freelance paradigm

I've been struggling with this question for a long time and finally I think I might have found a path towards a good answer. I don't believe this is my final definition, but I'm working on it and I'd be glad if you help me understand it.

In many sources you'll find different definitions; creativity is innovation, discovering something new, playful thinking, work of an unbiased mind, a fresh perspective on a problem, thinking differently, passionate work, making visible (i.e. physical) something that used to be invisible (i.e. only in your mind), etc...

This is may all be correct answers, but they don't hit the bull's eye. The very fact that they are scattered so numerously is an obvious symptom that we don't understand this phenomena very well. Good definitions are way simpler (but not simplistic).

So the definition that I work on goes like this: Creativity is being in harmony with one self.

Think about it. Creative thinking indeed requires at least two conditions to be met: (1) seeing things in new perspective and (2) working hard to make visible results. Both of that can happen only if one is doing something with true passion, if one believes to be on a special lifetime mission, following a certain destiny... In short: being in harmony with one self. Only then one can dedicate one's every breath to the pursuit of his heart. And only then true innovation is possible. All great persons knew this felling; Michelangelo, Tesla, Mother Tereza or Steve Jobs. And these are just the famous ones. It is impossible to work that hard if you don't feel it. Read biographies of those people if you don't believe me and then compare them with lives of the majority of ordinary folks who didn't find their true passions... (Why is that so, read my other articles below) It is also necessary to be in harmony with oneself if one has to except all the errors and wrongs that come along the way. Every creative person knows that most of the drafts are pure crap and that most experiments go wrong but some are crap or wrong in a special way that leads to new ideas and new insights. It's almost like working in a deep mine; you have to dig and carry out a lot of heavy dirt before you reach some gold. That takes passion or in our terms; harmony with oneself.

OK, someone might object. What about buddhist monks or indigenous peoples? Aren't they in such inner harmony? Why don't they follow paths of creativity then?

It is a reasonable objection. Because they are in harmony with themselves. But even though members of indigenous tribes do produce certain tools and even works of art or decoration, they most certainly don't drive themselves to such extremes as we (followers of western ways of thinking) do. At least not to my knowing. They don't put their very lives on the line for the sake of art or an idea (again: read Tesla's or Michelangelo's biography). And it isn't just because their life is more harsh in wilderness. Buddhist monks are not that close to the edge of survival and yet they are totally at peace with no desire for western type of creativity. Of course one might say that they sacrifice their breaths for the idea of Nirvana or Satori. But I think you already know that's not the kind of creativity I mean.

So what is it that makes the difference?

I came to believe that the clue might lie the way we perceive the passage of time. I think their perception of time is cyclical rather than linear. Ours is strictly linear. The very notion of linear time brings about concepts which are reflected even in our very language; time passes, time is lost, time that is about to come... This language is foreign to someone who thinks in terms of ever returning cycles of the Sun and the Moon, seasons, years or generations. The idea of linear time inescapably brings about a terrible awareness of ones own mortality. People do all kinds of things to escape this course; they turn to religion, they anesthetize their brain with drugs, alcohol, gossip or television, search for the 'meaning of life' in various other occupations with similar psychological effects, and so on.

Some also realize that time now suddenly becomes a sacred and very limited commodity which must used wisely. My life is not just a fluctuation in an eternal rhythm of universe - no - my life is unique, it is a brick that builds up a long linear wall of history. I must make it special! I must leave a mark! This is why creative work is at odds with true religious life. Creativity and religion both fill the same void which comes to existence when we become aware of our mortality. The most creative ages (beginning with renaissance and later enlightenment) are the ones when human thought was independent of religious political pressures.

So we might add another sentence to our definition: Creativity is being in harmony with oneself under the condition of linear time perception.

If we play with words even further, it could also be stated like this: Creativity is the productive necessity of linear time perception.
[Line of thought: there are only two ways to escape the notion of mortality associated with linear time perception: passive (religion, spirituality, anesthetic of drugs and television...) and active (doing something productive and perhaps even constructive with one's life). Therefore creativity is the productive way of coming to terms with the idea of one's own death.]

So this is it. This is our definition. If you don't have time, you might just stop reading at this point. But if you do, let's investigate how this notion of linear time came to be. This is even more speculative, we are on a very slippery slope here... And that makes it even more exciting to try it!

For once, the Bible holds a clue. In the famous story of Adam and Eve, the couple eats an apple from the forbidden tree of knowledge. They suddenly become aware of their nakedness and are banished from the paradise. Catholic philosopher C. S. Lewis (the same C. S. Lewis who wrote The Chronicles of Narnia) interprets this story as our breakage from nature. His reasoning goes something like this: for millennia human was unaware of his role in nature. Man was like an animal, living under the terms of mother Earth. Therefore man was very fearful of storms, earthquakes, rivers and other dangerous occourences. Man lived oblivious (in paradise), very much as wild animals do. But at certain point man domesticated fire which made him suddenly quite independent of forces of nature. There is no reason to be afraid and humble anymore. Not just that: we are here to reign! The apple is eaten and off from the paradise we go. The original sin lies in our very feeling of superiority over the mother nature. And here is what I add: the cyclical perspective of time shows it's first cracks... The first and most critical step towards linear time perception is made. The exodus from the paradise lies actually in the very realization of our mortality. The concept of linear time is critical for the development of science, while on the other hand, cyclical time is more related to ideas of spirituality and perhaps even some sorts of art. However, I am aware that indigenous peoples do fall "in the zone" when they perform their dances or do their art. I think we share this quality of creativity, and they might be even better at it than us. But while we're on the matter of time perception; "in the zone" experience is actually one that is timeless. We are not really aware of the passage of time then. Maybe that is why it is so universal.

Next steps can be chosen by the matters of one's own taste. My favorites are: invention of agriculture, invention of warm clothing, invention of the wheel, first cities and invention of political religion.

The last two or three which follow are wroth mentioning separately: the Renaissance being the first of them. In the Renaissance man (in his own mind) become not only independent of forces of nature but also of religion. A person is suddenly not just a human, but Individual (with capital I). Can you mention any famous medieval architect of Gothic cathedrals? No...? Come on, think harder... Well, neither can I, because we don't know of any by their exact name. That doesn't mean they didn't exist, it just means that their individuality didn't matter enough to be written down. There are still some traces of cyclical time perception in motion here. But with the Renaissance this is over. Hence artists and innovators are not just Individuals, they are also the first celebrities of modern European culture.

Next stage which only reinforced our false notion of independence from the forces of nature is of course the enlightenment and the industrial revolution. For obvious reasons (medical science, pharmacy, industry, electricity...) man became even more vehement in feeling of superiority. I believe computer and internet revolution is just the last phase of the same process that goes on for the last 200-250 years. We haven't really change our ways ever since. The idea of economic growth is the most naive consequence of our perception of time being linear. (OK, it is a consequence of many other misconceptions, but let's leave that out for this argument) In the past every farmer knew that one field can grow only this many potatoes. There might be some differences in harvest depending on whether it was a good or a bad season, but basically every field has its limit. This many potatoes and basta. How in the world can we promise a 10% increase every following year?

Only now are we beginning to realize that our resources are scarce and very much limited and that we can't grow for ever. Perhaps we are slowly returning back to the idea of cyclical time. I have no idea. I also have no idea where do we go from now on. Once our minds can be downloaded on a server we escape the very mortality we are so afraid of. There is no way of knowing how will this affect our society. But this is another matter indeed. It lies way beyond the original idea of this article.