Franklin from The Cult of Creativity 2023-1

The Cult of Creativity: A Surprisingly Recent History

By Samuel W. Franklin

  • Publisher: The University of Chicago Press (2023)

  • Location: Chicago and London

Chapter 1: Between the Commonplace and the Sublime

Identifying the Creative Person

  • Problem Statement: Defining creativity presents paradoxes; general descriptions are difficult to agree upon.

    • Need for two steps: 1) Identify creative individuals, 2) Determine common traits among them.

  • **Methods for Identification: **

    • Early research relied on reputation.

      • Some used critical approval; others sought nominations from teachers, employers, and peers.

    • Rexroth's participation in IPAR (Institute for Personality Assessment and Research) used questionnaires to assess reputation in creative fields.

    • Donald McKinnon, founder of IPAR, focused on qualities for success in modern society.

Research Shift and Approach

  • Historical Context: Shift from assessing high performers to highly creative individuals around 1955.

    • John Gardner proposed a focus on creativity growth.

  • Depth Assessment Method:

    • Combination of intelligence tests, personality assessments (e.g., Myers-Briggs Type Indicator), interviews, and casual observations.

    • Included measures of originality, aesthetic sensitivity, and artistic reactions.

Triangulating Creativity

  • Assessment of Fields: Analyzing creativity across three professions: Writers, Mathematicians, and Architects.

    • Writers: True artists, products irreducible to objective measures.

    • Mathematicians: High imaginative power, significant in theoretical contributions.

    • Architects: Balance of aesthetic and functional creativity, embodying the essence of creativity in both beauty and utility.

  • Research Objective: Discover what traits signify creative individuals beyond their professional excellence.

    • comparison among top, middle, and bottom performers

      • aimed to reveal significant traits that signify creative individuals beyond mere professional excellence.

      • By analyzing the accomplishments of these groups, researchers sought to understand how creativity manifests differently and what characteristics are shared by those considered highly creative as opposed to their less accomplished counterparts.

      • This comparative analysis likely highlighted differences in creative processes, outputs, and the impact of external factors, ultimately challenging traditional metrics of success in assessing creativity.

Defining Creativity in Architectural Research

  • Criteria for Creative Nominees:

    • Originality of thinking, constructive ingenuity, conflict with established norms when necessary.

    • However, actual selection methods often favored general merit over those specific creativity traits.

  • Challenges Faced: Difficulty in ensuring nominees represented the most original—often influenced by the modernist perspective.

Bias and Classification Pitfalls

  • Estimated Indicators of Creativity: Press coverage and accolades were used to identify creative individuals.

    • Critiques of taking eminence as a sure sign of creativity due to overlooking others outside the standard metrics.

  • Social Biases:

    • The reliance on reputation and meritocracy often ignored class, race, and gender dynamics in creativity evaluations.

The Impact of Gender and Class on Creativity

  • Perceptions of Gender in Creativity Research:

    • Early studies often reflected a male-dominated perspective on genius, leading to assumptions about women’s role in creativity.

  • Women's Involvement in the Workforce:

    • World War II shifted perceptions, as women sought financial independence and challenged traditional roles.

    • Betty Friedan's perspective on technology and women emphasized the necessity of creative intelligence in the workforce.

  • Misconceptions of Creativity:

    • Notions of women's creativity often centered on domestic roles, contrasting with the male-centered view of creative work.

Evolution of Feminist Perspectives in Creativity

  • Changes Over Time: From restrictive roles of women to acknowledging their potential for creativity.

    • Subsequent studies dispelled myths of inherent gender-based differences in creativity, showing women performed comparably when social factors were accounted for.

Final Observations

  • Societal Change through Feminism:

    • The underrepresentation of women and working-class perspectives in creativity studies sparked discussions about rights and recognition in creative fields.

    • Friedan's call for recognition of women’s creative potential marked an important shift in societal thinking about gender and creativity.

Claims of the Reading: The Cult of Creativity

  1. Defining Creativity: Creativity is inherently difficult to define due to its paradoxical nature and the variability in descriptions across different research contexts.

  2. Methods of Identification: Early research primarily relied on reputation, utilizing various nomination techniques, while modern approaches focus on assessing specific traits of individuals identified as creative.

  3. Shift in Research Objective: There has been a historical shift from studying high-performing individuals to those with genuine creativity, promoting a focus on fostering growth in creativity.

  4. Triangulating Creativity Across Disciplines: Creativity manifests differently across various professions—Writers, Mathematicians, and Architects—each embodying unique aspects of creative expression and assessment criteria.

  5. Impact of Bias and Classification: The existing practices for identifying creative individuals frequently overlook the contributions of marginalized groups, including women, due to inherent biases in the assessment processes.

  6. Gender Dynamics in Creativity: Historical perceptions of creativity have been skewed by a male-dominated perspective, but significant societal changes have highlighted women's potential contributions to creative fields, particularly post-World War II.

  7. Evolution of Feminist Perspectives: The promotion of women's roles in creativity has evolved, showcasing that creativity is not gender-specific and emphasizing the need to address social factors influencing creative contributions.

Questions for discussion

  1. How have historical perceptions and biases regarding gender influenced the study and evaluation of creativity, particularly in the context of women's contributions?

  2. In what ways can modern research methods improve the identification of creativity beyond traditional measures of reputation and acclaim?

  3. What role do social factors, such as class and race, play in shaping perceptions of creativity, and how can we mitigate bias when assessing creative individuals?

Quotes:

  1. "Defining creativity presents paradoxes; general descriptions are difficult to agree upon." (p. 5)

  2. "Early studies often reflected a male-dominated perspective on genius, leading to assumptions about women’s role in creativity." (p. 12)

  3. "The underrepresentation of women and working-class perspectives in creativity studies sparked discussions about rights and recognition in creative fields." (p. 25)