

Deadly conformity is killing our creativity. Let's mess about more - chestnut-tree
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/14/conformity-killing-creativity-at-work

======
kevinalexbrown
It's interesting that he brings up Feynman, because (if you believe his
version of events, anyway;) at one point after the Manhattan Project, he was
feeling particularly uninspired, because he wasn't playing. So he's sitting in
the cafeteria watching someone throw a plate in the air. He starts wondering
about the relationship between wobbling of the plate and the rotation. He
works it out, has some fun, and then starts thinking about how this might
relate to particle physics. This plate-wobbling play led to insights for which
he received the Nobel Prize.

Play is where insight happens, to borrow a phrase from another professor.
That's why I don't get annoyed when I see "not deeply interesting" projects on
HN. You could ask, like Hans Bethe did in the Feynman story, "yes, but what's
the importance of it?" and the answer in many cases will be nil. In the long
run though, I suspect that play results in those important, unforeseen changes
and transformations. It might not even be some change you yourself do -
sometimes it's enough to spark the mind that will.

Ultimately, though, I would like to see creativity defended as an end in
itself. What about play for play's sake? Our society has reached this
unparalleled ability to let people engage themselves creatively, why can't
that be the end-goal?

[http://www.physics.ohio-
state.edu/~kilcup/262/feynman.html](http://www.physics.ohio-
state.edu/~kilcup/262/feynman.html)

~~~
tannerc
Part of the problem is that competition is fairly level these days, thanks in-
part to the Internet, easier global communication, changes in production
capabilities, etc.

So, to the massive corporations that have been around for centuries now, any
time spent playing is time the competition is jumping ahead.

Of course newer, smaller, and more agile businesses see it the other way; play
is crucial to innovation and bounding in front of competition.

Creativity and true innovation are a balance, more than anything, between play
and nitty-gritty work.

As technology progresses businesses -- and even individuals -- will have to
ultimately decide for themselves if the risk of play and remarkable innovation
outweighs straight-forward conformity to the status quo and the guaranteed
slow wins of steady (albeit non-innovative) production.

------
spodek
As much as play and experiment helps foster growth and not to take away from
the point of the article, let's not forget the value of discipline and
conformity in developing creative expression and, ultimately, freedom. The
most creative pianist played countless scales, likely more than less creative
ones, despite scales being mechanical. Same with dancers and footwork,
athletes with sprints, and so on.

I am influenced by Martha Graham --
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Graham](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha_Graham)
\-- often called the Picasso of dance, who said about discipline, conformity,
and freedom:

 _The dancer is realistic. His craft teaches him to be. Either the foot is
pointed or it is not. No amount of dreaming will point it for you. This
requires discipline, not drill, not something imposed from without, but
discipline imposed by you yourself upon yourself. … Your goal is freedom. But
freedom may only be achieved through discipline. In the studio you learn to
conform, to submit yourself to the demands of your craft, so that you may
finally be free._

Few people matched her creative output and development.

I wrote more about this topic since it's important to me --
[http://joshuaspodek.com/master-speaks-creative-
expression](http://joshuaspodek.com/master-speaks-creative-expression) and
[http://joshuaspodek.com/model-foundation-personal-
freedom](http://joshuaspodek.com/model-foundation-personal-freedom)

(Edit: to jahaja's question "Do I misunderstand you when I feel that you are
equating creativeness with success?", I don't know a perfect definition of
creativity, but as I use it, I include some sense of problems solving.
Creating something useless doesn't feel "creative" to me, so in the sense of
solving a problem, as I use the term, creativity has some element of success.)

~~~
jahaja
Do I misunderstand you when I feel that you are equating creativeness with
success?

~~~
repsilat
Reflex and intuition can be at odds with creativity. They embody things we
already know. There is often a natural, organic-feeling quality to the "spark
of genius," but the process leading up to that point (considering problems
from other angles, reasoning abstractly) is itself more a "System 2" thing.

Or at least that's one idea. Certainly we should separate the claims that
"creativity requires discipline" and "executing on creative ideas requires
discipline". The latter is certainly uncontroversial, but I haven't thought
long enough about the former to know whether I agree with it.

------
michaelochurch
The issue is that the stakes, at work, are just too damn high for all that.

When Silicon Valley became the center of innovation (1950s to 1970s) there
were so many "cushy" government jobs that people didn't fear getting fired--
it was like being in Maryland today with a TS clearance-- and housing was
incredibly cheap. (It wasn't the government contractors themselves that made
SV shine. It was competition with them on autonomy. Companies had to provide
extremely interesting work, and that made for better companies. That's _why_
Silicon Valley made so much of itself.) People in Northern California in 1970
_could_ take a playful attitude to work because they knew nothing bad would
happen to them.

I think the Boomers are taking that easy work life to them with the grave. You
could be on acid at Woodstock in August 1969, protege to the CEO of a major
company in January 1970, and a CEO yourself by 1978. If you worked 50 hours
per week, you were considered extremely dedicated and would climb the ladder
rapidly. When there was tolerance for that kind of slack-- you wouldn't become
unhireable if not Director-level by 40-- there was more room for creativity.
That's gone now. Silicon Valley, with the mean-spirited and psychotic age-
discrimination culture that the VCs brought in, is probably the worst.

You can't fix this problem just by fixing single companies' work environments.
No matter how "creative" the work environment is, people are naturally
cliquish (i.e. there's always a threat of social rejection, no matter how open
and unstructured the environment, and too little structure can make
cliquishness worse) and the only way people can be at ease is in the context
of a larger environment where losing one job doesn't ruin one's life. In the
Valley, thanks to absurd housing prices and the good-ole-boy reputation
economy the VCs have set up, it often does.

As you can tell, I'm pretty horrified by the transformation of the Valley. It
used to embrace genuine weirdness and true disruption. Now it's just so
fucking conventional. It has the conformity and image-management needs of
traditional finance, but 1/10 of the upside. At least banks pay well and
promote internally.

~~~
dasil003
I won't argue too much with this except the last part. I think working for the
majority of startups is still head and shoulders above conditions working in
finance. Sure you make less money, and if you're naive they'll make you work
80 hours for a pittance of a salary and a bundle of useless options, but if
you are reasonably good and stand up for yourself you can still get a pretty
good deal.

~~~
michaelochurch
_I think working for the majority of startups is still head and shoulders
above conditions working in finance._

Working in finance is not as bad as it's made out to be. Analyst programs at
investment banks are pretty awful, but developer jobs aren't any worse at
banks than at startups. People argue that developers/engineers aren't rock
stars at banks (traders and quants get the glory) but that's also true at most
VC-funded startups (investors, executives, and product people get the glory).

------
wallflower
In a way, HN is a way to learn about interesting developments in fields that
we might never ever. Sometimes by people who know that they are really talking
about. It's kind of like eavesdropping on really interesting conversations at
a bar.

For example, this recent thread [1] is clearly being discussed by people who
have enough of an interest and ability in mathematical theorems that they can
critique and criticize it.

Not everything passes the community filter, however, - for more serendipity -
I recommend checking out the 'new' page. Occasionally, you will find a diamond
or two (if not broad interest, you personal interest) in the coal of no
upvotes.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6908305](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6908305)

------
mercurialshark
The kindness shown at Pret a Manger, while exceptional is not completely
surprising to me. While at their Chicago location, I walked in and ordered
food one day, running on particularly little sleep. At the register, the clerk
insisted that I take the lunch on the house, probably because I looked like
death. I grew uncomfortable and insisted on paying, at which point he
introduced himself as the CEO, on a quick US tour of their facilities. He said
it would be their pleasure and was totally sincere. Love that eatery and their
people.

------
wrongc0ntinent
Anyone willing to take a shot at a good, concise definition of creativity?

~~~
rjd
Personally, I've always defined it as the ability to take two separate ideas
and create a third one.

The more creative people are, the more they have the ability to make a
connection between two less related items.

I've often noticed the main difference between creative people and not so
creative people isn't skill or intelligence or anything. Its the ability to
not get phased by when you can't get an idea to work, you just keep plugging
on like a small form of insanity even though you fail and fail. A biochemistry
driven insanity I would say, I feed off the process of failing, and get
massive elation when something that shouldn't work does work. To me failing is
as important as succeeding, but the reward of succeeding is so much better.

And like most things, people rarely see the long chain of failures, so assume
a brilliance to what might be better classed as a madness ;)

------
panacea
Lego. At lunchtime.

~~~
fennecfoxen
Lithography. On the weekends. Supplemented with weekday doodles.
[http://uv.to/ctGj](http://uv.to/ctGj)

~~~
gboudrias
Pretty cool, but isn't it hard to get into?

~~~
wrongc0ntinent
Presses are prohibitive to most, though in cities you're likely to find at
least one shop where you can buy press time, usually that comes with all
supplies other than paper.

~~~
fennecfoxen
$35/yr + $2/hr. in Manhattan, no less:
[http://www.efanyc.org/rbpmw/](http://www.efanyc.org/rbpmw/)

The introductory 4-day (2-weekend) class was like $250 or something.

