Jay Yoo

How great it is that the business world is placing so much more importance on creativity and innovation, which have been creeping to the forefront of business priorities over the past decade (even more so since the passing of Steve Jobs).

At first I thought this was going to be a great article in the WSJ by Jonah Lehrer on “How to be Creative,” but never found the golden nugget.  While it offers meaningful quotes from cultural icons like Einstein and Yo-Yo Ma, the cursory advice provided on how to connect ideas that manifest into “A-ha!” moments have been promoted by the likes of Tom Kelley, Guy Kawasaki and James Web Young for some time now.  Unfortunately, I didn’t come away with any new insights on how to be creative:

• Don’t rely on experts.
• Relax (maybe have a beer).
• Cross pollinate.
• Have a beginner’s mind.
• Etc.

It does sound a bit like Fast Company or Business 2.0 circa 2002.  Perhaps I have been reading too much of this stuff over the years and this article is meant to be a bridge for creativity to go mainstream?

He hints at how hard pushing creativity and thinking differently can be with the inevitable and often times grueling process of trial and error (failure).  It can feel like “wasted time” with no measurable progress being made.

As Einstein once declared, “Creativity is the residue of time wasted.”

This is where I think the article falls short on what it really means to “be creative.”  Sure we all have access to it, but how do we pick ourselves up and keep being creative even in the face of failure, rejection and even sabotage? 

I think some people are better at “being creative” than others.  Maybe it’s because they honed their “instrument of creativity” over many years or they are just wired that way.  Whichever it may be, they are able to access creativity at any time and understand that the “A-ha!” moment will eventually come if one connects enough dots.  It becomes less of a surprise and more of an expectation.  Importantly, it usually surfaces when meandering with reckless abandon (beginner’s mind) satisfies the subconscious and one forgets about it for a while.   Then, like it fell from the sky, A-ha!  It just takes a lot of practice and persistence.

Through the process of creativity, there is always the need to overcome the naysayers, frustration and personal apathy (do to rejection and failure). Ultimately it is the “quality of one’s being” that allows you to let go, ignore rejection and persevere for no logical reason.  This is what differentiates “being creative” and “doing creative things;” what it takes to stick with it.  Anyone can do creative things, but can they always tap into their creativity?  The answer is yes, but it depends on their quality of being.

What I do like about the article is that the author promotes the fact that we all have access to creativity and he does a good job dispelling the myth that it is only for the “chosen ones.”  However, being creative takes a lot of work in the world and on oneself, which is never investigated with as much fervor as the need to “do more creative things.”

What is the “quality of one’s being?”  Perhaps being creative requires the same qualities as always being humble.

This is an interesting article in the WSJ. Actually, you could easily replace Chinese with Korean, Vietnamese, or Japanese.  This is how a lot of Asian kids across the board are raised.  I certainly think there is merit in rote training and being firm with your kids.

However, this is over the top. I just can’t do it in full to my kids.

Amy Chua’s kids rote train for hours and are not allowed to do the following:

• attend a sleepover
• have a playdate
• be in a school play
• complain about not being in a school play
• watch TV or play computer games
• choose their own extracurricular activities
• get any grade less than an A
• not be the No. 1 student in every subject except gym and drama
• play any instrument other than the piano or violin
• not play the piano or violin.

Really? Her kids are not allowed to be kids? 

I want my kids to excel and am a firm believer in training as the way to being good at anything. That said, I think there is very little opportunity for creativity with this kind of “life box.”

It is interesting to compare and contrast this with Sir Ken Robinson’s views on creativity. There is a difference between rigor and rote.

I actually thank Amy Chua for this article and think it is important for my kids to find what they are good at and work to excel at it.

However, I also want my kids to develop social skills necessary to succeed in an increasingly diverse workplace and world, so play dates are a must.

In the end, we all have to be more than smart and good at something to really succeed; we have to be likable and creative. I did not get a sense of how likable or creative Amy’s kids are or that she places a lot of importance on these aspects of one’s being. 

Well, my kids are getting straight “A’s”. One is in a play and the other is a master at video games. For sure they are super likable, creative and fun!

I think I might send Amy’s kids a whoopie cushion. I wonder if they would know what to do with it?

I was recently turned on to Norman McLaren, who was a pioneer in color animation back in the 1930’s (and beyond).  The time, thought and energy required for his work is mind boggling.  I appreciate the analog world.  Wow!

I went to see Bugs Bunny at Blossom last night with the family and friends and had a ton of fun.  Seeing the Cleveland Orchestra play Warner Bros. Looney Tunes in sync with the animated cartoons caught my imagination.  The creativity of putting together a cartoon, especially back in the 1940’s is impressive to say the least.  Hundreds of people required to create the story, animation and music!

I can not get my mind off of the the innovation in entertainment and art that was going on at that time.