On Creativity, part 2 - What Is Creativity?

What we're talking about in terms of this blog is not things like cooking dinner, decorating for the holidays, or singing in the choir, per se. While all these things have an element of making in them, for this discussion I’d like to define the term creativity as a kind of making that exhibits a high level of originality, aestheticism, and/or execution: the kind of making that results in something that may be recognized as special in some way by someone with deep experience in that kind of making. So, that dinner, that holiday décor and that choral concert might actually be sublime and moving experiences. It’s just that usually they’re not.

Already, it seems, we have nearly defined ourselves out of any meaningfulness at all. And that is probably in line with our experience of the arts through the arc of human history. While we have always had some consensus about the value of creative efforts of certain kinds in certain places at certain times, we may never really have a science-like way of talking about the results of our creativity. Cultural changes over time will make assessing these things like hitting a moving target. Our assessments will be transient…and lack accuracy.

Never mind. Creativity is not science. We get to decide for ourselves. And I have decided for the sake of our ongoing discussion that when I speak of creativity I am speaking more about the Ramones than Taylor Swift, more about James Joyce than Arthur Conan Doyle, and more about Guy Madden than Steven Spielberg. The more the market drives the making, the less significant becomes the creativity. When something profoundly human drives the making, creativity can be elevated. Can we sense the difference by listening to the music, reading the books, or watching the movies? Do we care about the difference?

When someone is in touch with something profoundly human inside them, their creativity can emerge as out of step with their moment in time. This can lead to cultural revolution when their idea uncovers a buried trove of shared human desires. Sometimes, like in the example of Vincent Van Gogh, the creativity can resound long after the maker,  unrecognized when living, has left us. At the same time, countless other respected and successful makers of that era have faded from view.

Today, with the availability of examples of creative works that span all of human history, our access to understanding creativity should be better than ever. We have examples. We can see the signs. So, maybe we can approach creativity like the judicial system once approached obscenity: it’s hard to define…but we'll know it when we see it. The key may be to really have our eyes wide open.