We may watch a movie or TV show, read a novel or listen to music, and appreciate that the authors, those identified as artists, are certainly “creative types” – but what about the producers and set designers?
Or the computer engineers at digital animation companies like Pixar?
The MacArthur Foundation has a mission to “support creative people and effective institutions committed to building a more just, verdant, and peaceful world” and acknowledges there are many kinds of creators, awarding its renowned fellowships to a wide range of people: playwrights, novelists, dancers, botanists, economists, chemists, physicians, psychologists and many others.
[The photo is from the Caltech chapter of the Society of Women Engineers swe.caltech.edu]
In her article Our Definition of Creativity is Killing Creativity, Mehera Bonner writes, “Being considered creative in the conventional sense usually means you paint, practice photography, love to collage in your free time, or are super-skilled at macaroni portraits –– but why restrict ‘creativity’ to only arts-related pursuits?”
One problem with that restriction is the narrowing of our sense of identity and possibility.
She notes: “Unfortunately, children tend fall into two restrictive categories as they develop their interests: creative or science-minded (shorthand for decidedly uncreative). And it’s kids who are deemed uncreative who are more likely to take on technology-based jobs –– which are, ironically, some of the most creative out there.
“There’s a perceived distance or mutual exclusivity between creativity and technology… Computer science and programming are often considered ‘nerdy,’ but they’re actually extremely creative jobs that require huge amounts of problem solving and quick thinking.”
Follow the link to read more of her article, published by CreativeLive, which has free and tuition online classes taught by top instructors in photography, video, design, business, audio, music, software, life skills.