The Concept of Creative Social Systems - Book Report/Review Example

"Creativity is not the product of single individuals, but of social systems making judgements about individuals' products (Csiksentmihalyi). Discussthe strengths and weaknesses of this approach to the study of creativity. Before discussing Csikszentmihalyi's concept of Creativity and the influence of social systems to it, let me first define what creativity is. Creativity is one of the most intriguing and most complex topics available. Behind the trailblazing creations and milestones that a creative person had accomplished is a painstaking and nerve-wracking process that only him can accomplish. From the vague insight of his future masterpiece to the astounding and awe-inspiring product of his once figment of his rich imagination a creative person has the passion to create something out of virtually nothing. Because of its complex nature there have been diverse views about creativity. Before the scientific study on it had taken place, people view it as something mysterious and exclusive only to a very selected and talented people. According to Edward de Bono, one of its popular misconceptions is that it is "a mysterious talent that only some people have (De Bono, 2004)." After their extensive research, modern psychologists have been able to debunk this delimiting idea and defined it as "a mental process involving the generation of new ideas and concepts, or new associations between existing ideas and concepts (Creativity, 2007)." In this definition, creativity is now a mental process that every person has the capacity to do. Anyone can be have this skill as long as a person abide by the procedures that one should undertake to accomplish a creative feat. However innovative discoveries that have not improved culture of a society is not fit to be called a Creative feat. Aside from mere coming out of fresh concepts or interlinking previous ideas to produce an original one, the renowned psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi added other factors that will complete his creative process. He laid down five steps in the creative process (Clark, 2004). These are: Preparation - an immersion in the interesting issues wherein creative solutions are needed. Incubation - subconscious and unconscious step where different ideas are juiced up. Insight - the moment when the ideas in the incubation period are interlinked to form a conclusion to the problem being resolved. Evaluation - phase when the decision whether the insight is "valuable and worth pursuing." Elaboration - transforming the creative insight into reality. For Csikszentmihalyi, forgoing any one of these steps will render the whole creative process incomplete, and thus making the final product uncreative. Therefore if a person has only attained the evaluation level and fail to reach the elaboration stage, this person has virtually created nothing. Csikszentmihalyi distinguished two kinds of creativity. The first is creativity with initial written in small "c". For him, this is "personal creativity," the one that all persons are striving to have. It is also kind that we want our children to develop. The second kind is spelled with a capital "C." This kind, which is "cultural creativity," requires that the creative individual should have impact to the culture and the society wherein he belongs (1995). It is the Creativity with capital "C" that Csikszentmihalyi is more particular with. For him the other kind of creativity is just a part of a complete social picture, which the kind with capital "C" is more concerned on. Csikszentmihalyi's approach to studying Creativity was by considering the interactions between individuals, society and culture. When Csikszentmihalyi developed his systems view of creativity he turned his attention away from "What is creativity" and instead focused on the question "Where is creativity" Considering the creative process that he developed, he questioned the idea that the creative processes are only to be found in the mind of the creative individual. Instead he suggested that this essential creative process, whether personal or socio-culturally defined, are to be found in the interactions between individuals and the society that they are situated in. This is the foundation of systems view of creativity that Csikszentmihalyi developed. It is a model of behaviour of creative systems that included interactions among the major components of a creative society. To introduce his concept of a creative society, he first identified three important components of a creative system, firstly the individual, secondly the cultural or symbolic component called the domain, and thirdly there is a social or interactive component called the field. An individual's role in the systems view of creativity is to bring about some transformation of the knowledge held in the domain. He will compile, study and use these to create something that will improve the society he belongs. Under the state of what Csikszentmihalyi call flow, "a deep and uniquely human motivation to excel, exceed, and triumph over limitation. (Debold)," a person experiences ecstatic experiences that ignites and breeds creativity. In the state of flow a person is: 1. "Completely involved, focused, concentrating" - with this either due to innate curiosity or as the result of training 2. "Sense of ecstasy" - It is a state wherein he feels as if he is outside reality. 3. "Great inner clarity" - People under this state has a clear direction on what he is about to do. 4. "Knowing the activity is doable" - under this state a person is deeply immersed in what he is doing that his skills are adequate for the job and neither anxious or bored. 5. "Sense of serenity" - he has a calm insight on what he is about to do free of worries about himself. He transcends beyond his normal consciousness. 6. "Timeliness" - he is present-oriented and unmindful of the passing time. 7. Intrinsic motivation - whatever produces "flow" becomes its own reward (Farmer, 1999). For Csikszentmihalyi, as individuals who experience this "optimal fulfilment and engagement" have brought out a new product or concept from his creativity the field, or the social milieu where he belongs will decide whether this discovery will be accepted in the domain or not. The field is a set of social institutions that acts as a judge. It selects from the variations produced by individuals, if those are worth preserving or worth improving. The domain, on the other hand, is a repository of knowledge held by the culture that preserves ideas or paradigms selected by the field. Csikszentmihalyi believe that this chain of creative process, individual's introduction of a new discovery, the judgment of the field and the inclusion of this to the domain would improve the status quo of this society. Having this new domain, individuals who would feel the flow will again introduce a new creative undertaking and initiate yet another cycle of creative evolution. A good example of this creative system is what happened recently in the mobile phone industry. The team led by Apple's CEO Steve Jobs (individual) have come up with a new mobile phone, which they believe will "revolutionize the mobile phone industry." They presented this to the mobile phone consumers market (field). This market will then judge through their demand for the product, whether it will be acceptable to the market or not. If it has successfully penetrated the market, it will change and revolutionize the culture of mobile phone industry from the previous versions with keypads to multi-touch screen text controls. In a typical cycle an individual takes some information provided by the culture and use his creativity to transform it. If the transformation is deemed valuable by the society it will be included in the domain, knowledge held by the culture, and so providing a new starting point for the next cycle of transformation and evaluation. In Csikszentmihalyi's view creativity is not found in any one of these elements but in the interactions between them. With Csikszentmihalyi's view one could argue fields will differ in the severity of their selective mechanism, every field is embedded in a specific social system. The only way to decide whether something is creative is through comparison, evaluation and interpretation. To discuss creativity as a product of social systems Csikszentmihalyi had taken a look at past civilizations. Following Carl Jung's trail he based his theories on pre-historical and historical accounts on Creative achievements of human civilizations. For him, in earlier societies art was not produced by a special type of person equivalent to our "artist" but spread through the whole community. Bodily ornamentation, tattoos, amulets and hair treatment were a universal practice among early humans. These cultures would find nothing in their experience to match the special values and expectations in contemporary society, geniuses and a discriminatory accomplishment called taste. In contemporary society one of the criteria on whether a product is creative or not is physical and financial wealth. Because of the influence of advertising and marketing modern art, as seen through the spectrum of Charles Saatchi phenomenon has become synonymous with money, fashion, celebrity and sensationalism. Anything that fascinates the senses are accepted as the yardstick whether a product is creative of not. This is the first weakness of this model. In a predominant capitalist society, the social appeal and value of a creative discovery is dependent on the amount and the intensity of its promotions and advertising could render a supposed to be a very creative and paradigm shifting discoveries that could have greatly improved the society. Due to the insincerity of some marketing and promotional campaign in the market about the product, the market's (field) judgment on whether an innovative discovery of an individual is truly creative in the society's point of view. Let us take, for example, the story of the Saatchi brothers. Charles Saatchi and his brother Maurice were born in Baghdad, the sons of a Jewish Iraqi textile merchant who moved to London in 1947. In 1970 they set up their advertising agency and quickly gained fame with advertisements, such as a pregnant man to promote contraception, and were engaged by the Conservative Party in 1978 to create election posters and slogans, They bought out three United States agencies in the 1980's to become the worlds largest advertising agency and made unsuccessful bids for the Midland Bank and Hill Samuel. Meanwhile Charles and his then wife Doris (nee Lockhart) became two of the greatest collectors of modern art. It can be assumed that Charles Saatchi influences the commercial value of different products in the art world in Britain today, but when in a position to evaluate creative products justifying one's judgements demands careful argument, since you cannot know what is in the individual's mind when creating products. Cultural and aesthetic values must be used to interpret. Art in any given society is the reflection of that society and thus bears the effect of the social, economical and historical events, which have been embedded in the mind of the creator. Presently, in its true intellectual sense, art has become a commercial entity in any given capitalistic society, despite the fact that true art is the product of the inner soul of the artist, which in turn is the representation of true socialist society, therefore the distortion of true art in any capitalist society is easily explainable. The artist's role has been diminished from being a creator of truly novel and original ideas to what is great according to what the market believes as beautiful and creative. Again, in capitalism, the influence of mass media and market forces are powerful components in decision-making. The creative process often takes place within the individual, only when it is shared with an audience should issues of evaluation by others be considered. If artists create something for themselves the only evaluation criteria they have are goals and boundaries they have set themselves. If preparing something to be shared with others in the context of the shared event, who will view the creative product What constraints are being placed by the occasion Because of the alluring influence of advertising and promotions in the capitalist society decisions that the society will make will be largely dependent on the image that the market has on the product. This is one of the shortcomings of capitalism. Profitability is a very vital factor in decision-making. Thus the question of whether a product presented to the market is not on how creative and sophisticated the product is but has been shifted to how profitable and appealing it is in the market. The market forces are usually used as measuring stick if the product released is acceptable to the field and not the inherent novelty of the product. In the present world the most important role of any political system is the management of economic entity and distribution of wealth throughout the different functions of the society, which is the creator of harmony by means of creating income and proportionate expenditure and thus steady growth and prosperity. However, the proportionate and fair distribution of wealth in any society is dependent on political values, which each governing society brings forth and the art if is in tuned with political thinking of the system has its unique role and in many cases is used for the means of control by its un-proportionate commercialised value. Bearing in mind that creativity of different shapes and means by an artist is a unique point of view over an artist with a desire to share with society as a whole. Bearing in mind this argument and reality in any given capitalist system, at present political and economic societies one can conclude that un-proportionate commercial value, allowance for any individual to own a given object or entity that is classed as art, thus most probably depriving the masses to enjoy the creation of the artist in its full form is perhaps the economics of politics. Alongside the considerable influence of promotions and mass media to creativity, another weakness in Csikszentmihalyi's theory is its possible dependence on social structures that can be flawed and tainted with biased and unjust motives. Politicians and other influential people can use their power to hamper the progress of a creative discovery. Instead of boosting the morale of creative individuals in their realm, these leaders could have retarded the progress of creativity in their society. To prove this argument in any given socialist society (former communist regimes) the different entities classed as art throughout the society at its face value was not allowed to belong to any individual and was classed as a national treasure, and therefore belonging to all, and supposedly could not be used as an eco-political controlling entity. However if the entity classed as art was not in tune with the political thinking it was disregarded and withheld from the masses. Ellen Dissanyake argues in her book "What is Art For The concept of art is only relatively recent and a deviation when viewed through the perspective of human evolution. Dissanyake is interested in how animals survive their environments, and address the question of natural survival. All early form of art, she observes were communal reinforcing group cohesion and helps to assure its survival. (What Good are the Arts) Richard L. Anderson backs evidence of her theory in his study of the North American Eskimo or Inuit, a Stone Age nomadic society that has survived into the 21st century. Art that is not competitive means preparing tools, decorating clothes and tattooing, something that is culturally significant. One could argue why should our artistic choices take any notice of Stone Age man This is where our basic human traits come from. Violence and sensationalism that is often seen in modern art could be seen as an answer to biological impulses of evolution. Tracy Emin's Unmade Bed and tent covered with all the names of everyone I ever slept with, which is debateable as to whether it is art or not, is an example of sensationalism. It could also be argued the bed is a statement of society today in a mess, and the tent demonstrates lack of morals in today's community. Damien Hirst is an excellent example of showing works of violence and sensationalism. Admired for his provocative style, one of his themes is an exploration of mortality. Perhaps, best know for his series of works " The Natural History series in which dead animals are presented as memento mori. Damien Hirst tends to revolve in phases of disdain and favour. He blames his occasional lack of success on the press, with art critic's erroneous assumptions about art, so the public accepts these opinions without ever actually viewing the art. In this manner the public is alienated from an art world that they could find very enjoyable if they gave it a fair chance. The public also agrees that the art critics are in turn influenced in their opinions by the media, going to an exhibition with preconceived ideas. Hirst's "Natural History" series involving animals preserved in formaldehyde and probably his most famous but controversial could be said to sicken many, and many people cannot face them or have some moral objection. After seeing his work at the "Young British Artist" Charles Saatchi began to collect his work and exhibit it. The "Young British Artist" are characterised by their independence and entrepreneurial skill and privately financed, and therefore do not have to worry about being discovered by governmental department. In the case of Damien Hirst art has become a commercial entity in the capitalist societies despite the fact that true art is the product of the inner soul of an artist, which in turn is the representative of all true human values wrapped into intellectual argument. A representation of true social societies, therefore, the distortion of true art in any capitalist society is easily explainable. There are endless styles around the world, but without culture there would be no different artistic styles, but neither does it follow that art is completely idiosyncratic or arbitrary or that there are no universal laws. Art has nothing to do with realism it involves deliberate rhetorical exaggeration, even distortion in order to create pleasing effects to the brain. As human beings our mind is empowered with logic and therefore awareness of good and evil, regardless of nationality, culture or education or even time or era. "High " art can be distinguished from "mass" art in our social system, and may carry connotations of class, The world of galleries, dealers and patrons can be seen as the exclusive preserve of money and privilege. Appealing to the social class whose rank places them above the struggle for mere survival. They think of themselves as leading rich and happy lives. Followers of high art assume their experiences are deep and more valuable than experiences gained from low art. Another question is whether the amount or extent of impact of an innovative feat is equal in different cultural domains. Most probably they are not. For example, physics is far significant than a domain like chess. Breakthroughs in physics will easily be judged as "creative" as compared to the astounding original moves in chess. Moreover, time is a principal factor that brings out changes in domains. In the medieval period, innovations made in the domains of theology and religion were very significant. At present, however revolutionary milestones in technology shrouded these domains. If Augustine and Aquinas, became celebrities of European civilization during the Middle Ages, they would be revered less at this time. But, by making a mark in the domain of physics one can become a living legend. Change in a clearly structured and codified domain will promptly produce impact to be recognized globally, whereas a change in a loosely organized domain may rarely or, worse, never be noticed. For instance, winning a Nobel Prize in physics is very noticeable unlike inventing a brilliant cutlery set, or even in developing a new personality theory. Since physics is a highly organized, and a popular domain, especially now due to the fact that we are in the information age, any major feat done on this domain will produce shockwaves of applause. This will not be the case if a creative person from the domain of carpentry exhibits his finest masterpiece. Not that Csikszentmihalyi has preference on certain domains. He only stressed the importance of social relevance of any creations. Now that the weaknesses of Csikszentmihalyi's theory are exposed, let us now define some of its strengths. His view of creativity is highly dependent on its impact on the improvement on the society. The gift of creativity, for him, should be beneficial to the society. Creativity infuses a solution to nagging and pressing problems that the society has. Following his steps toward creativity, Csikszentmihalyi stresses the active participation of the society as the evaluator of creative ideas. Therefore, under this principle inventors and other creative individuals should create socially significant products and systems that will be scrutinized by the society. Being in a state of flow and inventing products is not enough. To be truly creative the product should infuse change that the domain will eagerly anticipate and receive. These inventions should benefit society. This theory also highlights the importance of society in inspiring the individual to create. The problems that an individual encounter in the society he lives in is the inspiration behind the masterpieces of his craft. Instead of closing his world and become obsessed in his own realm, he has to open up his horizons to seek the best solutions to his problems that the field has. Clark (2004) believe that for an artist to be effective and to excel in his craft he should exercise extraversion and introversion. He should have the ability to shut himself from the rest of the world when he is pondering on the latest creation he is about to create into an astounding and breathtaking reality. He should likewise have the capacity to garner information from the outside world to be used as materials for his next product. The fields of a society have many problems that creative individuals must solve. For the evolution of society to take place individuals should constantly challenges the status quo under the state of flow while brewing up fresh ideas for solving complex predicaments that baffles humanity for years. Csikszentmihalyi 's concept of creative social systems put creativity in a social perspective. Like any theories, it has strengths and weaknesses. Csikszentmihalyi discovered that creative individuals are those who can to internalize this system, including the domain, the field, and the individual. Starting with personal talent, interests, curiosity, and drive they on the process learn and seriously consider the rules, the problems, and the conflicts that exist in the symbolic domain in which they have chosen to work. At the same time, they learn the criteria, priorities, and the concerns of other people who comprise the field. They successfully anticipate what others will say when they see or hear their own new ideas. In all of the fields we studied, individuals are very aware of what colleagues and other people in their field are doing, thinking, and what their concerns are. It is very rare to find the isolated creator that a romantic version of history has told us exists--the kind of persons who never talk to anyone and work all by themselves. That is not really typical at all. Most creative people, even if they don't interact with others, have internalized the criteria of the other people in the field, their opinions, and values. Of course the creative person may then decide to reject everything that the field believes in, but the rejection will have no effect unless it is done in a way that is acceptable to others. References Carey, J. (2005) What Good Are The Arts London, Faber and Faber Ltd. Clark, D. (2004) Creativity Retrieved January 15, 2007, from http://www.nwlink.com/donclark/creativity/creativity.html Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1995) Creativity across the life-span: A systems view Retrieved January 14, 2007, from http://www.gt-cybersource.org/Record.aspxNavID=2_0&rid=10559 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991) Society, Culture, and Person; A Systems View of Creativity. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press Debold, E. (n.a.) Flow with Soul: An interview with Dr. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi Retrieved January 14, 2007, from http://www.wie.org/j21/csiksz.asppage=1 De Bono, E. (2000) Misconceptions about Creativity Retrieved http://www.edwarddebono.com/NewsDetail.phpnews_id=9& Farmer, D. (1999) "Flow" & Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi Retrieved January 15, 2007, from http://www.austega.com/education/articles/flow.htm Gardiner J. (Ed.) (2000) Who's Who in British History London, Collins and Brow Ltd., and Cisco Books. Read More