Originality and Innovation: the Amalgamation of the Readings
Pink introduces an archaic notion of the American dream in the beginning of his article “Revenge of the Right Brain.” This notion entails children aspiring to become doctors, lawyers, and accountants and attaining “perhaps a dollop of prestige” (329). Now, the times have changed. The good ole’ American dream has evolved. No longer are Americans aspire for a quaint house to live in (they already have one) or a decent job to support the family (they have that, too). Instead, they aspire to become better and transcend the status quo. They aim to become millionaires and billionaires in their field. This is where innovation comes in. Alongside the conception of cyberspace and the World Wide Web, springs an endless possibility of internet businesses, pornographic medium, and phoneless communication. Who would have thought that a relationship forged at a Stanford University tour could produce a search engine valued anywhere from $10 billion to $25 billion (Google)? Innovation and creativity is, as Pink points out, the key to success in America. The cover for the August issue of Time Style and Design magazine depicts a colorful eye looking out of the page and into the lives of the people that read it; the caption states “Visionaries. Looking at the future through the eyes of 25 creative icons.”[1] Further into the magazine, the author Lisa McLaughlin delves into the aspects that make each of these creative icons visionaries for the future. These visionaries, product designers, ceramicists, and grocers to name a few, have flourished in their discipline and have elevated the playing field of their business to colossal proportions. No longer can a person establish a commonplace business and become successful in corporate America; instead, Pink heeds to “forget what your parents told you…and do something that fills…the desires of an abundant age” (331). Julie bests explicates Pink’s point by stating her independence of making clear decisions of her life goals (right brain), yet still bounded by the sentiments of her parents (left brain). This synthesis is what Pink tries to convey in the article: although left-brain thinking is a commonplace in our way of life, it is still necessary for the right brain to function.
A question then rises: where does this new creativity and right-brain thinking come from? Pink’s article points out that the basic instinct of human nature includes “demonstrating empathy, and designing innovations” (331) dating all the way back to the “caveperson ancestors” (331). Right-brain thinking is an innate capability that humans have, although it has lost importance and relevance in the Industrial and Informational Ages. Creativity, however, is ever present. In an article by Dr. Needlman entitled “Where Does Creativity Come From?” developmental psychologists introduce a concept of mastery motivation. Dr. Needlman defines it as “an instinct…that compels people to want to take control of their surroundings.”[2] The article brings up a simple experiment: tying a string to a baby’s toe and attaching it to a mobile. Every time the baby’s toe moves, the mobile does too. Thus, the baby is taking control of the mobile through manipulation and movement of the toe. Dr. Needlman explains that “people are strongly motivated to control the things around them and to discover new connections.”[3] Another example of childish creativity is evident in the snap, crackle, pop commercial of Rice Krispies Cereal. In the commercial, a child is asked what he hears when milk is poured into the cereal bowl; he replies with an elaborate story. All that from cereal and milk? From a perspective of a sound adult, we think it’s a preposterous thought. Are children just that ‘innocent’ or are we just slow to catch on to the fast-paced minds of children? I think children are born with that creative and innocent mindset that we require to succeed in America. Why, however, doesn’t this rush of creativity found in childhood follow us to adulthood? Have we succumbed to the “real world,” knowing that everything we do will be judged by our peers, colleagues, and superiors? Are we scared to maintain contact with that surplus of creative (and perhaps childish) energy in right-brain thinking for fear of criticism? Whatever it is, in order for us to incorporate the new American dream in our lives, we must tap into that insurmountable, innate life force of ingenuity. Danielle mentions the classics and their pursuit of “art, mathematics, literature, logic, sciences, and theatre.” That, I say, is the true genius we need in America: the ability to not only know the books, but also understand how it interweaves with culture and the world.
I love how Margaret concludes her discussion by saying that she “[marvels] at how far we have come and how far we have to come” and it’s true. Currently we argue about left and right brain thinking; but, what’s beyond right-brain thinking? Artificial intelligence? And beyond that? We simply do not have the mental capacity to predict the future, so why bother? Carpe diem.
No comments:
Post a Comment