Friday, October 25, 2013

Creativity: Society's Destruction & Our Self-Development

    "I believe creativity itself is not something that can be taught, rather it's something that can be broadened by experiences and exposure." That was my response to an in-class discussion the first day of school. The question was "Can creativity be learned or taught?" I thought about the phrase, "teaching creativity." How bizarre it sounded. We know if someone wants to learn how to play guitar, they take lessons from a guitar instructor. If they want to learn how to do better in a certain subject, they hire a tutor. But what if someone wants to learn how to increase their creativity? Do they see a creativity instructor? Probably not. All the same, two troubling questions remain: Why have we become so detached from our creativity? and What are the ways we can self-develop our creative process?

    According to Linda Naiman, "creativity skills can be learned. Not from sitting in a lecture, but by learning and applying creative thinking processes." She expresses this through her view of "Whole-Brain Thinking; right-brain imagination, artistry, and intuition, plus left-brain logic and planning." Naiman not only explains what is needed in order to develop our creativity, but provides methods on how to develop it. She uses diagrams, data, and factual evidence to describe the development of creativity and how she believes our educational institutions are counter-productive to this creative process.
.
 
    Like Naiman, Newsweek publishers Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman put our educational systems to blame. "Overwhelmed by curriculum standards, American teachers warn there’s no room in the day for a creativity class...The argument that we can’t teach creativity because kids already have too much to learn is a false trade-off." In their article, they protest that creative learning does not have to take away class time, rather it can be implemented within traditional teaching strategies. They also express the importance of children's creativity versus their overall IQ, and just like Naiman, use "whole-brain thinking" as a technique to develop creativity. They compare convergent and divergent thinking, then relate them to explain how they work together with both sides of the brain.
 
    Along with what seems to be a unified decision that traditional teaching methods are useless towards developing creativity, August Turk believes that there are some key factors in our thinking processes that can help as well. He describes how we need to get passed the idea of "making a fool out of ourselves" as it only adds restrictive boundaries on the capabilities of our creativity. One thing I found extremely interesting, was Turk's explanation behind frustration and it's benefits. “Make friends with frustration; if you are not occasionally frustrated, even angered, by a teacher or learning environment that seems bent on nothing more than highlighting your limitations, you are probably wasting your time.” This helped expose how all of our creative capabilities are self-governed, relying on our own efforts to push ourselves past simple things such as frustration in order to see improvement. As Turk puts it best, “Creativity requires treating the impossible as possible.”

   Although, not all of our creative development is subjective to the way we use our brain; sometimes, its why. In his article, Stefan Mumaw takes a different approach in understanding how to increase our creativity. But before answering "why," he first addresses "what." He criticizes our predisposition to creativity and invalidates the common misconception of its direct relation to being artistic. "We have resolved ourselves to the belief that since we are not artistic, we are not creative and therefore shouldn't engage in creative activity. It has become truth because no one has had reason to challenge the origin. If they did, they'd find that their primary definition of creativity is flawed." Mumaw then focuses on the importance of intention when understanding creativity. "Creativity cannot be present without a problem to solve...It is the problem that defines creativity, not the art." He goes on to express how once someone has found this problem, it is the originality of their solution where creativity takes part.

   In class, we talked about a famous photojournalist, Dan Eldon. He was a strong-minded activist who gave his life for his art. His objective was to use this art to expose that which the rest of the world didn't see. To Eldon, art and creativity defined his lifestyle, it was an ongoing experience. As he was exposed to new situations, he developed his craft and creativity. This is crucial in understanding the variety of ways in which our creativity can grow. As most sources focus solely on internal change, rather than external exposure. Yes, it is important to first analyze the way we use our brain; but we must also understand that without influence, we are blind to what creative possibilities can be made. Dan Eldon's journals are a perfect example. They include pictures, drawings, and collages all from his travels and based upon his experiences there. In a sense, they were a visual timeline of his life.


    Creativity lives within all of us. It may not be as prominent in one person over another, but regardless it is still a trait everyone has the ability to harness and develop. The way in which someone develops their creativity is different for everybody. For some, it may be a matter of changing perspective; while for others it may be influence from a personal experience. Whatever the case may be, understand that creativity can be one of the hardest things to develop. But once it is engaged, it will never stop growing, nor will it ever leave us.