Beautiful compositions can originate at airports that are nothing special at ground level.
Airports have intrigued designer Lauren O’Neil for much of her life. Watching planes landing and taxiing while once waiting in the terminal led her to wonder what airports look like from a bird’s eye.
Using Google Earth, O’Neil has carefully examined airports from around the world and cropped the images into abstract designs.
The entire series of images, entitled Holding Pattern, can be found on Tumblr.
The article shared from WIRED describes the lure airports had for O’Neil and how the regulations controlling airport design create dynamic patterns when viewed from above.
By Hannah Rolfes
”Creativity” has become part of the curricula at a growing number of colleges and universities. As content knowledge evolves faster than ever, the need to adapt to new information is essential. Gone are the days when a college-educated student can study one field and stay within it throughout his/her career.
Some creative studies programs focus specifically on process: accurately addressing a problem, brainstorming any and all solutions, and narrowing them down to the best one. Other programs also explore definitions of creativity, characteristics of creative people, and strategies to enhance one’s own creativity. Most educators and students value creativity; many in the private sector do also.
In the recent publication Creativity, Inc. Senior Vice President of Pixar and Disney Animation, Ed Catmull, credits the creative culture to Pixar’s astronomical success. An excerpt from the book describes the Pixar Braintrust, a group of creative storytelling experts, including directors, writers, and heads of story, that assemble every few months or so to give feedback on Pixar films-in-progress. According to Catmull, honest candor is key to the effectiveness of this group. On the flip side, all the filmmakers who share work must be ready to hear honest criticism of their film. Another important rule for Braintrust sessions is that the film, not the filmmaker, is under scrutiny.
“The principle eludes most people, but it is critical: You are not your idea, and if you identify too closely with your ideas, you will take offense when challenged.”
Catmull bluntly states that initially all Pixar movies “suck” in the beginning because often filmmakers are trying to create a truly unique concept. For example, without the scrutiny of the Braintrust, the first 39 dialogue-free minutes of WALL-E could have completely alienated the audience. Catmull paraphrases writer and director Andrew Stanton: “people need to be wrong as fast as they can.” The Braintrust gets the worst versions of a film out of the way early, clearing the road to a truly innovative film. At Pixar, starting with the bad is not a sign of failure, but rather, a typical starting point.
Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story 2 trying to decipher the location of stolen toys. A fine example of how creative collaboration can produce a film depicting creative collaboration. Photo from Reuters.
Read more …
by Christy Casey, Creative Thinking student, Spring 2014
Writer’s block: the arch nemesis of writers everywhere. When faced with the daunting image of a blank page, what do you do? Write…. but what?
After participating in workshops led by Chris Parker, of the Classics and General Humanities department, and by Julie Dalley, Assistant Director of the Research Academy for University Learning, my Creative Thinking classmates and I have a tool belt full of practical ways to generate writing material, specifically poetry, and conquer the ominous blank page.
Chris’ workshop provided sources of descriptive language and ways to incorporate metaphor. Within small groups students created a short poem, which we performed for the class, and individually each student wrote a short descriptive story. Before we wrote anything, Chris had us pull together our materials: a word bank full of juicy, descriptive words, including names of paint colors, tile chips, and words used to describe flavors of wine; verbs thrown into the mix by the group; metaphoric descriptions we wrote to describe the sounds produced by an array of noise-making contraptions.
The words had no particular correlation, but they became our only building blocks for our poem. This seemed limiting and frustrating at first, but a shorter list of very diverse and isolated words produced word combinations, metaphors, and mental images that I would not have thought to create otherwise. Using this method, my group named ourselves “Annealed by the Sun” and wrote phrases including, "the relentless red ray of bittersweet summer…"
I made revisions to a personal narrative of my first birthday party. Instead of my typical prose writing - “there was strawberry whipped cream cake” - I wrote,
“whipped white conceals the bright red strawberries tucked between layers of moist cake. Light, sweet, fresh…”
More stimulating, right? Chris presented us with an unconventional, exciting approach to writing that, in turn, helped us write more engaging material.
Read more …
by Christy Casey, Creative Thinking student, Spring 2014
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8… for me and my fellow students in the Creative Thinking course, those numbers adopted a brand new meaning during a workshop led by L.A.-based choreographer and director of the dance company REALITY, David Roussève. Days before the regional premiere of Stardust at the Kasser Theater, we had the pleasure of having David come work with us as a visiting artist.
First, David led the group through a guided improvisation, assigning certain tasks or movements to the numbers one through eight:
- walk through the space, trying to fill it evenly as a group
- run, still trying to keep the balance of the space
- melt slowly to the floor led by a specific body part
- get back up as fast as you can led by another body part
- devise a combination using a “dot exercise”
- yell out as loud as you can any thoughts that come to mind from a “menu” or topic
- create a personal movement phrase
Some numbers indicated a completely unrestricted improvisation, as in #8, the personal movement phrase; other numbers indicated a structure or boundary to the creation. My favorite structured creation was #6, the “dot exercise.” David told us to imagine there were dots all around us at varying distances from ourselves, then touch them as fast as we could with as many different body parts as we could, and set these movements as a phrase. Everyone’s phrase looked different, not just due to the direction or level of the “touches”, but in the way each person moved. It surprised me how much variety touching invisible dots allowed.
Creative Thinking class in a movement workshop with David Roussève. Photo courtesy of Montclair State University/Mike Peters.
Read more …
by Mike Lees, Lead Instructor, Fall 2013
This awesome aspect of the universe is found in qualitatively different modes of expression throughout the entire cosmic order but especially on the planet Earth. There is no being that does not participate in this experience and mirror it forth in some way unique to itself and yet in a bonded relationship with the more comprehensive unity of the universe itself. Within this context of celebration we find ourselves, the human component of this celebratory community. Our own special role is to enable this entire community to reflect on and to celebrate itself and its deepest mystery in a special mode of conscious self-awareness.
-Swimme & Berry (1992)
photo by Mike Lees
This sentiment from our course book, The Universe Story (1992), only begins to address the nature of creativity and creative exploration as our human endeavor continues to unfold, and we engage in processes that lend to the expression of who, what, when, where, and why we are. As we moved through the third and fourth quarters of our course, questions surrounding community, collaboration, and innovation emerged as topics to engage with and discuss. We delved into the nature of human innovation within the context of ecological and systems thinking themed elements (Meadows, 2008; Naess, 2008). This line of inquiry brought to a head the question of human ideas in relationship to manifesting creative processes. One student aptly asked, “How do we take an idea from realization to actualization and do something with that idea?” One could see and hear the frustration behind the question on the student’s face and in the student’s voice, as we all agreed that everyone can always conjure plenty of good ideas. The trick then becomes how one manifests these ideas in the world. Our group wondered if struggling with innovation and manifestation might ultimately require the force of a “sonic event,” as visiting professor Marissa Silverman of the Cali School of Music at Montclair State suggested when working with the students for a day.
Expression and its processes moved to the foreground in the exploration of innovation and renovation when Marissa asked, “What is music?” The ensuing debate developed further with numerous videos illustrating creative innovations and processes involving individual and collaborative creative capacities. Music made with a tree, a garden hose, and a Jeep Cherokee accented the discussion and left the class with more questions than answers and inspiration to be more creative ourselves! Marissa also asked the students to work together in small groups to create “music” with found objects and voice inspired by the sounds of weather – any type of weather system that each group chose. In a lesson grounded in systems thinking, Marissa compared the making of music to the making of “musics”, characterized by active pursuit and social construction, which left our group wondering about innovation, renovation, individualization, collaboration, systems thinking, and the creative process.
Read more …
by Hannah Rolfes
In a recent visit to the Creative Thinking course, Ashwin Vaidya discussed the human curiosity at the heart of scientific and creative research. Dr. Vaidya led us through an exercise in which we observed a group of four students, using only two fingers each, lifting one seated person. Dr. Vaidya then asked everyone to list reasons for a successful lift and to categorize each reason as either “likely” or “unlikely.” The importance of the activity lay not in finding the “correct” answer, but in the realization that humans LOVE finding answers.
While discussing our collective explanations for a successful lift, students often cited “mind over matter”—meaning, the students successfully lifted a person because they believed they could—as both a likely and unlikely reason. Dr. Vaidya did not say that “mind over matter” was “wrong” or “correct” but remarked that in the physical sciences “there is no room for the mind…yet.”
Re-read the first part of that statement one more time: In the physical sciences, “there is no room for the mind.”
When thinking about the physical sciences (physics, astronomy, chemistry, etc.), one thinks about, well, great thinkers: Newton, Einstein, Hawking. When we consider the body of research and theoretical work produced by these individuals, the mind seems intrinsic to the field, not inconsequential.
Yet, Dr. Vaidya’s statement is true in the context of his brief synopsis of scientific discovery: the mind, as a subjective mode of perception, is not the tool of measurement on which scientists rely. Everyone on Earth saw things fall to the ground prior to Newton; they just created differing explanations, as varied, unique, and inaccurate as all the other thoughts in their minds. For example, one individual may have thought invisible ancestral spirits pulled apples from trees, and another may have thought the apple fell of its own volition.
Newton’s explanation was revolutionary, not just for its complexity, but for the universal and consistent logic of mathematics with which he used to argue his theory of gravity. Anyone that understands calculus has the ability to see where he found his explanation.
Read more …
by Mike Lees, Lead Instructor, Fall 2013
The ring of a meditation bowl sounds, and we settle into another five-minute sit, to pause in space and place. We take a moment from the fast pace of our everyday existence as instructor and students living in the world to reflect and breathe before beginning our further explorations into creativity. On the opening day of class, we explored thoughts on creativity by asking questions such as, why promote creativity, what is the problem or why do people need help being creative, and what is involved in the ideas surrounding creativity (Robinson, 2011)? From this point of departure, our class has taken off in a number of interesting and amoebic-like directions surrounding creativity in our universe.
During the first quarter of our course, we explored the nature of self in relationship to creativity. Addressing issues pertaining to fear of failure, cultural contexts, comfort with ambiguity, blockages, and relative notions, we engaged in a number of exercises, practices, and discussions through a number of different mediums in order to examine how these ideas relate to the individual. With the course situated in a living-systems lens and supported by readings from our main text (Swimme & Berry, 1992), an awareness of the inherent nature of creative capacities within all living things aids in addressing these constructs. The students and I have been working with a tree journal: each student has found a tree on campus that they have befriended. This relationship with a tree addresses philosophical, poetic, and artistic exploration exercises of the self in relationship to another, non-human being in the world.
Photo by Michael Lees- inspired by Creative Thinking class discussions.
We have had the unique opportunity to attend shows that are part of the Peak Performances series here at Montclair State University. After performances of glacier, Brandin Steffensen and fellow dancers from the Liz Gerring Dance Company visited our course and led us in practicing a number of “visual thinking strategies” relating to perception and interpretation of creativity. A performance entitled Open City, by composer/musician Vijay Iyer and a jazz ensemble that included author Teju Cole and rap artist Himanshu Suri, explored the cognitive relationships found within intrinsic and extrinsic responses to creativity. The opportunity for our course to examine creativity in this particular context encouraged further reflection on the self and our own unique responses to what we feel defines creativity.
Read more …
Over the last couple of weeks we have been digging into the ideas of Systems Theory. The goal is to fold these powerful concepts into the students’ creative experiments. Systems Theory offers both a way to understand the underlying processes behind how/why things happen, and gives us pragmatic insights into how we can intervene in larger systems to make change happen. All of which is crucial to actualizing a creative possibility. The students’ introduction into understanding reality from a systems perspective has been the wonderful book on systems by Donella Meadows (Thinking in Systems).
The book begins with this quote, which has become a touchstone for the class:
If a factory is torn down but the rationality which produced it is left standing, then that rationality will simply produce another factory. If a revolution destroys a government, but the systematic patterns of thought that produced that government are left intact, then those patterns will repeat themselves… Thereʼs so much talk about the system. And so little understanding.
Here the stress is on two things: (1) the rationality which produces a system and (2) the pattern of thought that are behind this rationality. Meadows understand these as being part of the paradigm that a system operates within. Or the mindset which comes out of the system. For Meadows these two words are interchangeable.
Read more …
Last week Laurie Anderson came and spent a class with us. For the students it was an ideal moment as we had just finished a series of experimental projects and we were beginning to look at ways these projects “resist the present.”
The class quickly became an open-ended discussion about creativity, student projects and Laurieʼs work. It was quite an amazing few hours of sharing ideas and digging into concepts. Students jumped in and talked about their ideas and Laurie responded with hers. The discussion ranged from:
- how to choose what one should do (Laurie offered her three criteria “(1) is it going to be interesting? (2) is it going to make money? and (3) will it be fun?” (she would settle for two of the three))
- how to avoid becoming a brand
- making work for audiences of dogs
- and to the works of the 13th century philosopher Dogen.
Something that really struck me was her answer to the seemingly innocuous question: How do you write a song? She answered (and I am paraphrasing as best I can) — “every time I approaching writing a new song — I donʼt know how to write a song. I start from scratch with no idea of what a song is.”
I love this approach. For academics and for institutions of higher learning, myself included, even when we are teaching creativity, this is a tough response to hear. It is a response that champions the great neglected art of forgetting. Learning is all about knowing and accumulating knowings so as to be knowledgeable. And knowledge is all about memory — which is the opposite of forgetting. In bringing up knowledge and memory I do not intend to invoke that old dreaded image of pure rote learning. Not at all. But what we do, as teachers, is ask people to learn and remember things. Each class builds upon the next. From the introductory class, year by year, memory by memory to the upper level classes where one is (reasonably) expected to have an enormous amount of knowledge at one’s disposal. A knowledge that forms the breath a depth of a tradition or a discipline. But what of forgetting? Laurieʼs answer suggests that creativity involves a pedagogy of un-learning — of active forgetting. And that this key skill for creativity is in direct conflict with a great deal of what is crucial to much of higher education.
Read more …
— Iain Kerr
Good, as Bruce Mau says, is a know quality — to make something new you cannot focus on if what you are doing is good or not. This is really difficult. We are as individuals and as a culture organized around things being good. We want things that work and ideally work exceptionally well. We are always making things better. Creativity has a hard time in such ecosystems. The new usually does not work and when it does it does not work along the lines of how things worked in the past. There is wonderful saying I remember reading somewhere on this: You cannot make a transistor by trying to make a better vacuum tube. In the creative process we are working in a field situation — things come from everywhere and go off in all sorts of tangents. We roam across these fields following hunches about novel processes. Our everyday lives are far from field situations — they are mostly goal directed — which is to say we are doing the work of the good — which is following a path and improving upon it. A key questions for creativity is how do we set up field situations? How can we roam?
To dig into this question we’ve been watching the movie on the last year of the great experimental restaurant El Bulli (El Bulli: Cooking in Progress) as part of the class. El Bulli is famous for being only open for a few months of the year and that when they are closed they are at their secret research lab inventing new ways of cooking. And over the last couple of decades they have won every possible accolade for their creative cooking. Anyway, it’s a pretty astonishing movie that spends half of its time in their research lab (you can watch it on Netflixs). The big assumption about the lab is that’s where you would assume they are coming up with new dishes for the next season at the restaurant. Ironically, as you watch them do all sorts of things, they seem to do everything but this. They are not making any new dishes. This makes the movie have a very odd tone — cooks who do not cook (dishes). The one major rule they seem to follow in their lab is “no dishes”. The question that I asked my students was “so if they are not making dishes what are they doing in the lab?”
Read more …