Category Archives: Essay/short story

At the Intersection of Curiosity and Creativity

Seems like I’ve run across a number of articles over the past month or so dealing with a variety of topics in the realm of creativity. This posting is no different, and, yet, it is, uh, different. While many may find it difficult to define what creativity is, many will no doubt have an easy time knowing about curiosity. While everyone is curious, not everyone sees themselves as creative. Well, maybe this post will alter your perspective.

An article I recently came across by Helge Tennø discusses what happens at the intersection of creativity and curiosity, and what doesn’t happen.

He states the reason we struggle to come up with original ideas is not for a lack of creativity but a lack of curiosity.

“Every year we go into the same room with the same information and the same questions .. what do you think happens? Every year we come out with the same ideas” — frustrated workshop facilitator.

Creativity is limited to what we already know, it is only the re-combination of available information and experience. Creativity is not magic, it doesn’t produce ideas out of thin air.

In addition, most competitors think the same way, because they use the same methods and the same questions to find the same insights.

Outperforming your competition is not as much about who is the most creative or who has the deepest data. It’s as much about who can see something nobody else can.

Currently the trend is to apply a lot of data to buy our way out of this problem. Hoping that the machine will magically see connections our human brains can’t.

But machines are only reflections of our own values, ideas and biases. If we are staring down one rabbit hole the machine will only help us dig deeper.

We should therefore redesign our creative workshops. From combining information into ideas, to exploring questions we need to ask and information we don’t have.

There is a simple way to unlock this behavior: just ask “what has to be true for x to be true”, where x is your strategy, an existing product, something you are already doing .. anything.

One of the most productive ways to learn something new is experimentation.

The purpose of an experiment is not to confirm that you are correct (sometimes it is), but it should most often be used to surprise you.

To help you learn something that you didn’t know two minutes prior.

And the way to do that is to reduce the cost of an experiment to almost zero (because if experiments are expensive the organization will more likely prioritize experiments confirming their existing knowledge).

“The real measure of success is the number of experiments that can be crowded into 24 hours.” — Thomas Alva Edison

With cheap and fast experiments the company can explore hypotheses and assumptions they never tested before, learn new things, capture new insights, venture into new areas.

With their new learnings they can combine both information they never had before with questions they never asked before.

“Researchers suggest it is uncertainty, or when you think you know something then discover you don’t, that leads to curiosity and learning outcomes.” — Celeste Kidd, assistant professor of psychology at UC Berkeley.

In short:

We only know what we know, and we know very little. (But we know a lot more than we think we do.)

We need to shift our focus from creativity to insights and questions. And experimentation is a low hanging fruit and one of the fastest tracks we can use to get us there.

Recommended places to start your experimentation journey:

(4). Experimentation works, Stefan H. Thomke

(5). How managers can build a culture of experimentation, Frank V. Cespedes and Neil Hoyne

(6). Why Business Schools Need to Teach Experimentation, by Elizabeth R. Tenney, Elaine Costa, and Ruchi M. Watson

(7). Get Comfortable Breaking Your Product, Rik Higham

 

While I agree with most of what the author states, creativity should always embrace insights and questions. Creativity is not borne out of thin air but rather from the insights and experiences we have within us. Curiosity can definitely spur on creativity and vice versa.

 

Hopefully making a ruckus, one blog post at a time!

Be sure to check out my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for personal insights on life and its detours.

And, check out creative selections from my website.

Jolan tru!

Story is Still King in the Creative World. Here’s Why.

Whether it’s on TikTok, Twitter or television, storytelling is at the heart of advertising. Recently, storytelling mixing with creativity found its way into my inbox. I thought it appropriate to share here, on my creativity blog.

Margaret McGovern, Executive Creative Director of Boathouse, examines the key aspects of an engaging story. 

Heading into a new year always prompts questions: What’s new? What’s trending? What digital platform has risen to the top?

And there’s a lot; from vertical format to generative AI. And shorter… everything keeps getting shorter. Six seconds! How can you capture someone’s attention in six seconds in a compelling way, and without sound? 

Plus, it’s hard to predict anything anymore. From the rise of TikTok and the creation of the metaverse, to whatever is going on at Twitter, it’s all up for grabs. But, if there’s anything all of this change has shown, it’s that storytelling will be front and center because it’s the one thing that ties it all together

We still have a long way to go 

What we are seeing is a rise in inclusivity and equity. Voices that have been marginalized in film-making, and in all creative fields, are finally being heard. These inequities are finally shifting and trending in the right direction. Toy companies are removing gender labels, fashion brands are embracing a non-binary world, welcoming anyone to wear their clothes. My hope that this uptick in acceptance and inclusivity of truly all voices continues.

The metaverse is trying to TikTok its way into the hearts and minds of Gen Z and the generation that comes after that or, basically, pretty much anyone who will pay attention to it. There will always be a new digital stage to perform on but one thing will remain the same, the extraordinary power of telling a great story. Be cutting edge, create something we haven’t seen before, put it on a platform we are just starting to understand but, without a story, it all falls apart. 

We are in the business of capturing hearts and minds. It is our job to meaningfully connect people, brands, products and culture. Storytelling will always be front and center, it’s the one thing that ties it and us all together. Without a story, we come up short.

Narrative and storytelling

If a story is compelling, delivers on a universal truth or just makes us laugh or smile for six seconds, then it is a great story and will result in quality creative work, regardless of whether it has been shot on a phone, in someone’s dining room, or by a film crew of 30 people with a six-figure budget.

Never has it been more important to stick to the core of storytelling to help work stand out amid the proliferation of video. The world is full of video; we are living in self-created and curated bubbles and consuming more video content than ever before. But there is a reason for this; it drives engagement like nothing else. 

However, attention is a limited resource, and we need to get the right message in front of the right consumer at the right time. Media is fragmented and attention is at a deficit. Narrative pulls it all together and lets us focus on what story needs to be told, when and where. Plus, AI is helping us understand what’s out there, what is working, and why.

New ways to tell essential stories

The pandemic taught us that stories can be shot on smartphones, or even filmed over Zoom. Who would have thought that a Zoom-created commercial would ever be a thing? But, however they were captured, riveting stories emerged, tapping into universal experiences shared by all of us. This approach to film-making, doing whatever it took to tell a story, helped to revolutionize and re-imagine the standards for quality content the industry had created. And the consumers came along with open minds, willing to engage, watch, digest.

Probably key to this work created in serious times was the notion of authenticity, and it has increasingly become an important component of marketing. Content that is too slick or too branded will be dismissed. The savvy consumer knows when they are being played and information needs to be imparted in a clear, concise manner. Messages can be entertaining and humorous, but most of all they should simply be human. We humans fall for humanity every time and we use story to understand our world and all that happens in it. Authentic storytelling, inclusive of all voices, is what we need in the politically charged, troubled and climate-challenged world we live in. 

The opportunity for creativity and storytelling has never been greater. Our digital, always-on culture means we are consuming content at breakneck speed, which means there are countless opportunities to make powerful work that connects between brands and their audiences. Contrast this with the way work was created 25 years ago, when brands had such limited channels and opportunities, and 2023 is looking pretty good.

While brands may have countless opportunities, as Margaret points out, they also have more competition and more eyes and ears among which they must travel. Bud Light is finding that to be true as they endeavor to change the transgender story to a story much more positive. Today’s storytelling mixed with the right amount of creativity can make for a rather nice  and appetizing recipe. Bon appetite!
 
 

Hopefully making a ruckus, one blog post at a time!

Be sure to check out my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for personal insights on life and its detours.

And, check out creative selections from my website.

Jolan tru!

 

Creativity is Productivity

Recently I came upon an article about creativity and productivity by Wall Street Journal best selling book author Scott Young. In it he explores various traits of creative people and how they transition into productivity. Below is an interesting excerpt of his findings.

Nearly two centuries ago, the Belgian sociologist Adolphe Quetelet observed the impressively tight link between personal productivity and creative success.

More recently, Dean Simonton has analyzed the creative output of individuals across many domains and suggests an “equal-odds” rule best describes it: once a creative individual starts publishing in a field, each piece of work they produce has roughly equal odds of world-breaking impact.

 

The Surprising Equipotential of Creative Success

 Consider, for a moment, what this theory rejects:

  1. Accumulating expertise. We might expect steadily improving skills through deliberate practice and a widening knowledge base would lead to increased creative success. Except, this is not what we see outside of the initial preparatory training to enter a career.
  2. Youthful genius. Alternatively, we might expect creativity to decline as thinkers become burdened by old ways of doing things. Were this true, we would predict a reduced rate of creative success over time. But this wasn’t observed in Simonton’s research.

Instead, it looks like the most important determinant of creative success is simply how much work you produce.

 

Creative Success as Randomness

A simple model might capture the essential details of this trend:

  • Be at a knowledge frontier. You can’t contribute anything new if you’re not at the boundary of knowledge for a discipline. In academia, this usually prevents undergraduates from publishing many papers; in technology, this prevents unskilled inventors from obtaining new patents. Other work suggests painters and composers have similar ramp-up periods where their work is initially unremarkable. Getting to this threshold is non-trivial and takes considerable time and training.
  • Idea generation and public reception are randomly determined processes. Once you reach the threshold, further advances have a significant random component. This might be due to the trial-and-error process of finding new advances. Or it might come from the unpredictability of public taste as to what work receives acclaim.

The randomness of creative success favors those who are the most prolific. Price’s Law captures this relationship in scientific output. So in a field with 100 contributors, ten will produce half of the published output. If every paper in the field has a roughly equal probability of being cited, these ten highly prolific authors will capture approximately half of all citations in their field.

 

To Produce Better Work, Increase Your Output

Photo by Avi Richards on Unsplash

Intuitively, it feels like there ought to be a strong quality-quantity trade-off in one’s work. You can make a few excellent things, or you can produce a lot of mediocre work. Certainly there are lots of things that increase productivity at the expense of quality. Typing random words on a page and hitting publish would increase essay count at the cost of writing quality dropping to zero. However, it’s interesting to note that Mr. Young’s most-viewed articles have tended to come from his more prolific writing periods.

We prefer to attach creative success to a combination of innate talent, acquired ability and passionate commitment. Placing such significance on chance appears to cheapen the achievements of great artists, inventors and scientists.

Yet perhaps it’s because we’re so uncomfortable likening creativity to a lottery that this perspective is undervalued. Over a surprisingly wide range of pursuits, creativity is productivity, and we will have more hits if we take more swings.

That may seem quite obvious but one still should not downplay raw talent and determination, as Scott points out.

Scott H. Young, author of WSJ best selling book: Ultralearning www.scotthyoung.com

 

Hopefully making a ruckus, one blog post at a time!

Be sure to check out my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for personal insights on life and its detours.

And, check out creative selections from my website.

Jolan tru!

 

Can AI and Creativity Coexist? An AI Followup

Recently we have been hearing a great deal about Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its impact on society. Last week this blog posted some of that information and this week shares with you a followup of sorts. Below is part of an interview with two professors from UCLA, Jacob Foster and Danny Snelson, and their take on AI’s influence on us. Thanks to Jonathan Riggs for spearheading the effort.

 

One of the Writers Guild of America’s demands in its current strike is for studios to regulate the use of artificial intelligence for creating, writing and rewriting TV and movie scripts and other material.

That might have sounded like a far-fetched concern just a few years ago. But with increasingly sophisticated, easily accessed AI tools already making inroads in other creative fields — literary magazines and fine arts competitions have lately had to contend with a glut of AI-generated submissions — there is a very real concern that expensive, time-intensive human creative labor could soon be outsourced to machines.

Higher education has reached an inflection point, too, now that AI tools can pass graduate-level exams and write serviceable essays at the touch of a button. Already, UCLA has posted a faculty guide and held a virtual town hall on the subject.

“We in the humanities have long thought about these kinds of questions, especially at the experimental limits of what constitutes creativity,” said Danny Snelson, a UCLA assistant professor of English and a writer, editor and archivist. “Lately I’ve been thinking about this artwork by Robert Rauschenberg from 1961 in which he sent a one-line telegram: ‘This Is a Portrait of Iris Clert if I Say So.’ It’s a perfect rejoinder to where some of the debates about creativity and AI are right now.”

Jacob Foster is a UCLA associate professor of sociology, computational social scientist and co-director of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which unites scholars to explore cognition in all forms. He also has pondered the revolution that appears to be unfolding.

“Something terrible and amazing is about to happen, but no one has a full idea what these systems are capable of — or an entirely clear picture of how they do the things that they do,” he said.

In a joint interview, Foster and Snelson spoke about how chatbots could be used in teaching, offered historic analogs for the current AI explosion and opined about whether technology is actually capable of creativity. Answers have been edited slightly for length and clarity.

 

Are you excited or concerned about where AI is headed — or both?

Jacob Foster: I’m excited, given my broad interest in how complex wholes become smarter than their parts. I agree with the school of thought that says AI creates opportunities to get at a more fundamental understanding of — and clarity about — things like intelligence and creativity.

Danny Snelson                                                        David Esquivel/UCLA

Danny Snelson: I’m tremendously excited watching these developments unfold, but in a physiological sense — an excited state of fight or flight. Things are moving faster than we can understand them. These developments change things in ways that matter. The effects of algorithmic bias are real and the harms of technological development are never equally distributed.

Foster: To that point, I recently asked ChatGPT to write short plays about the nature of creativity. Until I explicitly told it that the expert on creativity had to be a woman, it always came up with a story about a singular male genius interacting with a female muse or with a female petitioner seeking his advice.

When you read the technical report for GPT, they have worked very hard to tamp down on problematic responses — for example, using reinforcement learning with human feedback — but even this neutral prompt resulted in a gender-biased response. AI is a mirror of the things we’ve written and the stories we’ve told, and that becomes a much bigger deal when it’s potentially determining who gets jobs or certain insurance rates.

I’m helping to organize a program at our Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics on the mathematics of intelligences, and trying to develop the theoretical foundations of AI is obviously a big motivation. I don’t think we have the resources within social theory to think about the possible rearrangements of society that such technologies could enable. We don’t know how to deal with social change that’s happening so quickly and pervasively.

 

Is AI capable of creativity?

Foster: We often reserve the notion of creativity for the capacity to generate interesting, novel things. But the contrarian part of me wants to argue when people say, “Large language models aren’t creative; they’re just putting things together.” Humans do that, too — look at many of the papers produced by students or academics!

Snelson: These systems reveal just how formally consistent most writing is. The more generic the formats that these predictive models simulate, the more successful they are. These developments push us to recognize the normative functions of our forms and potentially transform them.

Jacob Foster                                                           David Esquivel/UCLA

Foster: I think of the short film “Sunspring,” directed by my friend Oscar Sharp, which came out in 2016 and was the first movie written by AI. The script itself is only borderline coherent — this was a much earlier iteration of the technology — but it becomes something much more elevated when interpreted by the human actors, director and viewers.

Snelson: William S. Burroughs would cut up different texts and smash them together to produce a kind of surrealist energy. And he said this beautiful thing, which is that by using this cut-up method, you’re cutting into the present for the future to leak out. Right now, we have an opportunity to think about these new forms of fluid, coherent, algorithmic writing and how we might cut into them to see what they might reveal.

 

Can ChatGPT actually be an asset in teaching at the university level?

Snelson: In my Intro to Comics course, my students collectively wrote a full book in the first week, before they knew anything about the subject, using ChatGPT. I think it’s useful for them to experiment with the essay, and then for the rest of the course we instead use comics formats to produce new knowledge about comics.

We want our students to use modes of critical thinking to navigate the world around them, which now includes these AI tools. Experimenting and playing with them will prepare students, hopefully, to think critically in a technological environment that’s always changing and shifting.

Foster: That’s a very helpful tonic for the prejudice that the essay is a necessary gym to build the skills we want students to have. It’s of a type with my faintly ludicrous “old person” attitude that me learning how to use card catalogs made me uniquely capable to deal with the internet age.

Snelson: Right now, for example, there’s a moral panic in academe about essays. Having taught the fundamentals of argumentation, evidence and rhetoric for over a decade, I can tell you essay writing is not a mysterious formula. The essay has stood strong for a while now; it has limitations that other modes — some of which are still to be invented — may yet be better at when it comes to inspiring students to develop the kind of critical thought needed to address generative algorithms.

Foster and Snelson chatting in the UCLA Court of Sciences                                                                            David Esquivel/UCLA

 

How will we look back on this moment in time?

Snelson: If the history of major technological inventions is any indicator — I’m thinking here of the printing press and the internet — we’ll look back at this time as a moment of confusion and flux with a huge amount of widespread misunderstanding, and, hopefully, with unexpected avenues toward a better future.

It makes me think of this great anecdote by Rudy Rucker, who helped invent the genre of cyberpunk fiction in the 1980s. At some point, he woke up with this universal computing device in his hand that could access all of human knowledge while still living in the extreme disparities of contemporary America and he realized that a cyberpunk future was already well underway.

Foster: In some sense, this is a generalization and acceleration of the experience humans have always had negotiating a world of vast forces far beyond themselves.

As folks like the computer scientist Danny Hillis and mathematician Norbert Wiener have remarked, we’ve been dealing with artificial intelligence for centuries, in the form of corporations and bureaucracies that take human beings as their parts and turn them into vast, impersonal collective machines. Will we be able to tame or resist these new machines? I hope so.

 

On a side note: The Houston Area Apple Users Group will meet on May 20, 2023, with the main meeting topic being AI Chatbots. We will be comparing Google Bard, Microsoft Bing, and OpenAI ChatGPT. This meeting will be held via Zoom. 

Creativity + Constraints = A Good Pairing?

When one adds any sort of constraint to the creative process, one gets bogged down, right? Um, not necessarily. In fact, it could be just the opposite. From a variety of perspectives, constraints can open up dialogue and creative opportunities not originally thought or considered.

Portions of this blog post, originated by one, Lee Duncan, got me to thinking about just that. In the early stages of writing a short story, I jotted down some thoughts on my iPhone, knowing they would be automatically “copied” to another application (Notes) on my laptop so I could continue at some later date. When that later date came and I went to access them on my laptop, the additions I had made were nowhere to be found.

Oh, the horror!

I discovered a major constraint! Now, I had to rely on memory to reconstruct the few paragraphs I had previously written. I realized I couldn’t remember everything word for word so I revised my thinking a bit to write new dialogue based around what I did remember. All in all, it turned out okay (so far).

In his post, Duncan cites that designers, artists, writers, and creatives of all kinds are often told to “think outside the box” and let their imagination run wild. He asserts that creativity loves constraints. That limitations can actually enhance our creativity rather than hinder it? I tend to agree.

Both he and I agree that the idea that constraints can fuel creativity is not new. In fact, it has been embraced by some of the world’s most innovative thinkers, including Dr. Seuss, who famously wrote “Green Eggs and Ham” using only 50 different words. Steve Jobs once said, “Creativity is just connecting things. When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while. That’s because they were able to connect experiences they’ve had and synthesize new things.”

Thinking Differently

Constraints force us to think differently. Or “newly” as in my case. They force us to look at a problem from a different angle and approach it in a new way. When we’re faced with limitations, we’re forced to be more resourceful, more innovative, and more creative.

Duncan cites an Instagram example: In the early days, the platform’s co-founders were faced with a constraint: they had to build a photo-sharing app for the iPhone using only the phone’s built-in camera. Rather than seeing this as a limitation, they embraced it and created a platform that revolutionized the way we share and consume visual content.

The Brain on Constraints

Research has shown that constraints can actually stimulate the brain and enhance our problem-solving abilities. When faced with a difficult problem, our brains tend to default to familiar solutions. But when we’re presented with constraints, we’re forced to explore new solutions and think outside the box.

One study conducted by the University of Amsterdam found that participants who were given a set of constraints to work within were more creative in their problem-solving than those who were given no constraints at all. Another study found that imposing a deadline on a creative project actually increased creativity, as it forced participants to make decisions and move forward with their work.

In my view, this wouldn’t necessarily increase creativity but it would increase the possibility of failure or at the very least, some new ideas. Creativity would then evolve.

Ideas and Constraints

Constraints can therefore help us generate better ideas. When we’re given a blank slate and no direction, it can be overwhelming and difficult to know where to start. You’re sort of blindly throwing the dart at the board and seeing where it lands. But when we’re given a set of constraints, we’re forced to work within certain parameters, which can actually help us come up with more focused and relevant ideas.

When a group of designers was tasked with creating a new line of office furniture, they were given a set of constraints to work within, including a specific budget and a requirement that the furniture be modular and easy to assemble. Rather than hindering their creativity, these constraints helped them generate a range of innovative ideas that met the client’s needs and exceeded their expectations.

Applying Constraints to Facilitation

Constraints can also be applied to facilitation, or the process of leading a group through a creative problem-solving process. By imposing constraints on the group, the facilitator can help guide them toward more creative solutions.

For example, a facilitator might ask a group to brainstorm ideas for a new product, but impose a constraint that the product must be made entirely from recycled materials. This constraint forces the group to think about sustainability and environmental impact, which can lead to more innovative ideas.

If no constraints were added, the group might generate hundreds of new ideas but would have to undergo a due diligence exercise to decide which ideas were better and then further decide how to proceed. That’s another exercise entirely but well worth the time invested.

While it may seem counter-intuitive, constraints can actually be a powerful tool for fueling creativity. They force us to think differently, stimulate our brains, help us generate better ideas, and can be applied to facilitation to guide groups toward more innovative solutions.

When constraints happen, and they will, gather your thoughts and let your imagination roam, exploring new opportunities and possibilities. I think you’ll find that paired together, creativity and constraints make for a viable coupling.

 

This blog post is based upon an article by Lee Duncan, an IBM Enterprise Design Thinking Leader.

 

Hopefully making a ruckus, one blog post at a time!

Be sure to check out my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for personal insights on life and its detours.

And, check out creative selections from my website.

Jolan tru!

 

The Season of Creativity

As each of our seasons progress, my good friend Felix Scardino passes on a seasonal message meant to inspire and provoke thoughtfulness in each of us. As Spring has arisen, so, too, has the Season of Creativity. Felix’s message for this Spring is as follows . . .

In our winter message, The Season of Inwardness, Thomas Merton urged us to Trust the winter when the plant says nothing. He was reminding us that, although things appear dead, hidden within them are resources that lead to new life. With its burst of color and growth, spring validates that concept. Let this season be your teacher. Spring can remind you not to jump to dire conclusions when all seems lost, when you can’t see much in your future, or when you feel that your reserves have dried up.

Take a lesson from nature. Our resources for new ideas and insights are often so hidden that our lives look like dead branches. If you find yourself in a personal winter of doubt, confusion and fear (what Shakespeare calls the Winter of our Discontent), rest assured that there is a creative source within you. You will begin to see shoots of life and hope, which usher you into your spring. But be prepared to work for it!

In spring, at the end of the day, you should smell like dirt. ~ Margaret Atwood

‘Smell like dirt’ means be willing to do the work, take a chance, experiment, risk disapproval, fall on your face, start over! New biomedical research suggests that you will thereby activate your healing system. We feel most alive when, acting from our deepest nature, we allow what lives inside of us to come out.

Don’t wait for the big bang of colossal insights before you roll up your sleeves. Trust the “still, small voice” of your quiet inkling and hunches–not by thinking about them, but by acting on them.

Honor them, work with them, shape them as you would clay. Speak them, write them and teach them in your office and at school. Stir them, mix them and chop them in your kitchen. Hammer them, sand them and paint them in your workshop. Make bold strokes. Make a mess. You can always clean it up and start over.

Welcome spring and your new creative self!

Felix Scardino, LCSW

 

Hopefully making a ruckus, one blog post at a time!

Be sure to check out my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for personal insights on life and its detours.

And, check out creative selections from my website.

Jolan tru!

The Day the Monster Visited Martian Colony

{Author’s Note: This is a special blog post featuring my 12th short story. This Thursday will also feature the story on my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for those different audience members. Hope you enjoy it and Happy Mardi Gras!}

 

It was an unassuming place by all accounts. It stood there off the beaten path but welcoming to those wanting of a beverage or two. Or so it seemed. John and Terry were on their way home after a series of meetings during the day when they drove by in their hovercraft and decided to stop. As soon as the pair walked up to the entrance, they were met by the Bouncer who unemotionally proclaimed that only Terry was really welcomed here.

When the two inquired as to why, they were told that no one of blue skin was allowed inside. When the two pressed the issue, saying it was ridiculous in this day and age, they came nose to barrel with an old fashion, but still lethal, shotgun. The Bouncer simply stated that should they try to enter, they would be blown to bits. Both of them. When Terry asked why both of them, he was told, “Because you brought Blueskin with you!”

Feeling rightly discriminated upon, the two attempted to gain entrance. John immediately grabbed for the shotgun when it went off right in John’s face. As his head rolled down the steps, the gun went off again in Terry’s direction and in seconds only his torso remained standing. The bouncer just stood there, unemotional, and called for “cleanup at the entrance.” Soon, the bodies were quickly carried off and all was back to “normal.”

The Monster was alive and well.

Continue reading →

Special Post – Beyond the Majestic: The Final Chapter

This is the third and final installment in the Majestic Trilogy. After several months of waiting for the next developments in the story line of the original “Stopover at The Majestic“, and its sequel, “Beyond the Majestic: The Evil Doer“, comes the Final Chapter. This special blog post highlights this last installment.

Majestic Hotel, Lake Charles, LA, circa unknown

Previously at The Majestic

As we were about to leave the last part of the Evil Doer sequel, the lobby was a scene of chaos. Mr. Curtis, still somewhat dazed, began to slowly move around and see to the cop. It would be a few minutes before emergency personnel would appear on the scene. In the midst of all this, Mr. Curtis wondered if the explosion were merely coincidental or if it was a plan by the GM to help him get away and remain on the Galaxy’s Most Wanted List.

That would have to be a question left for another day. Why was the GM/Time Traveler doing all this? Why did he want the Majestic transported to another time? Why be so reckless? Too many questions. Too few answers, thought Mr. Curtis. Now what?

As he tried to make his way around the immediate chaos where the cop lay, Mr. Curtis felt unsure of himself. He got more woozy and unsteady. Then as he got to the cop, Mr. Curtis suddenly fell to the floor, unconscious. Their search for answers would have to wait.

 

And Now, The Final Chapter

“Get that damn light out of my face!,” exclaimed Mr. Curtis. “Relax sir,” intoned the stranger. “Just checking your reflexes and your cornea.”

“Who are you and where am I?,” asked Mr. Curtis. “You’re in the hospital. I’m Dr. Zooski. You’re doing just fine, all things considered,” he said.

“Whaddaya mean?,” retorted Mr. Curtis.

“You’ve suffered a concussion and been in a coma, sir,” explained the good doctor.

“How long have I been out?,” inquired Mr. Curtis.

“Three months, fourteen days, seven hours and some assorted minutes,” said Dr. Zooski.

“Three months!,” exclaimed Mr. Curtis. “I’ve gotta get outta here! Wait, how’s the officer who was injured nearby? I need to talk to him. I need to find the GM of the Majestic, find out where he went,” explained Mr. Curtis.

“Hold on, sir. You’re not going anywhere for awhile. You just woke up from a three-month coma and we want to make sure you’re okay,” said the doc. “As for your officer friend, I’m sorry to say he didn’t make it. His internal injuries were more than he could overcome. And I have no idea about the Majestic GM,” said the doctor.

Mr. Curtis then realized that now he was on his own if he wanted to get to the bottom of the GM’s involvement with the explosion and the status of the Majestic. But where would he go and what would he do? These questions naturally troubled Mr. Curtis and also made his headache worse. No matter, he obviously wasn’t going anywhere for some time and now had more time to think and consider possibilities.

 

******

 

It has been several weeks since Mr. Curtis awakened from his coma and he was feeling much more like his old self. He thought in order to start gathering some clarification on the explosion, he’d return to the scene of the crime, the Majestic. He would talk to management and find out what, if anything, they knew. Maybe a few clues would emerge.

What he learned was that the explosion was no accident, it was arson. Evidence on the scene indicated that the former GM had indeed played a part if not planned and executed the whole thing. Question is: Where is he now? And why did he do it?

Mr. Curtis found himself wondering if other, additional sites have been targeted by this fellow and if they would alter the Space-Time Continuum. Curtis had to find out and subsequently stop him.

If the GM had been set on “moving” the Majestic into the future for whatever the reason, Mr. Curtis thought, wouldn’t it make sense for him to set himself up as general manager of the futuristic Majestic and have it serve as his HQ for more evil doing?

With this in mind, Curtis set out to locate him and confront him, and, hopefully, put a stop to the madness. So, with his time-traveling cane, Mr. Curtis set off to the future, the 24th Century to be exact. This is where he felt the GM had settled with the new Majestic.

Upon reappearing inside this futuristic Majestic, Mr. Curtis wasted no time in searching for the GM. In a matter of minutes, he found him. Not ever knowing the man’s name, Curtis opted for an introduction of himself and immediately knew the GM recognized him. After a few moments of surprise, the GM collected himself and introduced his person to Mr. Curtis. However, the look of surprise and concern were still evident on the GM’s face.

Nevertheless, the GM did not try to run away. Instead, he remained calm and in conversation with Mr. Curtis. He even acknowledged he was aware of what happened to the old Majestic and felt bad about the explosion in the historic landmark. He was not aware, however, that the officer at the scene had died. He also never admitted responsibility.

Mr. Curtis laid it out clearly for him who he was and his mission: Making the GM pay for his crimes. The GM seemed unflappable and unmoved by the possible repercussions. As such, he turned away from Mr. Curtis, answering no more questions, and proceeded to walk away.

Just then, Mr. Curtis picked up his walking stick and adjusted the very top where the indicator light showed “stun.” Pointing it toward the back of the GM, Mr. Curtis activated the setting and in a flash the GM crumbled to the marble floor unconscious.

Because a crowd had begun to gather around the two men, Mr. Curtis flashed his badge-like credentials and assured the gathering that all was under control. After a few minutes, Mr. Curtis had the GM moved to a private room where he could question him more and, if needed, to transport him back in time to the old Majestic or, possibly, even to the Space-Time Continuum Enforcement Council for trial.

Upon the GM regaining consciousness, Mr. Curtis continued with his interrogation. During questioning, he learned that the GM had indeed been responsible for the Majestic arson explosion in order to give himself a diversion for escape into the future. He had also rigged it so that he would in effect take the Majestic with him into a future setting so that he could reestablish his headquarters.

When pressed, Curtis also learned that the GM apparently acted alone in this evil deed but the GM never admitted it. Mr. Curtis thought that even if the GM acted alone, it was not beyond the realm of possibility that there were others who had been influenced by the GM and would follow him to other sites for more destruction and damage to the timeline.

Having received the information needed, Mr. Curtis decided it was time to move on and take the GM with him. He would transport him to the Enforcement Council for trial and processing. Holding up his walking stick, he merely stated, “Space-Time Continuum Enforcement Council, two to transport.” Then, poof, they were gone in an instant.

The evil GM was turned over to authorities, tried and convicted. Mr. Curtis had repaired the Space-Time Continuum and, for the moment, all was back to a rather normal state. Unfortunately for the Majestic, it would be torn down in the early 1960s for a parking lot. Thus, the Majestic of the 24th Century would cease to exist.

After the trial, Mr. Curtis returned to the Majestic of the Sixties before its demolition and was rummaging around the evil GM’s office when he came upon an oddly shaped locket. It had a ruby red crystal in the middle which was obviously designed to be pressed into some form of action. Upon closer examination, Mr. Curtis discovered that it was already set to activate and, not only that, but was currently set to emit a beacon of sorts. 

Mr. Curtis felt a deep, unsettling tenseness in his gut when he realized the beacon was “live” and transmitting. Was this some sort of homing mechanism and to whom was this signal being sent? In the pit of his soul, he didn’t really want to know but he feared it was already too late.

~

On Imagination – Another’s Thoughts

“To see, to hear, means nothing. To recognize (or not to recognize) means everything.” – André Breton

This week’s creativity blog shares another’s perspective. I’m on her email list and this particular email dissertation I found quite interesting. She goes by the name “The Used Life” and is an artist extraordinaire.

Here are some of her thoughts . . . what are some of yours?

I think of my art as an articulation of my inner life. That all of the scenes that take shape in my collage art (and poetry, too) also exist within me. There is a mystery in that which I love: that is, the mystery of human imagination. Indeed, it is a rare occasion when I am able to explain clearly and succinctly what I believe my artwork means. I like not knowing. No, I love not knowing. It is the mystery that makes it meaningful.

It is also, I think, the element of mystery that creates something akin to a mystical or religious experience—the feeling that, when I am creating, I am acting as a conduit, or channel, for “something else”, something almost otherworldly or unreal.

But, what’s the “something else”? What do I think is really happening in those moments, and what is the role of imagination in that process?

First, let me clarify by saying that I don’t define “imagination” as the ability to conjure images at will. That, I think, is a very small part of what comprises our imaginations. Here are some thoughts.

Imagination is a loss of separateness.

It is the recognition of ourselves in another—in another person, in an animal or landscape, in a character from a novel, a scrap of discarded paper, or a cardboard box. I would suggest that this “moment of recognition” is where the feelings of awe, of ecstasy, or even love that often accompany or precede creativity come from.

“Imagination is the outreaching of mind…the bombardment of the conscious mind with ideas, impulses, images and every sort of psychic phenomena welling up from the pre-conscious.” – Rollo May

What psychoanalysts might call a kind of projection, or a “leaky” subconscious. Imagination is the outpouring of inner images onto the outer world, such that a third image—a new image—may be born.

Imagination is a way of perceiving.

Maslow talks a great deal about what it means to see “unitively”, suggesting that many self-actualizing people encounter the world in a manner that allows them to see the sacred in the everyday. In the essay, “Theory Z”, he suggests self-actualizers may be divided broadly into two groups: those who experience episodes of self-transcendence (i.e., artists, poets, musicians, other creators), and those who are more pragmatic thinkers (i.e., businesspeople, entrepreneurs, politicians, scientists).

The difference between them: pragmatic thinkers deal with the here-and-now, operate within the confines of concrete reality. Transcenders are able to perceive the stuff of everyday life within the context of eternity and, as a result, are able to perceive (or feel they are perceiving) the “sacred” or “miraculous”.

What I think: the latter see imaginatively. What Maslow refers to as the perception of eternity is a function of imagination. It is the natural “outreaching of mind”, the involvement of the subconscious, or preconscious, primordial images and the emotions they carry. That’s where those feelings of “eternity,” “otherworldliness,” “surreality,” or even of encountering “the sacred” in the everyday (or in a work of art) come from.

What’s more: children see imaginatively. We were all, at one time, able to see imaginatively without trying…which leads me to my last point.

Our imaginations transform the everyday into the extraordinary.

Without the imaginative encounter—that is, without the fusion of inner and outer worlds—I doubt we would ever be able to perceive the extraordinary. I think we need those subconscious projections, those “leaky” images, impulses, and ideas. They tell us who we are. They help us make meaning. That outpouring of the unreal is what gives reality its shine.

 

Hopefully making a ruckus, one blog post at a time!

Be sure to check out my other blog, Joe’s Journey, for a different kind of playground for creativity, innovation and inspiring stuff.

Where Does Creativity Come From and How to Increase Your Own

I recently ran across a newsletter article on creativity and wanted to share some interesting aspects of it with you. Though the main source seems to be the Monitor of Psychology and its author, Kirsten Weir (see footnote below), there are numerous additional sources cited to supplement the creativity aspect.

Creativity means different things to different people. Seemingly, creativity is mostly aligned with marketing, design and the arts. But, what about science and engineering? Literature? Man’s simple ability to think? Let’s explore this to get a better feel for where creativity comes from and how best to enhance our own experience.

Creativity in the brain

What, exactly, is creativity? The standard definition used by researchers characterizes creative ideas as those that are original and effective, as described by psychologist Mark A. Runco, PhD, director of creativity research and programming at Southern Oregon University (Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2012). But effectiveness, also called utility, is a slippery concept. Is a poem useful? What makes a sculpture effective?

Runco is working on an updated definition and has considered at least a dozen suggestions from colleagues. One frequently suggested feature is authenticity. “Creativity involves an honest expression,” he said.

Meanwhile, scientists are also struggling with the best way to measure the concept. As a marker of creativity, researchers often measure divergent thinking—the ability to generate a lot of possible solutions to a problem or question. But measures of divergent thinking haven’t been found to correlate well with real-world creativity.

Does coming up with new uses for a brick imply a person will be good at abstract art or composing music or devising new methods for studying the brain?

Maybe we move away from defining creativity based on a person’s creative output and focus instead on what’s going on in the brain, ponders Adam Green, PhD, a cognitive neuroscientist at Georgetown University and founder of the Society for the Neuroscience of Creativity. “The standard definition, that creativity is novel and useful, is a description of a product,” he noted. “By looking inward, we can see the process in action and start to identify the characteristics of creative thought. Neuroimaging is helping to shift the focus from creative product to creative process.”

Creativity often involves coordination between the cognitive control network (of the brain), which is involved in executive functions such as planning and problem-solving, and the default mode network, which is most active during mind-wandering or daydreaming. The cooperation of those networks may be a unique feature of creativity, Green said.

Green’s work suggests that targeting specific areas in the brain could enhance creativity. Yet no one is suggesting that a single brain region, or even a single neural network, is responsible for creative thought.

In search of the eureka moment

Creativity looks different from person to person. And even within one brain, there are different routes to a creative spark, explained John Kounios, PhD, an experimental psychologist who studies creativity and insight at Drexel University in Philadelphia. One involves what cognitive scientists call “System 1” (also called “Type 1”) processes: quick, unconscious thoughts—aha moments—that burst into consciousness. A second route involves “System 2” processes: thinking that is slow, deliberate, and conscious. “Creativity can use one or the other or a combination of the two,” he said. “You might use Type 1 thinking to generate ideas and Type 2 to critique and refine them.”

Which pathway a person uses might depend, in part, on their expertise. “It seems there are at least two pathways to get from where you are to a creative idea,” he said.

Coming up with an idea is only one part of the creative process. A painter needs to translate their vision to canvas. An inventor has to tinker with their concept to make a prototype that actually works. Still, the aha moment is an undeniably important component of the creative process. And science is beginning to illuminate those “lightbulb moments.”

The rush you get from an aha moment might also signal that you’re onto something good, said Jonathan Schooler, PhD, a professor of psychological and brain sciences at the University of California, Santa Barbara. “Creativity is at the core of innovation. We rely on innovation for advancing humanity, as well as for pleasure and entertainment,” he said. “Creativity underlies so much of what humans value.”

He and his colleagues studied these flashes of insight among creative writers and physicists. They surveyed the participants daily for two weeks, asking them to note their creative ideas and when they occurred. Participants reported that about a fifth of the most important ideas of the day happened when they were mind-wandering and not working on a task at hand. “These solutions were more likely to be associated with an aha moment and often overcoming an impasse of some sort,” Schooler said.

Six months later, the participants revisited those ideas and rated them for creative importance. This time, they rated their previous ideas as creative, but less important than they’d initially thought. That suggests that the spark of a eureka moment may not be a reliable clue that an idea has legs. “It seems like the aha experience may be a visceral marker of an important idea. But the aha experience can also inflate the meaningfulness of an idea that doesn’t have merit,” Schooler said. “We have to be careful of false ahas.”

Continue reading →