Genius is a good start

By David MacGregor, September 8, 2006 @ midnight

It takes more than raw talent to become a true superstar

[Education]

There’s something haunting about the vivid impasto swirls and daubs of Van Gogh’s art. He personifies the misunderstood genius, the crazy artist. Then there are the romantic bohemians, Puccini-style, burning their poems in freezing garrets because they can’t afford to buy wood for the stove.

Clichés and cultural associations about creatives abound. But the truth is less obvious and superficial.

The idea of the creative individual as flamboyant and out of step is a cartoon. Many of the most creative thinkers would pass you by on the street without warranting a second glance. Flamboyance is not a reliable indicator of creativity.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, the famous psychology professor from the University of Chicago, says that highly creative individuals like Van Gogh usually fail to make an impression in their lifetimes because they are only creative individuals. Which isn’t enough. To make a significant difference, highly creative individuals must also have a command of their domain.

Compare Van Gogh with Picasso. Picasso was classically trained in art. As a child he was a prodigy. In his own words, “Once I drew like Raphael, but it has taken me a whole lifetime to learn to draw like children.” His work was widely accepted in his field. Gallery owners, critics and collectors validated his exploration and experimentation. In his lifetime Picasso was a superstar. Without each of these elements working together he would have been just another talented amateur; though, possibly, because his work was so different from the artistic conventions of the day, even his talent might have been questioned.

“The idea of the creative individual as flamboyant and out of step is a cartoon. Many of the most creative thinkers would pass you by on the street without warranting a second glance.”

I have been talking to high school kids about choosing careers in the creative economy. My own experience of leaving school at 15 seems attractive to some (I returned to study after three years of working in a factory). I encourage them to go on to further study or acquire a skill in a particular domain. Breaking rules is easier when you know what they are. Exploring ideas and innovation is easier when it is focused. Some people come up with a random idea that becomes a wildcard success; but consistently applied creativity in a particular domain will deliver more viable ideas than serendipity.

One of the issues stemming from the discussion of Generation C in Idealog is whether the capacity to create and distribute works validates the work itself. In the context of this discussion the answer is no. Value is determined by whether the thing created makes a difference. The blogosphere is crowded with the musings of anyone with access to the Internet (I have coined a word for this: bloggeral). Amateur poetry and artworks are not made important by being self-published any more than a child’s painting becomes a masterpiece when it is framed.

The warm, fuzzy democratic ideal that ‘everyone is creative’ shouldn’t be misinterpreted to mean that everyone will create something worthwhile. The chances increase with education, application and participation in the wider field. A widespread and lifelong dedication to learning and enquiry will make a big impact on the success of New Zealand among the world’s creative economies. The more prepared we are, the luckier we’ll be.

David MacGregor is a co-founder of Idealog. He is also a creative consultant and teaches at Massey University School of Design