On Creativity
In this piece, I contend that it’s okay for young people to procrastinate, hand in assignments late, and get in trouble. As a society, we are raising way too many “Excellent Sheep”.
The story of civilization cannot be told without acknowledging the role of human creativity.
Regrettably, for a variety of reasons, the space for original thought has been shrinking in the 21st century. In this article, I explore three trends that are driving this phenomenon, they include:
1. The Rise of Credentialism
2. The Quest for Conformity and
3. The Fixation on Productivity.
1. The Rise of Credentialism: In his brilliant book, “Excellent Sheep”, William Deresiewicz, laments the rising culture of credentialism - which privileges outward indicators of success over and above creative thought.
For many young people, success means landing prestigious jobs in elite firms. Usually, the strategy for landing these jobs entails chasing gold stars (amassing degrees from elite schools, aiming for perfect grades and mastering the rules for acing standardized tests). There is nothing inherently wrong with taking this “prestige pathway” to success, however, this mindset comes at a cost to society. A young person who is fixated on building an immaculate resume and unblemished profile is unlikely to espouse the attributes of a creative mind (such as the willingness to experiment (and fail in some cases), the desire to explore diverse disciplines, and the courage to pursue one’s true interests and passions).
2. The Quest for Conformity: Most of the famed inventors - to whom we owe humanity’s revolutionary inventions - were non-conformists who ignored rules, challenged the status quo and rejected deadlines.
However, from a young age, we are socialized to conform. If you are like most people, you would have begun your academic journey in a school. And most schools are bastions of conformity where deviations from established norms are sanctioned, and unquestioning compliance is rewarded (studies have shown that teachers tend to discriminate against highly creative students, labeling them as troublemakers).
Take the painstaking observance of deadlines in schools. Students who miss set deadlines are often penalized while their compliant peers are celebrated for submitting their work “way ahead of schedule”. But originality cannot be rushed; in fact, in many cases, it is virtually impossible to produce a work of genius according to a schedule. Most paragons of innovation we celebrate today practiced creative procrastination. Leonardo Da Vinci spent about fifteen years developing the ideas for his iconic painting, “The Last Supper”. I wonder how many Da Vincis, Einsteins and Mozarts society has lost due to the rigorous enforcement of conformity – at the expense of creativity.
Teachers are not the only referees of compliance; in the era of social media, the enforcement of conformity has been democratized. Post an idea that is remotely contrarian on social media, and you are likely to face the full wrath of the conformity brigade. Astronomy stagnated for decades because Nicolaus Copernicus refused to publish his original discovery that the earth revolves around the sun. Fearing rejection and ridicule, he stayed silent for twenty-two years, circulating his findings only to his friends. If Copernicus feared rejection and ridicule in 16th century, I wonder how he would cope in the age of Facebook.
In her blistering essay against social media sanctimony, the Nigerian novelist, Chimamanda Adichie observes that “We have a generation of young people on social media so terrified of having the wrong opinions that they have robbed themselves of the opportunity to think and to learn and to grow”. I couldn’t agree more.
3 The Fixation on Productivity: The 18th century gave humanity the steam engine. The 19th century gifted us the automobile. The 20th century delivered the internet. But, as a brutal commentator observed, when the 21st century rolled around, it came bearing an app for tweeting 140 characters (to Twitter’s credit, they have generously increased the number of characters to 280). The point here is the lack of revolutionary inventions (at par with the invention of the airplane, automobile etc.) in the 21st century. What some observers cite as “monumental inventions” of the 21st century are hardly original creations, but modifications of existing ones (e.g. the development of electric vehicles).
To be fair, the 21st century is far from over, and there is still headroom for groundbreaking inventions. But while we await the coming of the elusive 21st century marvels, I would argue that one reason we have a scant list of inventions in this age is the ascendancy of a worldview that privileges productivity (and results) over creativity. From football games to college campuses to corporate boardrooms, the resonant mantra is: “WHAT COUNTS IS THE RESULT”. Consequently, corporations spend a fortune teaching employees how to grow the ‘bottom line’; schools celebrate students with the highest grades, and sports administrators honour the “Highest Goal Scorer” (but not the creative player that dribbles and enriches the game with his or her scintillating footwork and creativity) . With the heightened obsession with results comes a waning appetite for risk taking and experimentation - two prerequisites for pushing the frontiers of invention. When a CEO cuts his organization’s research and development budget to deliver impressive quarterly results, society is worse off for it. When a seminal essay fails to illuminate a concept for a student (because he or she is more interested in memorizing parts of the text that are likely feature in the examination), society is poorer for it. And when a football coach actively promotes tactics that win games (but stifle the creativity of players), society is poorer for it. To reverse the dearth of consequential inventions in the 21st century, we must not pursue productivity and short-term results at the expense of creativity and innovation.