How much do we project our interior world on the canvas of the world at large?

<blockquote>

<p>We know three things about intelligence. One, it's diverse. We think about the world in all the ways that we experience it. We think visually, we think in sound, we think kinesthetically. We think in abstract terms, we think in movement. Secondly, intelligence is dynamic. If you look at the interactions of a human brain, as we heard yesterday from a number of presentations, intelligence is wonderfully interactive. The brain isn't divided into compartments. In fact, creativity — which I define as the process of having original ideas that have value — more often than not comes about through the interaction of different disciplinary ways of seeing things. Ken Robinson 2006 TED talk</p>

</blockquote>

<p>

<p>I would argue that creativity, like intelligence, paraphrasing Ken Robinson’s quote: is expressed through “the world in all the ways that we experience it. One, (creativity) is diverse. We (create) visually, we (create) in sound, we (create) kinesthetically. We (create) in abstract terms, we (create) in movement. Secondly, (creativity) is dynamic. “In fact, creativity — which I define as the process of having original ideas that have value — more often than not comes about through the interaction of different disciplinary ways of seeing things.”</p>

<p>I think this explains why we often come from so many different points of view here. We, as individuals can only experience our creativity from our own unique perspective. When we attempt to describe our own process, I also believe, like I said above with another quote: ““it’s like talking about quantum theory in a language of levers and weights.” Whether we identify thinking, feeling, awareness, lack of awareness, intention, memory, whatever, we are attempting to use crude metaphors for something that is far more sophisticated.</p>

<p>The MRI studies of jazz improvisation and rappers are attempts to see what the brain is doing during these activities. Improvisation is only one type of creative activity, so let’s not get bent out of shape about their study! I get the feeling a lot of folks don’t feel like they are improvising when they are producing their photos, so again, we each have our own unique experience and the language we have to describe it often falls short.</p>

<p>http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0001679</p>

<p>You can map the brain with an MRI even to see where in a musician's head improvisation takes place, but it is a map that will not tell anyone where to go.</p>

<p>So what's the use of the map? Or how would one use this map and for what purpose except for maybe brain surgery and the development of drugs?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>On creativity, for a neurologist 'creativity' might make itself evident through the form of a brainscan and scientific data etc,...But scientific data on creativity such as brainscans are of little relevance to the artist. For the artist creativity means and becomes evident by working with the materials and by working within or outside the confines of the medium.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> Phil, if you read just the abstract of the linked article, the conclusion of that article is, creative improvisation may be (Julie, note the word may be) governed by "<em>internally motivated, stimulus-independent behaviors <</em>which><em> unfold in the absence of central processes that typically mediate self-monitoring and conscious volitional control of ongoing performance.</em>" I think the reason Steve brought it up because he finds an agreement between how he sees his creative process to unfold and the conclusion of that study. I can only imagine that the results from a scientific study like that could help to reinforce one's understanding of the creative process. Increased awareness of the mind and thought process can only be beneficial to our overall existence. Whether that makes one a better artist or not is only to be seen, but no harm in considering.<br /> <br /> Although I am too ignorant to advocate the MRI study, I too feel there is a lack of conscious planning and more of spontaneous reflexes during a creative process. That goes directly in line with Jack's OP about the inner world and its influence.</p>

<p>Steve, this:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Prior to arrival for the scan session, all subjects received sheet music of a jazz melody (“Magnetism”, twelve-bar blues form) that was composed by one of the authors (C.J.L) to ensure novelty for the subjects (Fig.1, lower left). The subjects memorized this melody prior to scanning, and demonstrated proficiency in playing the melody from memory prior to scanning. During scanning, a pre-recorded jazz rhythm section provided musical accompaniment. In particular, the pre-recorded music was a 12 bar blues in medium tempo (around 100 beats per minute). Two repetitions of the underlying chord progression (or “choruses”) were played in each block. During blocks, subjects were cued randomly to either play either the memorized melody (Jazz-Ctrl) or to improvise using the underlying chord progression of the novel composition (Jazz-Improv) as the basis for invention (Fig.1, lower right). Subjects were given relative freedom during the musical improvisation blocks, with the only instruction being that the musical style of the melody and the improvisation should be consistent with one another; this instruction was intended to minimize wide variations in number of notes played, rhythmic complexity, or stylistic approach that could have been possible in an entirely unconstrained environment.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>... is not 'creativity' IMO. To my mind (I know you disagree) it's moving the furniture around. It <em>is</em> musicians playing with and without a score, and that is interesting in its own right (at least to me). It is scientifically appropriate to say that musician's playing <em>with</em> a score generate one MRI and those playing <em>without</em> generate such and such differences. And interpretation, appropriately designated as speculation, from those MRI is scientifically appropriate.</p>

<p>What is never clear is how much the musicians, or artists or photographers or writers, when asked to "be creative" simply <em>act like</em> they're being creative. Most people know what good music, photographs, writing looks like and most people know what improvisation looks like. I can act like I'm improvising in all of those activities, but I would simply be patching together my idea of what such an improvisation 'looks like.' Moving the furniture around.</p>

 

<p>Julie, it strikes me that your willingness—based on what you describe as your “belief” (25 Jan 2017 5:55pm)—to deny the validity of Steve’s and my personal experiences with improvisation is itself a potent example of the extent to which a person can project their interior world onto the canvas of the world at large.</p>

<p>Following along what I think is Phil's eminently reasonable approach to creativity, I offer these thoughts from Marc McGuiness on the subject. I found them this morning while googling around about creativity . . .</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"Most stories about creativity are stories about the 1%. We hear about the moment of inspiration—Archimedes leaping from his bath, Coleridge hallucinating “Kubla Khan” in an opium reverie. We don’t hear so much about the years of perspiration—Archimedes plugging away at failed experiments, Coleridge learning his craft by writing notebooks full of dull poetry.</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

<em>"Most of us don’t like to think about the labor involved in creativity. It takes away the glamour and the magic. But real creators know different. They know that creative work isn’t particularly glamorous. It requires discipline, routine, and a nitpicky attention to detail. But they also know that none of that takes away the magic. We often talk about “the creative process,” but it’s really several interlocking processes. The magic happens at the point where they intersect."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>My own creativity is at play in every rejected photo I've taken (which number far greater than the keepers). It's at play every time I struggle in thinking about solving various problems involved with backlighting, or using flash, or getting high contrast results that aren't harsh and over-the-top . . . or collaborating with one of my human subjects to make a photo that shows genuine character. If I limited my sense of creativity to the unthinking moment of snapping a shutter button, I wouldn't pursue creativity because it would have no meaning for me. Creativity is a holistic endeavor for me, a multi-faceted series of activities where I get to use as many of my faculties as I can successfully use in the process.</p>

<p>Leslie wrote: " ... is itself a potent example of the extent to which a person can project their interior world ... '</p>

<p>Quick! I'll get an MRI and you can read the anti-creativity wavelengths in a very scientific way.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My point is mainly that ultimately creativity in terms of creating art comes down to discipline and to doing the work ( even if you don't want to do the work for whatever reason ) and doing the work isn't some metaphorical floating around lost in thoughts affair that can be put on or off at will.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I was addressing your question regarding the potential use of things like the MRI study to anyone other than the neurologists. Of course I agree with you on the aspects like discipline and hands on practice, and there isn't much alternative to those. However inner understanding of our creative process is important too, and I am willing to incorporate anything that forwards that understanding, including clinical studies of the brain.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>... some metaphorical floating around lost in thoughts affair that can be put on or off at will.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> Hey, that's cool! I like to metaphorically float around lost in my thoughts, while someone else does the hard work for me. Add to that some euphoric highs with potential out of body experiences as well.</p>

<p> @For the artist creativity means and becomes evident by working with the materials and by working within or outside the confines of the medium."Phil</p>

<p>Conundrum of words...what are you communicating other than banality? Hey, some of us read these posts</p>

<p>@Increased awareness of the mind and thought process can only be beneficial to our overall existence." Phil.</p>

<p>Physical exercise is good for the soul and mind and leads to deeper Zen....and? Words for the sake of creating words...Phil,photos would be a lot more interesting. </p>

<p>"How much do we project our interior world on the canvas of the world at large? "Jack.</p>

<p>Yes, we do Jack. Look at the photos folk take.....gives you a good feel for them...photographs have their own language and if you listen they will tell you....a story of truths.</p>

<p>But then you need to read the language of photography...</p><div></div>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Nope...Im not Gods gift. Just Illustrating my thoughts....with photographs.</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>My own creativity is at play in every rejected photo I've taken (which number far greater than the keepers). It's at play every time I struggle in thinking about solving various problems involved with backlighting, or using flash, or getting high contrast results that aren't harsh and over-the-top . . . or collaborating with one of my human subjects to make a photo that shows genuine character. If I limited my sense of creativity to the unthinking moment of snapping a shutter button, I wouldn't pursue creativity because it would have no meaning for me. Creativity is a holistic endeavor for me, a multi-faceted series of activities where I get to use as many of my faculties as I can successfully use in the process.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

 

 

Fred, I appreciate what you are saying and thank you for sharing your working process with us. Everything that I read in these forums are helpful and that includes your description, the scientific (fallacious?) MRI studies, Julie's vehement opposition to any attempt of biochemical characterization of creativity. You are describing a tedious experience ridden journey with many creative periods that ends up in a few epiphanies or pinnacles of creativity in a person's life. Again I am not advocating those MRI studies, but I think they were trying to record such periods of creativity in their MRI scans. May be they are hovering in the periphery without being able to penetrate the core of understanding, but I think one day they might. Anyway I have experienced special moments in my life where spontaneity and reflexes seem to have taken the centerstage and certain photos that resulted from those moments were very different from everything else in the same series. The implicit assumption here is, those moments are creative moments, although I agree thats a matter of belief.

<p>Eyes that see, eyes that are blind.</p>

<div></div>

<p>"If I limited my sense of creativity to the unthinking moment of snapping a shutter button, I wouldn't pursue creativity because it would have no meaning for me "Fred.</p>

<p>We really don't have unthinking moments. An Artist/Photographer is always thinking consciously or otherwise.....we are not tourist and even those think about their photography.</p>

<p>When you look at the photographs you are also looking at the photographer.</p>

<p>The photographs tell all.</p>

Testing..

testing