Friday, 13 April 2012

Creativity, the Talent Myth and Craft

We all know that creativity is to have thought up of and made something new to entertain, solve and communicate. I decided to look it up on the online dictionary too which says, “resulting from originality of thought”. So to be creative is to be able to create or make or draw or paint or act out or say something that would be considered original, brand new. It doesn’t always have to be good or bad obviously but it is the definition of creating something. I think if I look too deep into this matter, my head will hurt, as Wikipedia explains how there are almost a dozen definitions and approaches. So which one do I look at for it to be relevant to me?

Looking at one of the given links, trying to explain creativity in general terms but in detail, I like the explanation that says, to be able to VIEW things in new ways or from a different perspective, not just making something. That is where psychology could come in because, say you get a group of people given an object like a roll of foil and you tell them they have 30 minutes to do whatever they want with it, every result will not be the same. Show them a detailed picture or a scene and tell them to say what they see but only record down the first thing they notice, and not every result will be the same. Now relating this to talent, different people in the group will create something based on what they know and have learnt about foil as opposed to saying they are being outright talented AND what these people decide to create could be to get a desired reaction, be it praise or interest or not. So creativeness is based on solving problems or making something to gain a reaction based on your perspective and talent is based on that (perhaps unseen) knowledge you have of the object and what you have seen and learnt from the world around you. I hope that wasn’t too confusing but I think I have this figured out.

Further looking on psychology terms, they say a ‘creative person’ can express unusual thoughts, is usually bright, and experiences the world in novel and original ways. Their perceptions are fresh and judgements insightful and making discoveries only they know about. I say that’s a load of bull and it sounds like they are specifying unnecessary characteristics to these ‘special’ people. I would call it curiosity above anything and everybody has it, they have their own personality and different view on a matter. It only takes one person to discover a new or different invention or display of originality and somebody calls you a creative? I disagree. Everyone has the creative ability.

Wikipedia titles being talented as ‘intellectual giftedness’ and say that it is different from skill, which we all know is acquiring or learning behaviours. They then say it is “an innate, personal aptitude for intellectual activities that cannot be acquired through personal effort”. To blow what I said out of the water it says there is also artistic or creative giftedness so now I question the difference between being talented or gifted. Come to think of it now, no lie, during primary school, I so happened to enjoy all subjects and doing my work, homework etc. Teachers took note of this and I was signed up on the ‘gifted and talented’ list of students and I had opportunities to test my skills, go on science trips with a select few. I was honoured to have that opportunity and it made me think, are others really inferior to me? From a young age I would be deep in thought, I knew what was right and wrong and had great common sense and that’s all I thought it was as during secondary school, I eventually turned down the opportunities given and wanted to be normal, not chased after because I might be able to develop skills faster than others and become a super brain. My motivation was not there, that was all, I wanted to have fun and enjoy the young life and play computer games because of the friends I had common ground with. Looking back and looking at how I am now, my motivation to work is still low as I want to enjoy good times while they last but when I see the way I learn things, if it means anything, I am a very fast learner, I come across shy and not very talkative because I analyse people and situations deeply and don’t want to be in their way. Anyway I babble. What I am getting at is the fact that I sort of agree about talent but only if it means the same as gifted intelligence, the ability to learn and adapt skills fast in certain fields that motivate us as individuals.

Back to art and games, every member of an art team in the industry is creative but technical restraints do of course hinder your ability to express your creativeness and be able to show off so you have to make do with what you have. Games manifest creativity from the artists providing original sources, writers who provide an original, totally made up story that they believe will work. It takes the rest of the team and the big bosses to agree and approve of it and eventually you see it published. Some work, some don’t but that could be due to time and technical restraints and general feedback. I show my creativity like everybody else and expect feedback so I can improve of my bad points and sharpen my good points. I am talented in that I can learn and assess a situation swiftly and adapt, but I think it takes a lot of practise and repetition for me to be truly skilful and deliver on quality. Time, quality and motivation are the skills I need to improve on to be successful in my field and I believe that is all.

DUDE this is a long blog sorry if you was bothered to read all this HAH!


No comments:

Post a Comment