“The
process of creating original ideas that have value; more often than
not comes about through the interaction of different disciplinary
ways of seeing things.” - Sir
Ken Robinson
This quote
was taken from a TEDtalk that Sir Ken Robinson did on whther or not
schools kills creativity.
Which is quite a statement to make seeing as schools are meant to be,
and indeed have been assumed, to nurture a childs mind. Yet, I can't
help but agree with Sir Robinson's logic, bringing up the case that
we are all born creative, and that as children we ARE creative but
going through schooling and being taught that making mistakes is the
worst thing we can do actually harms our creativity in a near fatal
way. We don't grow out of creativity, we're educated out of
it.
He
goes on to say that 'if you're not prepared to be wrong,
you will never come up with anything original'.
And that was the most profound thing I've heard in a long time. It
really made me think back to being a kid and that how I would have
done whatever regardless of whether it would work out in the end,
doing it solely for the point of doing. However after having gone
through schooling I became less and less creative, I would take fewer
risks, weigh up whether something was worth my time and rarely being
adventurous. On top of this I'm quite a cynical person, not
necessarily pessimistic, more realistic... and
how odd that feels to realise that is probably holding me back. Is
there a link between being creative and being stupid? By that I mean
making silly decisions with the 'give anything a go' attitude.
On
top of this I might be narcissistic to a degree, and a narcissist
will rarely (if ever) admit to being wrong and will do whatever they
can to make themselves never fail in the eyes of others because
self-image is so important. I say to a degree because a true
narcissist would deny being one altogether. Naturally, they will take
fewer chances and thus taking into account what Robinson said about
not being prepared to be wrong, would that mean narcissists as a
whole are generally uncreative?
Of
late I've also been doubting my imagination, not the quality of the
drawings I do but the overall substance within them. I look at truly
creative people's drawings of, say characters and am always befuddled
as to how they come up with this stuff. My designs look simple by
comparison. However, for a while now I've been aware of how important
risk taking is in art, that it is a big part of learning the medium
and that it is even encouraged so I've taken it upon myself to really
drive it home every time I pick up a pencil. The results so far have
boosted my confidence, doubled, if not tripled the amount of work I
produce and the improvement in just the last year has been
drastically larger then the last three combined. All because I take
more risks. From small things like a mere brush-stroke to larger
endeavours such as an entire painting. Before where I might have cut
my losses and started something else, now I continue and see where it
takes me, always appreciating the fact that ideas can come from the
most mundane of places.
Back
to the creativity of children. The reason they are generally creative
is because they're not frightened of being wrong; too young to know
of consequences they continue doing what they want. Picasso once said
that 'All children are born artists; the problem is to
remain artists as we grow up.” To
which I can agree. What is being an artist if not the constant
pursuit of creativity? To which children do this day in day out
without realising. It just comes easy to them.
“When
we grow up we often lose that capacity and end up becoming frightened
of being wrong.”
Can
you argue against this? Companies and education systems scorn those
who make mistakes, especially in companies where it could cause you
to be unable to provide for your family. Noone wrong
for not taking risks, if anything that's smart but the fact remains
that it kills our creative capacity.
Yet
with all this said it's odd that to a lot of companies, talent is
more important then experience to the point where people who are
perceived to be talented can get promoted faster and are groomed for
the high spots where those who just have experience in the field are
either left there or pushed out. I feel odd even wondering this but
why is talent so highly regarded over experience? Surely an
experienced person will know what decisions to make and be generally
a safer bet. Low risk, low reward? I understand why talent is sought
after, that's obvious, but it just seems weird that companies go on
crazy recruitment drives getting people right out of universities,
putting them above their preconceived payroll and neglecting those
who lack creativity but have been solid workers. Is it the need to be
the best, to be seen as the most innovative company around?
“The
talent myth assumes that people make organizations smart. More often
than not, it's the other way around.” -anon
“It
never occurred to them that, if everyone had to think outside the
box, maybe it was the box that needed fixing.”
A final statement towards a company that died because it put too much
stock in the talent myth,
hiring anyone who was talented, because they were talented. Not for
their experience (often lack thereof). I feel that it is quite a
profound statement as it makes me wonder whether or not people who
lack talent, or rather
have less than what deems them talented,
are essential to a business or teams success, as much as talented
people, due to the way they work.
So
with all this said about people 'growing out of creativity'
and how I myself have tried to become more creative after realising I
just wasn't by forcing myself to make mistakes and accept them I
believe that like any skill; be it art, humour, chess etc, that we
all have it within our power to become creative.
Reference:
Sir Ken Robinson: Do schools kill creativity?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY
The Talent Myth
http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_07_22_a_talent.htm
Narcissism, Self Actualism, and Patrick Bateman
http://research.similarminds.com/narcissism-vs-self-actualism/172
No comments:
Post a Comment