There are three different feeds you can subscribe to, which correspond to the different types of content. Links are short posts of one or two paragraphs which simply share an interesting link with brief commentary. Entries are longer prose pieces of at least 300 words. If you subscribe to everything, you'll get everything I publish, including approximately one entry and five links a week. Comments are not included in the everything feed. If you want to subscribe to comments, you can keep up with the conversation using the comments feed.

Timestamp
Published at 09:33 PM on November 17, 2008
Comments
There are 16 comments on this post. Add yours.
Content

What is creativity? I doubt many people, including teachers, could give you a good definition. In simplest terms, it is the ability to create. However, I like to use a more specific definition:

Creativity is the ability to transcend traditional ideas, rules, patterns, relationships, or the like, and to create meaningful new ideas, forms, methods, interpretations, etc.
Leonardo da Vinci

Above: Leonardo da Vinci was a master of mixing creativity and art.

The key to creativity is the ability and act of transcending tradition. Using this definition, I think creativity is exceptionally rare in schools. Students are almost never asked to transcend tradition and think outside the box. In fact, doing so is punished. This rarity arises from a confusion about what creativity really is.

If you were to ask most teachers or administrators, you would hear a distinctly different story. Most will says their schools/classrooms stimulate and “unlock” creativity1. Doing a word search on school mission statements will turn up an inordinate number of references to creativity. Someone should replace 99% of those occurrences with the word “art.”

What many school officials and teachers mean by creativity is really art. Art is all about practice and method. Art is about the perfection of technique. Art is about applying techniques rigorously in pursuit of a goal. In short, art is studied action; artificiality in behavior.

Painting yet another landscape is art, and neither is solving a mathematical equation. Both of them involve substantial practice and application of traditional rules.2 Make no mistake: both can be very difficult. The level of effort it takes to perfect any art is astounding. However, this is distinct from creativity. Remember, creativity is all about transcending tradition. In many ways, creativity and art are polar opposites.

Actually, creativity and art are not so much polar opposites as two sides of the same coin.3 Creativity is used to think of new ideas and sources of ideas. Art is used to translate those ideas into presentable forms. To create a brilliant work, both creativity and art must be used.

In many ways, schools fail to recognize this. Art is constantly drilled in schools: when not directly transferring content, teachers often focus on teaching new skills4. However, very little attention is paid to the application of those skills in novel ways. Writing thousands of 5-paragraph essays will give you perfect form and will make you a very precise writer, but it will not make you a great and innovative one. Translating notes into a science fair board will, optimally, teach art to a degree. However, none of these things will teach creativity. When schools talk about their wealth of creativity, they usually mean art.

To a certain degree, I do not think creativity can be taught. The very nature of it makes creativity unteachable — you cannot teach someone to positively ignore convention, since in doing so they would simply be internalizing another rule. However, creativity can be practiced. Constantly making new ideas teaches you to see which work and which will not. Searching for pattens helps you to see patterns faster in the future. Luckily, art can be taught — and it should be taught. Without art, nobody will respect your creativity. The point is, creativity can be practiced but not taught.

Train

Right: A great example of tilt-shift photography from Vincent Laforet.

The next time you brag about how much creativity you foster, ask yourself if you really mean art.

Notes
  1. Unlocking creativity is a scary proposition in and of itself. Who locked it up in the first place?
  2. In many ways, art is very similar to science.
  3. Sick of the casual metaphors yet?
  4. Most skills are really just a combination of practice and knowledge of method, similar to art.

Comments

There are 16 comments on this post. You can add your own below.
Context
...ref="http://students2oh.org/tag/thought/" rel="tag">thought. This entry is cross-posted from my personal blog. Please direct your responses there. Wh...
Content
You’re back! I see now that you’ve been back since September, but I had no idea until I saw your post on S 2.0. I’ve got to say, your layout here rocks.
Name
Content
@Darren: Yes, I’ve been back for a while, but keeping a low profile. Only recently have I been connecting up with some of my older haunts. :) Thanks, I like this new layout a lot more than the last one.
Name
alistair fitchett
Content
I’m interested in the thinking that you cannot teach creativity. I would disagree with that view, and would argue from the perspective of creativity being a process. If you unpack the process and identify the kinds of actions involved at each stage, then you can start to develop teaching strategies to address those. You don’t have to do that from an art(s) context either. You can apply the process to all kinds of areas. Also, as an artist and as a teacher, i totally refute the idea that “Art is all about practice and method. Art is about the perfection of technique. Art is about applying techniques rigorously in pursuit of a goal.” That’s a very rigid definition that fails to consider the intellectual elements of what artists do everytime they create a piece of work. Maybe you’ve just been unfortunate in your experience of Art education? Good to see people thinking about these issues though :)
Name
Content

@alistair: I strongly disagree with you about creativity being a process. Actually, I think we’re confusing our definitions/terms. In the traditional sense, I believe “art” encompasses creativity and method/practice. In my definition, the creative aspect is creativity while the “art” is the practice/process. So yes, the art can be taught but I don’t think the creativity can be. I believe the creativity is the “intellectual elements” of what artists do. That is the unteachable part, while the process of art can be effectively taught.

At some point, I believe all good “art” needs a pop/idea (often many). Art needs some inspiration, some innovation, to be truly interesting. I don’t think we can teach that innovation, but we can teach people to be prepared for it and to act upon it effectively.

Thanks for stopping by!

Name
Content
I agree in general; however, I take a spiritual approach to understanding art. All creativity is not art. Art emerges from gifts and personal passions. Art is mainly the agility of thought and feeling that remains vibrant through ages despite the art form.
Name
Content

@Usiku: I think your definition of art might be a little limited. Many things can be considered art, including a well-coded application or a brilliant essay. Though people have different passions, all creative people share a passion for creation (of art).

Name
Content

I hesitate to even label someone or something “creative.” It’s really that, a label; and when someone actively strives to be creative, or even thinks that they are, they’re only fitting into what is accepted as “creative,” not actually being creative themselves.

Example: people who call themselves cynics. No true cynic would ever admit to being cynic. They’d call themselves “pragmatic” instead.

Name
Content

@lindsea: I’m not sure I agree with you… admitting your strengths doesn’t mean you don’t have them, it just means you are in touch with yourself. I have one question for you: are you creative?

Content
Your new blog causes a sense of confusion and disorientation both in design and practicality, but if you designed it yourself it certainly is different. Congratulations on that, as it shows a skillful use of Ajax. However, that is not the topic of debate at hand here. While I feel you are on the mark to some degree with the concept of creativity. However the base is create, followed by a suffix that means ‘ability to.’ “The ability to create” is the literal definition by that standing. That is something that can be thought, however… Guidance can be given for your definition. One of the Beatles, I believe John once regarded his lessons in music as ‘learning what not to do.’ Hopefully… The formatting of this comment is somewhat reserved.
Name
Content

@Dillon: I’m not sure what confuses you about my blog, given that everything in it is relatively standard and it follows expected design practices (including using a grid). Maybe you’re just used to Blogger templates? (On that note, I might recommend you play around with your header – the contrast makes your subtitle almost impossible to read.)

Regardless, I think you are on track with the literal definition of creativity. In fact, I would say a more fitting definition is “the ability to create something [new].” We learn from what others do, to shape our opinion of what works and what doesn’t.

Name
Content
I found this insightful. Creativity is difficult to teach…it can be encouraged. Schools for the most part aren’t about that. It is a constant tension between creating new innovative ways of encouraging students to learn and instilling the traditions of the society. I wish there were an easy solution, but the tension is probably necessary.
Name
Content

@Jorgie: I’m glad my insight helped you. I think I agree that there is a tension between creativity, but in many ways I think it is a good tension. If schools teach students to value both, they will create creative people who also respect the value (and experience) of tradition. Thanks for stopping by!

Content
When you define creativity in such terms, you see how our great inventions and innovations came from creative people. I love the notion that creativity transcends the traditional…
Name
Content

@Lindsay: Thanks for stopping by. I think this more generic definition definitely helps to explain almost all of the innovation, both artistic and scientific, which has happened to build our civilization.

Context
...anent Link: Thing 5: Reflections on RSS Read">Thing 5: Reflections on RSS Read I liked the post Of Creativity and Art.  The blog site is called Newly Ancient, and in this post, the author has captured the way I feel ...

Respond

Respond to this entry with your remarkable insights.

(Required)