, well just not motivated by it at all, managed to pull something together but again really disappointing on a personal level.

i need to work more creatively, so far i’m stuck in a cycle of submitting comfortable written papers, the next one has to change, once that is i’ve got a hook on something that will (a) hook me and (b) fit in with the criteria for the third unit ….