Mindstructures » Creativity

Serious about Creativity

Annemieke — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 11:15:07 +0000

Recently I came across a very interesting woman, Paula Scher.

I saw a Tedtalk from a few years ago where she talked about design, play and being serious.

In that talk she differentiates between being solemn and being serious.

Differentiating between those words is not natural for me, because I have a general feeling of the word serious but not for the word solemn. And even looking it up in the dictionary did not make me understand the real difference.

But I very much understand her differentiation in concepts (or at least I think I do) and I very much understand her idea of playing. In not having that phase made cut and dry and carved in stone. With no playful trial and error anymore. Of using accepted forms. Of playing by the rules.

As opposed to being in the moment and use what is available. Of seeing patterns. Connecting dots. Just playing, taking chances and just being unaware of any rules because it is all new and very exciting. But still taking it very serious.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Some excerpts:

Being solemn is easy. Being serious is hard. Children almost always begin by being serious, which is what makes them so entertaining when compared with adults as a class. Adults, on the whole, are solemn.

That’s because it is hard for most people to recognize seriousness, which is rare, but more comfortable to endorse solemnity, which is commonplace.

Solemn design is often important and very effective design. Solemn design is also socially correct, and is accepted by appropriate audiences. It’s what right-thinking designers and all the clients are striving for. Serious design, serious play, is something else. For one thing, it often happens spontaneously, intuitively, accidentally or incidentally. It can be achieved out of innocence, or arrogance, or out of selfishness, sometimes out of carelessness. But mostly, it’s achieved through all those kind of crazy parts of human behavior that don’t really make any sense.

Serious design is imperfect. It’s filled with the kind of craft laws that come from something being the first of its kind. Serious design is also — often — quite unsuccessful from the solemn point of view. That’s because the art of serious play is about invention, change, rebellion — not perfection. Perfection happens during solemn play.

But something happened to it, and what happened to it was, it became very popular. And that is a kiss of death for something serious because it makes it solemn.

The institutions are solemn, and so is the design. They’re better crafted than the Public Theater was, and they spend more money on them, but I think that that moment comes and goes. The best way to accomplish serious design — which I think we all have the opportunity to do — is to be totally and completely unqualified for the job.

I think what she said was very much in line with what David Bohm, Friedrich Schiller and Ken Robinson said, only they used different words to describe the concepts.

Ken Robinson talks about an aesthetic experience in which your senses are operating at their peak, when you are present in the current moment, when you are resonating with the excitement of this thing that you are experiencing, when you are fully alive.

David Bohm talks about creativity, which he thinks is essential for the whole of life. If you get stuck in a mechanical, repetitious order, then it will degenerate. Civilizations got stuck in a certain repetition and then the creative energy gradually dies away. They vanish, not only because of external pressure, but because they internally decay.

And Friedrich Von Schiller talks about the instinct of play which lets the two opposing instincts (the sensuous and the formal instinct) act together. Even though they are each others total opposite, it is possible to play with them, let them be there at the same time. As long as they are playing together, there has to be no conclusion on what is true and what is false. During the play, the mind can be physical and moral at the same time. The play takes the dynamics out of feeling and passion. And it takes the moral out of reason. So feeling can be in harmony with rational ideas.

Although they use different words, an aesthetic experience (Robinson), creativity (Bohm) and the instinct of play (Schiller), they all seem to mean the same thing: seeing patterns that emerge from an underlying reality, having a feeling of concepts that can not be fully described with existing words.

My feeling is that what Paula Scher describes is exactly that. She saw new patterns, just by playing and not being bothered with knowledge and rules. And she did something with what she saw, she made it manifest.

Understanding the Meaning of Concepts

Annemieke — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 15:00:56 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

We bring up our children with too much conceptual abstractions, that they have to memorize. They have to learn concepts without realizing the underlying reality. Learn concepts without understanding the meaning. They have to learn what others think is important.

And slowly along the way, they lose the ability to think creative.

It is like a box that is filled with bottles of water, thinking it is full, and all the water is separate. Without realizing that pouring the water out would leave plenty of room for more, while all the water can mix.

From the post The Concept of Water / Music from Pressure Points by Camel / Image Source / More Videos

Creativity to Prevent External Pressure and Internal Decay

Annemieke — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 11:24:19 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

David Bohm on Creativity:

Creativity is essential, not only for science but for the whole of life.

If you get stuck in a mechanical, repetitious order, then it will degenerate.

One of the problems is, that every civilization got stuck in a certain repetition.

The creative energy gradually died away and that is why the civilization dies.

Many civilizations vanish, not only because of external pressure, but because they internally decay.

David Bohm on Creativity from Art, Science and Spirituality / Music from Beethoven’s 7th symphony / Image Source / More Videos / More David Bohm Posts

Creating Something New Together

Annemieke — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 14:47:51 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

David Bohm on Dialogue:

If the meaning of communication is to convey information or knowledge from one person to another, then the essence of communication is ‘to make something common’.

Dialogue as a special kind of communication, is ‘to make something IN common’. Or creating something new together.

But in most cases there is a HUGE problem in the exchange of meaning between people. Meanings are similar but not identical. Which can be a real problem if people get to focus on just their own meaning.

But if done right, it can also lead to something new.

Observing the differences you might see something new that is relevant to both views. Go back and forth with the continual emergence of new content that is common to both participants.

Which needs an open mind. Each has to be interested primarily in truth and coherence, and be ready to drop old ideas and intentions.

From the post Dialogue as Creating something New Together / David Bohm on Communication and Dialogue / Music by Camel from Lawrence / Photo by Tristan Savatier Loupiote.com used by permission / More videos from blogposts / More David Bohm Posts

Creativity Grows on Insight and Understanding

Annemieke — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 09:09:11 +0000

Click here to view the embedded video.

Creativity has an inherent order that grows on insight and understanding.

It has to develop according to that.

It might need rules and boundaries to keep growing in a certain direction. It might need ideas from others to grow even further … but … only after a certain amount of independent growth.

Without interference from others. Without criticism. Without imposed rules. Even, and maybe most of all, without praise and rewards. Which might get addicting and more important than creative growth.

If the fuel comes from outside instead of the inside, it holds the risk that, one day, the fuel gets cut off.

From the post The Danger of Praise and Reward as Fuel for Creativity / Based on the thoughts of David Bohm / Music by Camel from The Snow Goose / More videos from blogposts

Creativity beyond Praise and Criticism

Annemieke — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 20:59:59 +0000

Still reading the letters on aesthetic education, I tried to understand the beginning of part two.

In that part, Schiller paints a picture of how the individual is blinded by the age in which he lives, the society in which he is born.

But also about the struggle of that society itself. That has this high ideal of a perfect humanity, but despite all that, still struggles with evil.

I had to read that part a few times before I got an idea of what Schiller was talking about.

The strange thing is that, although I have difficulty understanding what he says exactly, I get the feeling that Schiller says something important. And I also have the feeling that what he wrote 200 years ago, still applies very much in our time.

Creativity and criticism

Especially the following was very interesting.

Nothing is more common than to see science and art bend before the spirit of the age, and creative taste receive its law from critical taste.

What Schiller means, I guess, is that the people, living in a certain place and time, tend to think within a certain set of values and act upon them as if they are universal. And they use their critical skills to judge ‘everything’.

Which is not wrong in itself. It is a set of values that is a sum of the whole society, and living by its rules is more or less part of the game. The game of a society that keeps a certain balance between individual desire and the common good.

But that does not mean those values are universal. That they apply everywhere. And in all times. That just means they are good in a certain context. The context of that specific society. In that specific time in history.

Art, as Schiller says, is also criticized in the spirit of that age. But one of the characteristics of art is, that it is a search for new patterns that fit in a greater whole, which goes beyond the context of that specific society in that specific time.

Creativity and praise

The following quote is something I saw mentioned several times when reading about Schiller. The first few times I did not quite get it, I kind of read over it because it is very subtle.

Live with your age, but be not its creation; labour for your contemporaries, but do for them what they need, and not what they praise.

Be not the creation of your age!

I think this is essential. We have to use the information from outside, but our actions must be based upon that information combined with the information that comes from within. Not disturbed by the praise of others.

It is in the same line as what David Bohm says about creativity. That praise prevents creativity, because of the danger that praise might become more important for the individual than being creative.

Once we are addicted to the opinion and influence of the outside world and get rewarded by it, it becomes more and more difficult to listen to our inner voice, or as Schiller calls it, use the spirit of free inquiry.

But at the same time it is also important to ´live with our age´. To use the result of that free inquiry to serve that same society. To do what needs to be done, using our own unique qualities.

The Art of Language

Annemieke — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 19:29:34 +0000

I love it when suddenly things start to make sense, when thoughts come together.

I was again reading the book On Creativity, because I was searching for the definition of some concepts.

Those of creativity, aesthetics and art.

All my previous posts about aesthetics point to the importance of those concepts as an essential step between instinctive and moral human behavior.

But before I could understand it better, I wanted to have some sort of definition. A definition as general as possible. And who would be better to talk about general definitions that take in account the whole, than David Bohm.

In the chapter ‘The art of perceiving movement’ Bohm talks about the split in our language between our emotional and aesthetic perception on the one hand, and our rational and functional perception on the other.

A very good case in point is provided by considering the word art. The original meaning of this word is ‘to fit’. This meaning survives in articulate, article, artisan, artifact and so on. Of course, in modern times the word art has come to mean mainly ‘to fit, in an aesthetic and emotional sense’. However, the other words listed above show that art can also call attention to fitting in a functional sense.

The fact that we are hardly aware of the syllable art in words such as articulate or artifact is an indication of an implicit but very deeply penetrating fragmentation in our thought between the aesthetic, emotional aspects of life and its practical functioning aspects. This fragmentation tends to operate also in the meaning of the word beauty, which is ‘to fit in every sense’. Nevertheless, this word also tends mainly to emphasize aesthetic and emotional fitting.

It can be seen that, in a very profound sense, all these activities are concerned with fitting, i.e. with art. All that man does is a kind of art, and this implies skill in doing things, as well as perception of how things fit or do not fit. This is indeed self-evident for the visual or musical artist as well as for the artisan. It is true also for the scientist and the mathematician, but less evident.

It is clear, then, that reasoning is to be regarded as an art. And thus, in a deep sense, the artist, the scientist, and the mathematician, are concerned with art in its most general significance, that is, with fitting.

With that in mind I found a post about language with a video of Stephen Fry, about the ‘correct’ use of language. And the following caught my attention:

But that is an issue of fitness, of suitability. It has nothing to do with correctness. There is no right language or wrong language any more than there are wrong clothes. Context, convention and circumstance are all.

The video is mainly about the critical approach to language. How being too critical and too focused on a correct use, can prevent us from being creative with it.

But at the same time it brings to attention the importance of context. How the right use of language depends on the circumstances.

It has to fit, we have to find the right balance. A balancing act that requires skills to recognize the resonance.

How to Confront Inner Conflict Instead of Ignoring it

Annemieke — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 22:55:07 +0000

Sometimes David Bohm says so much with one sentence, that I feel the need to take it a bit apart.

It is a line in the first chapter of the book On Creativity.

He describes how the mind tries to avoid contradictions. It is often too confusing or painful to stay with a certain problem, so the mind looks for a way out.

Either it continues to dart from one thing to another, or it reacts with violent excitement that limits all attention to some triviality, or it becomes dead, dull, or anesthetized, or it projects fantasies that cover up all the contradictions, or it does something else that makes one momentarily unaware of the painful state of conflict in which the mind is.

In this one sentence, Bohm gives 4 examples of how we are inclined to deal with this inner conflict. So if we want to avoid conflict we might do one of the following.

1. Go from one thing to another.
We avoid problems. As soon as a problem arises, we go do (or think about) something else.

2. Limit all attention to some triviality.
We get excited about some minor thing. Or someone did us wrong, so we just keep repeating that and blow it to huge proportions.

3. Get dull or anesthetized.
We try not to feel. We use medication, drugs or alcohol to suppress our feelings and pain.

4. Cover up all contradictions.
We watch tv, read fairytales, go to parties and play cheerful music. We only surround ourselves with happy people.

Or search for something else that takes our mind away from that painful state of conflict. That way we will end up with this ‘self-sustaining confusion’. This confusion slowly takes over and eventually the whole mind degenerates.

A better solution

So avoidance is not the real solution. But if that is not the solution, what is? Well, if avoidance is not the answer, it must be confrontation.

And it is. But it is very subtle.

We need to give patient, sustained attention to the activity of confusion, rather than attempting to promote creativity directly. Giving simple attention – a finer, faster process than confusion – is itself the primary creative act.

According to Bohm, it is the only way to get out of the problems we are in as a human race. The only way to get out, is for the individual to go inside and confront their own contradictions.

To make room for creativity. Because we need that creativity to respond to the ever changing challenges around us.

When the Mind is Trying to Escape the Awareness of Conflict

Annemieke — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 08:14:18 +0000

This post is about another block to creativity, a block that prevents us from expressing the creativity that is present in each of us.

Self-sustaining confusion of the mind.

This not the usual confusion, the confusion we experience if we just don’t understand something from outside. Bohm, in On Creativity, says that this self-sustaining confusion is something different.

Self-sustaining confusion occurs when the mind is trying to escape the awareness of conflict. In which one’s deep intention is really to avoid perceiving the fact, rather than to sort it out and make it clear.

Wow, this is huge. And I think very true. That what can also be called ignorance. Or avoidance. The time before the demanding need to integrate the shadow. When we can get away with acting like everything is okay.

Bohm points out that this process creates an order on its own: a reflexive state of dullness in which the natural agility of the mind is replaced with torpor on the one hand, mechanical and meaningless fantasies on the other.

Very interesting picture here. And one that I think is very common. The picture I get is a huge gap between emotions and intellect. Between conscious and unconscious. Between body and mind. There is no interaction, no healthy feedback mechanism that provides the necessary information to keep the organism (in this case the human individual) healthy.

Unfortunately this has come to be considered a normal state of mind, and is therefore endemic in our culture.

I think indeed most of us will see this all around. The solution that Bohm gives here is also very interesting.

Consequently, we need to give patient, sustained attention to the activity of confusion, rather than attempting to promote creativity directly. Giving simple attention is itself the primary creative act.

Here again gets clear that Bohm sees creativity as a process. A process that is very unique and personal. An integration of inner conflict, of views that are very different and might even be opposed.

From such attention, originality and creativity begin to emerge, not as something that is the result of an effort to achieve a planned and formulated goal, but rather, as the by-product of a mind that is coming to a more nearly normal order of operation.

So there is nothing special about creativity. It is not just for artists. It is something that natural arises in a healthy human being. In every human being that is not paralysed by confusion.

Recognizing Patterns from an Underlying Reality

Annemieke — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 13:19:28 +0000

Maybe I can better change the subtitle of this blog.

Since reading the book Science, Order and Creativity, creativity seems to be the main focus of my blog.

But while thinking about that, I realized it always was the main focus of my blog. Of all the blogging I did so far.

My focus was mainly human development. And the essence of that development as I see it, is the development of the individual. The uniqueness of each individual. The unique way of the individual to deal with the world. Combining personal experience with information from outside and actually do something with it.

Which is just another way of describing creativity.

In a comment on my previous post, I was reminded of another book of David Bohm about creativity. I searched online and found a foreword on Google books. Which was so very interesting that I immediately ordered the book.

In that foreword (which I have to read with more patience soon) was the following which I think is extremely interesting. It is about what lays beneath the aesthetics of creativity:

This theme (that at its inner core, scientific inquiry is richly aesthetic) is a recurrent one throughout On Creativity. But it is the impulse underlying this aesthetic – the impulse to learn – that is the focus of this first chapter. The learning which Bohm alludes to here is not the rote learning of established facts; it is learning about something truly new. Such ‘newness’ is not, for example, acquiring information about a culture one had not previously studied, which would most likely be a simple additive process. The learning implied here is instead that of perceiving new orders of relationship, and hinges on a sensitivity to difference and similarity.

I really think this is essential in understanding the importance of creativity. Why it is so very important to recognise this ability to be creative, to provide free space for it. To be aware of the blocks we build that prevent creativity. And the importance of developing our creativity.

It is about perceiving new orders of relationships. It is about a growing sensitivity to differences and similarities. It is about recognizing patterns. Patterns that emerge from the underlying reality. Patterns that give aesthetic satisfaction if they are recognized.

And doing that is the task of the individual. The individual that has to ‘see’ new patterns and make them manifest.

How Creative Energy becomes Destructive

Annemieke — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 08:49:56 +0000

From the moment I started reading this chapter in the book Science, Order and Creativity, I knew it would be on my mind for a long time.

Looking at the posts now, I see that I read the book in June. And still, everything I do, read and hear is in the light of that chapter.

Most of the chapters in that book were, although very interesting, way over my head. But somehow I just kept reading. And when I finally came to the chapter about creativity, I was really glad I did.

In several posts, I already looked at the aspects of that chapter that were the most remarkable.

Remarkable in the sense that creativity seems to be a basic need of humans, but because of several reasons, often does not get the change to develop in a healthy way. The main reason was the need for approval that blocks creativity.

But the book is even more shocking. It says that if this basic need of creativity is suppressed, it becomes destructive.

What is even of greater danger to the child, in such an approach, is that it eventually brings about violence of various kinds. For creativity is a prime need of a human being and its denial brings about a pervasive state of dissatisfaction and boredom. This leads to intense frustration that is conductive to a search for exciting ‘outlets’, which can readily involve a degree of force that is destructive. This sort of frustration is indeed a major cause of violence in that the senses, intellect and emotions of the child gradually become deadened and the child loses the capacity for free movement of awareness, attention, and thought. In effect, the destructive energy that has been aroused in the mind has been turned against the whole creative potential itself.

Reading this I get all kind of ideas how that might work with different types of people. For those of us who are more outgoing, it might be easy to see how this destruction gets manifest in the outside world. But for others I can imagine this destructive energy to be going inside.

I think this is really serious. So based on that book, I wonder if the following conclusions would be too extreme.

Everyone is creative.
Everyone also wants to be accepted.
To be accepted, it is better to do what others expect from us.
As a result we never get to develop our creativity.
So this creative energy stays undeveloped, but therefore not less powerful.
It becomes destructive, going outside resulting in violent behavior, or going inside resulting in selfdestruction.

That would mean that creativity (in a broad as possible way) is so much more important than we all tend to think.

Creativity and the Need for Free Space

Annemieke — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 07:01:38 +0000

Money prevents creativity.

This was one of the conclusions in the previous post.

Another post was about something else that prevents creativity: the need for approval.

Both conclusions were based on sound research. Of course it is all a bit more complex than that, but still the conclusions were very interesting.

I think this is especially interesting, because at first it seems counter intuitive. Almost everyone would say that encouragement in the form of money or praise, motivates people. But obviously that does not count for being creative.

From the book in this post:

To do something for a reward, the whole order of the activity, and the energy required for it, are determined by arbitrary requirements that are extraneous to the creative activity itself. This activity then turns into something mechanical and repetitious, or else it mechanically seeks change for its own sake. The state of intense passion and vibrant tension that goes with creative perception then dies away. The whole thing becomes boring and uninteresting, so that the kind of energy needed for creative perception and action is lacking. As a result, even greater rewards, or punishments, are needed to keep the activity going.

From the video in this post:

As long as the tasks involved just mechanical skill, bonuses work as they expected, the higher the pay the better the performance. Once the task called for even rudimentary cognitive skill, a larger reward led to poorer performance. For simple, straight forward tasks, the kind of incentives of, if you do this then you get that, they are great. Tasks that are algorithmic, a set of rules that you just follow along and get a right answer, if then, rewards, carrots and sticks, outstanding. But when a task gets more complicated, when it requires some conceptual, creative thinking, those kind of motivaters don’t work.

Does that mean that people should not be motivated to be creative?

I still think that people might need an encouragement to be creative (those who forgot we are already creative by nature) but at the same time, that is exactly where our motivation should stop.

We, not being the other person, can never know HOW they should be creative. We can never know what their interest is. What their talents are. Where their passion lies. What the other is so obsessed about, that he wants to practice it over and over and over again.

So in order to be really creative, the only thing someone needs is free space. The rest has to come from within, not from outside in the form of rewards. Not in the form of rewards like money and not in the form of rewards like approval or praise.

Autonomy, Mastery and Purpose

Annemieke — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:12:17 +0000

This weekend I saw some very interesting videos on Youtube.

One of those videos Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us, was so interesting that I wanted to take a closer look.

So I uploaded the video below and took notes of the conclusions. Which were surprising, but at the same time, made very much sense.

What motivates us?

It is a video about our motivations. Why we do things and what makes us good at something.

The general view has always been that money and other forms of reward make us perform better. And in many cases that is indeed the case. Give more money and people perform better.

But this only counts for certain, straight forward, tasks. When a task gets more complicated, when it requires some conceptual, creative thinking, those kind of motivaters don’t work!

So being creative needs something else then rewards from outside.

This was also the conclusion in the book Science, Order and Creativity. In that book it became clear that being creative requires a very different approach to human development. A more individual approach.

So for creativity, money is not the motivator. But according to the video, 3 other things are: autonomy, mastery and purpose.

Autonomy

It all starts with autonomy. More or less the same as in the book on creativity, the most important first step is an individual approach. The individual has to think and act purely from their own inner self.

Autonomy is our desire to be self directed. To direct our own lives. Now in may ways traditional notion of management run a foul of this. Management is great if you want compliance. But if you want engagement, what we want in the work force today is to do more complicated and sophisticated things, self direction is better.

If you want people to do something interesting, it is better to get out of their way.

Mastery

The next step is developing skills, becoming a master.

Mastery is the urge to get better at stuff. We like to get better at stuff. This is why people play musical instruments at the weekend. You have all these people that act in ways that are actually seen irrationally economically. They play musical instruments at weekends, why? It is not making them any money, why are they doing it? Because it is fun, because you get better at it and that is satisfying.

The video gives the example of Wikipedia. Why many technically sophisticated, highly skilled people, participate in that. Which is strange economical behavior, because they do not get paid for it. But challenge and mastery are the drive here.

Purpose

The next step brings the individual back into the whole society. Where their creative input is valuable for the greater good.

What you see more and more is the rise of what you might call the purpose motor. More and more organizations want to have some kind of transcendent purpose. Partly because it makes coming to work better, partly because that is the way they get better talent.

The video makes a differentiation between profit and purpose and both are equally important.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The paradox of reward

One of the most interesting things about the video, is the paradox of reward. Give more money, to make people work harder and better. Which works perfect if you want some sort of slaves, that do exactly what you want them to do.

But it does not work, it even works counterproductive, if you value their creative input.

What is the Self?

Annemieke — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:09:37 +0000

This week I found another interview with David Bohm.

Somewhere in that interview he talks about why we need the space to develop creativity.

He wrote about that in the book Science, Order and Creativity and I already have several posts about one chapter of that book.

The chapter states that creativity is very important, but it does not always get the chance to come into existence. And that it needs independent growth, which means the opportunity for free play in the early stages of development.

It becomes clear that it is often difficult for people to be creative. And even more difficult to develop their creativity.

And personally I am fascinated by that. Why is that so very hard? I talked about that in several posts already and think that it very much has to do with an essential difference between two types of people.

In the post Inner Drive or Navigation from Outside, I wrote about those who have this overwhelming inner drive, and those who don’t. Or maybe they do, but they manage to suppress it.

That post expressed very much my personal feeling about how that works with people, but in the interview with David Bohm, it became clear to me that he also thinks there is this essential difference between two types of Self.

There are two places in the interview where he elaborates on that. He talks about the difference between the ‘repetitive reflex system’ versus ‘free play’. And the talks about the difference between ‘me’ versus ‘I’.

I think it all has very much to do with the transition from a pre-individual state into becoming an independent and authentic individual, a subject that is coming back on this blog every time because I am fascinated by it. A certain place on the model that I use on this blog.

It is a transition that I think is essential for every human being, but is at the same time a very complicated and, for some, very difficult process.

In my following post I want to quote what Bohm has to say about that and give my own understanding of what he says.

The Development of Creativity

Annemieke — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 07:37:25 +0000

I recently had a guestpost on the blog Thoughtwrestling about the place of creativity in human development as a whole.

In the post I also mentioned how I see the development of creativity itself.

I wrote another post on that before, where I used my model of development to describe creativity in different forms (like dancing, painting, drama, architecture, music, etc) while in my guestpost I used the model to describe the creative development in a more abstract way.

I based this abstract development mainly on a chapter of the book Science, Order and Creativity. In that chapter it became clear to me that certain aspects of creativity are important in a certain follow up.

Concerning your own creativity, it is important to interact with others (3), to have a structure (10), to be critical (6), to ask for feedback (7), to sustain focus (2) and so on. But only in a certain follow up.

Being to critical to early on might easily kill creativity. Being too focused might be focus on something that is not relevant. Asking for feedback should be done after making a good presentation. Interacting with and learning from others, as interesting as it is, might make you change your mind too easy.

So in this post I want to expand a bit on each step in the process. There is a development on three levels: pre-individual (primordial), individual and post-individual (universal), with each the follow up from energy (spirit) to manifestation (body) to interaction with others (mind) to unconscious adjustment (soul).

(The words spirit, body, mind and soul are used here in a certain context and might differ from how others use it.)

The cycle can be used for all development, but here it is specifically used for the development of creativity.

PRE-INDIVIDUAL

1. There has to be space for free play.
This is an essential starting point. Maybe not a problem for some, because they take that space no matter what. But for others it might be a difficult thing to do. Just try things out, just start something and play around with it.

2. It has to be sustained, being focused and concentrated.
There is the danger of going from one to another all the time. Which is no problem in itself, but afterwards there might be a place and time to stay with something that is fascinating enough to explore further. Focus on a certain aspect, let it come into existence. Mix colors, experiment with materials, just stay with one work, without interference.

3. Learning from others, discussions and interaction.
After a certain period of concentration and focus, it is great to see what others are doing. Some might never be interested in that, but others are really curious how other people solve certain problems. Or reading books about the subject of interest. Just learning and interacting with others. Which can be very productive and interesting. But has the danger of distraction and going from one to another without much substance.

4. Using personal emotions and experiences.
In this phase personal experiences and emotions mark a certain path to go. What happens to a person, gives a certain direction to his interest and desire to explore. It is still a phase where things ‘happen’ as opposed to the next phase where the person is using his ‘free will’.

INDIVIDUAL

5. Taking a unique perspective
This is the centre of creativity. Here every personal experience comes together with every information from outside. And the individual has to filter that information and make it into a unique perspective. It is not yet materialized (that comes in the following phase) but here is the source of inner knowing that gives a confidence and perspective, a certain look on things that can not be reached any other way.

6. Develop skills, analyzing, functional and productive.
This is the phase of becoming really good at something. If the previous phases are not developed good enough, it can also be the phase of becoming really good at something that someone else thinks is important. But if it is well developed, you can make your own creative insights manifest and develop them further. Practice skills, doing things over and over again, make it more functional and producing a much as possible.

7. Presentation, feedback and working together.
Here it is time to show your work to others. Instead of producing more or improve skills, now is the time to make it also attractive. Make it look as good as possible. Search for reflection. Or looking for someone who wants to cooperate, who complements your own shortcomings.

8. Defining value and defending against attacks.
This might be the hardest part. It is the area of the psyche, of the shadow. Seeing others as enemies, as opponents. Others who might attack you. You have to defend it, but at the same time learn to see why there are attacks.

POST-INDIVIDUAL

9. See where it fits in society and start promoting.
This is the place to see the greater whole again. Seeing beyond the individual ‘I’. Look at things from a more philosophical and abstract level. Going beyond borders, maybe even literary going to travel, meet other cultures. And at the same time finding a market for your creative products.

10. Being constructive, seeking borders and becoming an authority.
Defining your own rules. Building a business around your own creative ideas. Setting up borders, constructions to build upon further. Being clear in what you can and cannot do. Being an example for others, an authority in your own field of expertise.

11. Dialogue and seeing the essence of other creative individuals.
The end result here might be something like dialogue, but it also might be something like revolution or breaking rules. It is the phase where the individual has to realize there are other individual experiences and views. There is no ultimate truth that is the same in all circumstances. And others have views that might be relevant although they might seem very challenging at first.

12. Sacrifice, selfless sharing with others.
In the end it is important to share without expecting anything in return. But this should not be to soon. Giving away to soon might make you expect something in return, even if it is unconscious. And that is even more dangerous than just expect something in return, while being aware of it. Which in its own right is just as important, but more belonging to another phase.

The Danger of Praise and Reward as Fuel for Creativity

Annemieke — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 08:14:49 +0000

This post is going to be centred around several sentences.

A few lines from the book Science, Order and Creativity.

The moment I read those lines, I really felt this was true. By analyzing it here in this post, I hope to emphasise the very important distinctions that I think are essential.

I will let the text intact and just pull it a bit apart and give it headlines. That way I hope the subtle differences become more clear.

No interference

“Thus creativity appears to be incompatible with external and internal rewards or punishments. The reason is clear. In order to do something for a reward, the whole order of the activity, and the energy required for it, are determined by arbitrary requirements that are extraneous to the creative activity itself.”

Passion needs to come from inside

“This activity then turns into something mechanical and repetitious, or else it mechanically seeks change for its own sake. The state of intense passion and vibrant tension that goes with creative perception then dies away.”

Danger of dependence from outside

“The whole thing becomes boring and uninteresting, so that the kind of energy needed for creative perception and action is lacking. As a result, even greater rewards, or punishments, are needed to keep the activity going.”

Adapting outside structures without understanding

“Basically, the setting of goals and patterns of behavior, which are imposed mechanically or externally, and without understanding, produces a rigid structure in consciousness that blocks the free play of thought and the free movement of awareness and attention that are necessary for creativity to act.”

Certain rules are important

“But this does not mean that rules and external orders are incompatible with creativity, or that a truly creative person must live in a arbitrary fashion.”

Some examples

“To write a sonnet or a fugue, to compose an abstract painting, or to discover some new theorem in mathematics requires that creativity should operate within the context of a particular artistic or mathematical form.”

“Cezanne’s particular creativity in art, for example, was directed toward the discovery of new forms and orders of composition within the context of a particular form of freedom that thad been previously established by the Impressionists.”

“Some of Bach’s greatest works are similarly created within the confines of strict counterpoint.”

Insight and understanding

“To live in a creative way requires extreme and sensitive perception of the orders and structures of relationship to individuals, society, and nature. In such cases, creativity may flower.”

No growth on external goals

“It is only when creativity is made subservient to external goals, which are implied by the seeking of rewards, that the whole activity begins to wither and denegrate.”

Fuel has to come from INDIVIDUAL insight and understanding

So creativity has an inherent order. That inherent order grows on insight and understanding. It has to develop and grow according to that. During that development it might need certain rules and boundaries to keep growing in a certain direction. It might need ideas of others to grow even further….

BUT

…all that only after a certain independent growth on its own. Without interference from others. Without criticism. Without punishment. Without imposed rules.

Even, and maybe even most of all, without praise and rewards.

Because praise might be the biggest trap. Praise and rewards from others might be so addicting, that it becomes more important than creative growth. And as a result the fuel comes from outside instead of from the inside. With the risk that, one day, the fuel gets cut off.

Inner Drive or Navigation from Outside

Annemieke — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 08:18:37 +0000

In this post I want to see how the conclusions from the previous post fit the model I use on this blog.

There are many ways to look at it, but for now I want to focus on the main point of that post: the need for approval.

As children we are sensitive to authority. We have to learn what is right and what is wrong. There is a constant battle in the child between a desire to do something and the consequences those actions have. Do something wrong and get punished, do something right and get praised.

Now, very generally speaking, you can see two types of children.

The first type is the child that has a strong focus on what they want and constantly search for ways to do it, even against all odds. They just do what they want to do. They always look for ways to get away with that. They will be punished often, but along the way find more and better ways to still do what they want.

The other type is the good kid. The child that more likes to be praised than it wants to do things its own way. The child that needs approval. That needs assurance and encouragement. That wants to be liked. They go long ways to please others and live by the praise they get from that.

Of course that is a very broad generalization. And most children are a combination of that. They all have moments that they just do what they want to do. And they all have moments that they need approval.

Inner drive or navigation from outside

But still, in essence I think there is this difference. Not only with children, but also with adults.

There are those that first and foremost live from their own inner power.

And those that are fueled by others.

Now this post is not about that first group. As much as there is to say about that group, in this post I want to focus on the second group of children. Or more general, the second group of people.

This is the group from the previous post that has so much more difficulty to use their creativity. The group that is very sensitive to what others say. That thinks people with authority know everything better than they do. Who will never break a rule. Who think of others first. Who want to be liked. Who only do what they are supposed to do.

In other words, who do not trust their own inner drive. But let other people guide them.

Underdeveloped Individuality

If that should be translated to the model of development, that would mean that some part of that cycle is not enough developed. Some part that is called the part of individuality.

And if that part is not enough developed, that means that the cycle goes from pre-indivudual straight to post-individual. With the result that values (9) and authority (10) come from the outside world.

Now this is not so much a problem for children. In many cases it is a good thing that values and authority come from the outside, because they are not yet in a position to make decisions on their own judgement.

And even for adults it might be so much easier if others provide us the values and play the authority. And it might go well for some time.

Creative Selfexpression

But all the time this selfish yet very creative energy (5) is still there. Even if it is suppressed or ignored. But as it is not developed, it comes around in different forms. Destructive or projected on others.

Or as a need for praise and attention.

But instead of just being an unconscious need, it has to be accepted. It has to be developed. It has to become strong. And the only way to achieve that, is to acknowledge it. And let it work on its own.

It is the transformation that naturally belongs to puberty.

Of course many have that desire for a strong selfexpresssion much earlier. And some much later. And some might even never discover it.

But I see it as the essence of human development. Our own creative selfexpression. Using our own inner drive, instead of depending on navigation from outside.

How Creativity is Blocked by the Need for Approval

Annemieke — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:48:13 +0000

Creativity is a natural potential energy in humans, which becomes destructive if it is blocked.

This is a conclusion of a chapter in the book that I want to review in this post.

The first part of the above conclusion says that creativity is an inherent characteristic in humans, which is shown by experiments with apes and very young children.

The second part of the conclusion says that if creativity is blocked, it becomes destructive. According to the writers, David Bohm and David Peat, this is because creativity is not only a characteristic of humans, it is an essential need.

For creativity is a prime need of a human being and its denial brings about a pervasive state of dissatisfaction and boredom. This leads to intense frustration that is conductive to a search for exciting ‘outlets’, which can readily involve a degree of force that is destructive.

I will go into this potential for destruction in another post. But here, in this post, I want to focus on the last part of the conclusion. Why not just use the creative energy that seems to be so natural, why would it be blocked?

What blocks creativity?

I really think the book here touches on something very important. If I would have to pin it down to one major block that prevents us from being creative, it is actually very simple.

Other people.

Of course there is more to it than that. And there is even a paradox, as other people might even fuel our creativity in a certain way. But not in the usual sense. Not by rewards or praise.

In the book this is shown by the example of an extension of the experiments with apes, where the researchers started to reward them for their paintings.

Very soon their work began to degenerate until they produced the bare minimum that would satisfy the experimenter.

Also with young children this can be observed. Their creativity also gets blocked by praise.

they become selfconscious of the kind of painting they believe they are supposed to do. This is generally indicated to them by subtle and implicit rewards, such as praise and approval

And not just that, they also do not want to be different from others.

and by the need to conform to what other children around them are doing. Thus creativity appears to be incompatible with external and internal rewards or punishments.

So apart from this need for creativity, there is another need that seems stronger. Maybe not always and maybe not with all children, but with many children, the need for approval seems to be stronger than the need for creativity.

Now earlier on in the book, in the chapters about order, it became clear that creativity has its own inherent order. But this order gets disturbed by other people. Other people who (unconsciously) impose their own order on the child.

To do something for a reward, the whole order of the activity, and the energy required for it, are determined by arbitrary requirements that are extraneous to the creative activity itself. This activity then turns into something mechanical and repetitious, or else it mechanically seeks change for its own sake. The state of intense passion and vibrant tension that goes with creative perception then dies away. The whole thing becomes boring and uninteresting, so that the kind of energy needed for creative perception and action is lacking. As a result, even greater rewards, or punishments, are needed to keep the activity going.

So the most important thing to do, to get connected to this creative energy, is to become free. Free of demands of others, but even more important, free of the desire for approval.

Creative Development

Now this freedom is not there at once. It is something that develops over time. With a young child it is natural that approval is more important than creativity. They have to become confident with themselves. For that they might need encouragement.

But the creativity does not need this encouragement, this creativity is so very individual and dependent only on the person self. Every outside interference can harm the creativity.

But the development goes on. If someone can more and more rely on this creative essence, other people certainly do get to play a role. It might even get to be a very important role.

But only after a certain period of individual creative growth.

Creativity in the Whole of Life

Annemieke — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 08:26:56 +0000

After I wrote my previous post, I read the chapter ‘Creativity in the whole of life’ for the second time.

The chapter from a book called ‘Science, Order and Creativity’.

And this time I was even more convinced that it reflects my thoughts on many things that I want to write about on this blog.

It is a book by David Bohm and David Peat and it is suggesting more creativity and better communication in science. More emphasis on ideas instead of formula. More about the whole than about fragments and more about meaning than just mechanics.

Now as interesting as the whole book was, I was especially amazed by that specific chapter about creativity. But there is so much, I just don’t know where to start. So I think it is best to just start with the beginning of that chapter.

But first I will give an overview:

Creativity and what blocks it.
Blocks to creativity in the generative order of society.
Dialogue and culture.
The individual, the social and cosmic dimension of the human being.
The responses of east and west to the conditioning of consciousness.
Creativity in science, art and religion.
A new order of creativity.
Summary and outlook.

I don’t know yet if I am going to write about each chapter chronological. But this way I have a better idea for myself where I am going.

Creativity is natural but…

In the previous chapter of the book, the writers came to the conclusion that creativity is something very natural. It is a potential for every human being. But what is also very natural for a human being, is an attachment to fixed programs.

And rigid attachments to what is known, just do not mix with creativity.

So they want to find out what blocks this natural creativity and what are the conditions behind those blocks. One of the essential tools in exploring that, is free dialogue. In order to do that, they need to consider everything.

And with everything they mean the individual as well as the collective. The eastern view as well as the western view. The scientific as well as the religious and the artistic view.

And so they start with why creativity seems to be blocked. Which is the first part of the chapter I want to analyze in my next post.

English Books in Dutch Libraries

Annemieke — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 08:27:44 +0000

I love books that are non-fiction.

It is not that I do not like fiction, sometimes I do, but most of the books that I read in my life were non-fiction.

I used to spend many hours in our library looking for answers to questions I had, taking as much books home as I could.

But lately I hardly ever got to the library. One of the reasons is that most answers are so much faster to find online. But the other reason was that most of the books that I was interested in, got more and more specific.

No English books in our library

Living in the Netherlands means that our library has mainly Dutch books. But the books that I find online as a reference in my online searches are almost all in English.

So most of the time, I tried to find my information online (or sometimes buy a book) wishing that there where more books to borrow that I wanted to read.

Then a few weeks ago I read about a challenge. World’s Strongest Librarian Josh was planning to read one book for every number in the Dewey Decimal Classification System and I thought that was great.

Not that I could ever do that. I can only read something that I am really interested in, and if not, I have no idea what I am reading.

But I liked the challenge and thought I would have liked to join in with the books that had my interest. But because most of the books that have my main interest at the moment, are not translated, I thought it meant I just could not find them in our library.

Until I had a clear moment.

What about other libraries

In the past I had ordered books from other, larger, libraries in the Netherlands. And now I thought they might also have English books.

So I called our local library and found out there are online procedures for that. You start in one place, if the book is not there, you go to the next and if it is not there either, I could email one person who would look around if the book was anywhere available.

So I ordered 3 books and a few days later I already could pick them up. Brilliant!

A much to interesting book

And so I started with the first book: Science, Order and Creativity by David Bohm and David Peat.

But as excited that I am, having access to all those books all of a sudden, the next one is going to have to wait.

The reason for that is, that this first book is so really very interesting. The whole book already was, but the chapter ‘Creativity in the Whole of Life’ was so very interesting that I want to write a few blogposts about it.

There is a view about creativity that very much resonates with the way I see it. Not just important but even essential for our lives. So now I am going to read that chapter again…

Creative Development

Annemieke — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:52:59 +0000

One word that can describe the first sign of the individual part of the zodiac is creativity.

There are many more words that can be used for that part.

Expression, selfcentred, arrogant, artistic, honorable, selfassured, ego, confident, pride, attention, authentic.

But in this blogpost I want to focuss on the word creativity. Creativity as a developmental process.

I want to translate the 12 signs in relation to creativity. Each of them is just an example, as there are many more ways to view that part of creativity.

For the first one I used ‘dancing’ but I also could have used ‘martial art‘. And for the second one I could use ‘sculpture’ instead of ‘painting’.

And although ‘dancing’ is the first phase of the whole development, it does not mean it is a lower artform.

Dancing itself has that same development. From impulsive dancing (1) to expressive dancing (5) to constructive dancing (10) and so on.

1. Creative Action: Dancing

So I called the first phase of creativity dancing. It is the phase of action, in some way the essense of the first sign of the zodiac. It is activity that is self-motivated, unaffected by others. Vitality. Focused in short bursts. It is what children do at a very young age to express themself.

A more developed form is classical ballet which can be seen as constructive dancing. But dancing in itself is a form of creativity that is seen as energetic.

2. Creative Manifestation: Painting

The word I used for the second phase is painting. I used painting because it is one of the most common examples of creativity. This phase is about manifestation. The energy of the first phase gets a form.

In this case the manifestation of creativity. It is an act in itself. Not reaching out to the world outside, because that comes in the next phase, not an impulse like in the previous phase. But a coming together of materials, colours, shaping, all in combination with the desire to create.

3. Creative Interaction: Blogging

This phase is about interacting. Finding a way to communicate. I wanted to use writing here, but writing does not have to be creative. Because it can also be a use of words that have nothing to do with the person writing them. A use of words that are learned and used in a mechanical way.

Writing also might have nothing to do with interacting. Writing a book is a creative process, but not an interactive one.

But then I thought about blogging. Blogging in many cases is a form of self-expression. And it also is a form of interaction. An interaction that is based upon the expression of an individual.

4. Creative Emotion: Drama

This is the phase to play with emotions. A phase where emotions are recognised and cultivated. About finding a creative way to express them.

Again in this phase, drama has that same development. From just impulsive expressing feelings, to cultivate that expression in any artform.

5. Creative Expression: Performance

The word I use for this phase of creativity is performance. I use performance because it is like expressing an expression. More in a theatrical, overacting way. A way of intentionally be in the centre of attention.

It does not have to be an expression of emotions like in the previous phase. And it does not have any function like the next phase. It is just about creation itself. All it needs is an audience to actually be in the centre.

6. Creative Function: Design

Here the creation has to become functional. Done now with the expression of emotions. Done now with the expression just for its own sake. Now is the time to produce and improve.

It is about improving by trying over and over again, to make it better and more functional. And it is about producing something useful. Things we all need, like furniture or clothes or websites.

7. Creative Reflection: Esthetics

This phase I call esthetics. It is about relationship, about culture and beauty. It is the phase where the individual is searching for a way to get feedback.

It is about sending out who you are. Done in a way that is appealing to others. Showing the best you have. Identify yourself with that what you are good at. With that what is characteristic. That what you want to be.

From using make-up and fashion to buying cars, decorate your home, looking for art and design. Finding a way to express who you are and present that in a way that others are attracted to.

8. Creative Integration: Metamorphosis

Coming in this phase a transformation has to take place. Because at a certain moment there is the realisation there is a part of the self that is unknown.

Or maybe not so much unknown as it is suppressed. Which was a good thing in order to develop a specific, self chosen character. One that is build on talent and skills.

But now the time has come for the individual to take a look at its own reaction to others. And find out why there are such strong reactions at times. To recognise them as its own and integrate them. A process of self-mastery. Of taking controle over the whole self.

9. Creative Vision: Art

The most controversial word to describe a phase, I guess, is art. Art is often used as self-expression. It is also often used for just the artforms that are touchable like paintings and sculptures. The history of art is mainly based on that.

But what makes something art, has also to do with the role it plays in time and culture. So the creation has to be an individual expression to begin with. But one that can be seen in a wider context. Here the universal part comes into play. Where the individual has to reach beyond itself.

But because this is about the creative process, this can be seen as a combination of expression and vision. Which places it beyond creativity. And it also places it beyond just having the abstract vision. It has to be combined to actually be art. Creativity in a certain time and place, in a certain context.

10. Creative Construction: Architecture

This phase of creativity has to do with structures. It is about high goals, achieving something big. About ambition, accomplishments. About responsibility for others. It goes beyond function and skill. It goes beyond vision.

It also goes beyond the individual creation. In most cases others are involved. It is only the supervision that remains as others have to do the actual work. I used architecture because it is a combination of creation and construction.

11. Creative Invention: Avant-garde

Here the essence is that it has to be different from all that existed. Or that what already exists has to be altered or changed. Or even destroyed.

It is about progression. It is not about building and constructions like in the previous phase. It is more like breaking it down, about changing any existing status quo into something never seen before.

But at the same time it is very focussed on seeing everyone as an individual. It is about free-thinking and using unorthodox methods. To come to totally unexpected and new ideas.

12. Creative Imagination: Music

This is the phase that is to describe the hardest of all. The best I can think of here is music. This is the field of myths, of dreams, of the collective unconscious. Of compassion and unity.

And I think music as a form of creative expression is capable of resonating with that field.