generating the spark [thoughts on creativity]

I read a lot about creativity. As someone immersed in making|designing|creating I find it an endlessly fascinating topic. And as a researcher, I do too.

There's quite a bit of information out there from psychologists that attempt to explain what creativity is, where it comes from, and how it works.

There are also a range of people immersed in teaching art or design who think about creativity from a making perspective. If you ever feel inspired to read more on this I recommend reading a book called Studio Thinking. These folk know about creativity from an insider-maker's world and that's what they focus on in their book.

The Studio Thinking people write about the 'habits of mind' that need to be developed for creativity to flourish in a studio environment:

develop craft|engage & persist| envision| express| observe| reflect| stretch & explore| understand art world

What I find interesting to think about are the kind of environments or atmospheres that encourage the possibility of creativity (and ones that don't). Creativity is about expansiveness. You can see that when you look at the habits of mind the Studio Thinking people have highlighted. So environments that encourage that expansiveness, ones that allow mental and physical space and movement, freedom, a sense of adventure, exploration and risk taking are really important when initiating and developing creative projects.

My question then, is do we have or allow enough opportunities for this? Do we have the kind of environments where this kind of creativity can spark and come to life?

These are important questions for individual artists|designers|makers, small and medium sized organisations, and also especially, I think, for large organisations and corporations to think about. And I mean organisations of any kind, not just the explicitly creative kind. Because creativity is important in all kinds of work and all kinds of projects.

I read and hear so much about large organisations being fearful of creativity and employees with a creative streak. These kinds of people scare inherently conservative folk because of their expansive natures and ways of working. There is a lot of emphasis on control in many organisations (small, medium or big ones) and, sadly, the loss is creativity. Creative folk and their thinking often freak out those who like to keep hold of the reigns. Imagine how much this impacts on creativity and innovation all over the world! And imagine how much untapped potential lies dormant because of this fear.

But things might be starting to change. 'Blue sky days' are now starting to creep into the way some innovative organisations structure their working week to enable the space for creative thinking (and doing). Google calls this their 20% time where they allow staff to spend one day a week on the dreamy, expansive thinking and doing needed for creativity to spark. There are many websites and books out there encouraging self-employed people to do the same whether they are artists|designers| makers or work in areas not traditionally connected with creativity.

Even those of us who are makers can get stuck in a rut and need to carve time out for some expansive thinking and doing. Do you have a structured way for doing this? If so, what is it and does it work for you?

creativity & abundance

I’ve been thinking a lot about consumption of late. More precisely, the fact that I don’t participate in much of it anymore. Not that I ever was a big shopper but lately I’ve noticed I don’t buy anything at all except for food. And books. And art supplies. That’s about it really.

Then these thoughts started connecting to stuff I've been thinking about in terms of abundance. This bubbled up especially while I was reading Daniel Pink’s book ‘A whole new mind: why right-brainers will rule the future’. Quite a good read for lots of reasons (more on that in another post). Dan emphasizes how we live in a time of abundance and how this allows people to have the time to, amongst other things, question the meaning of life and to focus on quality and beauty in our lives. It must be said that Dan is talking about abundance in relation to the wealthy West and not the whole globe. Abundance is clearly not something enjoyed by all.

Then yesterday I saw Kate Holden’s article where she tells a funny tale of realising she’s doesn’t have much stuff when it came time to fill out a home contents insurance form. As I read it I thought, yes! I know that feeling well. I too was overwhelmed when I had to fill out a similar form. Abundance gone mad. Every time I walk into a large department store these days I feel overwhelmed with all the stuff in the world. I wonder who buys it and why we need it all.

This theme is now being picked up in recent newspaper articles claiming that small houses are beautiful. Most of us don't need big houses. They're vast spaces to clean and heat and cool. And they're expensive to build and maintain. At last some common sense!

It's somewhat challenging and tricky then, as someone who prints, designs and illustrates to think about how I fit in with the consumption/abundance thing. I think anyone who makes anything and sells it (including skill) thinks about this at some time or another. The good news, if we're to follow Daniel Pink's argument, is that people with design and conceptual capabilities are going to be very much in demand in the future. This is starting to be the case already. Anyone with skills that can't be replicated by a computer will be needed as we move into an era dominated by abundance and automation. Pink explains that this means there will be a demand for clever design and beauty as abundance moves us away from a focusing merely on function.

Kind of heartening, don't you think?

do we value art + design?

Challenging times we live in. Those of us who value art and design, that is.

I recently read this story about a glass studio at Monash University (in Melbourne) having to close. I hear it's an expensive course to run. And that may well be true. But hear me out as I have a few thoughts to share. If universities keep closing specialist courses like this one where will our next generation of artists, makers and designers go to learn about their chosen fields? Sure, there are ways to learn an art or design process outside of the walls of universities. I'm not suggesting that it's the only way someone can learn to paint, weave, design computer games, or blow glass, for example. What I struggle with though, is the idea that universities are on a roll with the idea that art and design courses are too specialist in nature and too expensive to run. Small, niche fine art courses are closing in many universities. The unspoken seems to be that they're not valued for what they can offer. If art and design programs are not valued in universities, what does that say about what we view as important in education? And what does it say about our society more generally? Do we value art and design? Do we want our world to be without art and design? Can we even imagine how that would look or feel or be like?

I've been thinking about these questions for weeks (you can blame the PhD) and was even more intrigued when I saw that the UK is about to open it's first ever super-private, US-style ivy league university - the New College of the Humanities. Yep, that's right, for a very big price tag (about $AUD 27 000 per year) you will be able to study with some of the finest philosophers and thinkers at this new university. Astonishingly, this has happened because public funding to the arts and humanities has deteriorated so badly in recent times that the folk behind this venture felt the need to rescue these disciplines from the deathbed of education. There are huge equity implications for such an education venture and the media has been full of articles questioning the direction this new university has chosen to go in (see the UK Guardian for more stories).

So this is where my mind is going - will university fine art and design courses be forced to go in this direction too? That is, set themselves up in private (read very expensive) universities because publicly funded universities keep cutting costs and courses in these areas? Is that even possible? It will be a sad day indeed if art and design courses are siphoned off into mega-expensive private universities only for the rich to enjoy.

What do you think? Let's hope it doesn't come to that.