July 31, 2004

pillar management

zzzzsteak29.jpg
More thoughts on “How To Be Crea­tive”:

10. The more talen­ted some­body is, the less they need the props.

Mee­ting a per­son who wrote a mas­ter­piece on the back of a deli menu would not sur­prise me. Mee­ting a per­son who wrote a mas­ter­piece with a sil­ver Car­tier foun­tain pen on an anti­que wri­ting table in an airy SoHo loft would SERIOUSLY sur­prise me.

Abraham Lin­coln wrote The Gettys­berg Address on the back of his paper lunch bag, sit­ting on a park bench.
James Joyce wrote with a sim­ple pen­cil and note­book. Some­body else did the typing.
Van Gough never star­ted a pain­ting with more than six colors on his palette.
I draw on the back of wee biz cards. Wha­te­ver.
There’s no corre­la­tion bet­ween crea­ti­vity and equip­ment ownership. None. Zilch. Nada.
Actually, as the artist gets more into his thing, and as he gets more suc­cess­ful, his num­ber of tools tends to go down. He knows what works for him. Expen­ding men­tal energy on stuff was­tes time. He’s a man on a mis­sion. He’s got a dead­line. He’s got some rich client breathing down his neck. The last thing he wants is to spend 3 weeks lear­ning how to use a rou­ter drill if he doesn’t need to.
A fancy tool just gives the second-rater one more pillar to hide behind.
Which is why there are so many second-rate art direc­tors with state-of-the-art Maci­notsh com­pu­ters.
Which is why there are so many hack wri­ters with state-of-the-art lap­tops.
Which is why there are so many crappy pho­to­graphers with state-of-the-art digi­tal came­ras.
Which is why there are so many unre­mar­ka­ble pain­ters with expen­sive stu­dios in trendy neigh­borhoods.
Hiding behind pillars, all of them.
Pillars do not help; they hin­der. The more mighty the pillar, the more you end up rel­ying on it psycho­lo­gi­cally, the more it gets in your way.
And this applies to busi­ness, as well.
Which is why there are so many fai­ling busi­nes­ses with fancy offi­ces.
Which is why there’s so many fai­ling busi­ness­men spen­ding a for­tune on fancy suits and expen­sive yacht club mem­berships.
Again, hiding behind pillars.
Suc­cess­ful peo­ple, artists and non-artists alike, are very good at spot­ting pillars. They’re very good at doing without them. Even more impor­tantly, once they’ve spot­ted a pillar, they’re very good at quickly get­ting rid of it.
Good pillar mana­ge­ment is one of the most valua­ble talents you can have on the pla­net. If you have it, I envy you. If you don’t, I pity you.
But nobody’s per­fect. We all have our pillars. We seem to need them. You are never going to live a pillar-free exis­tence. Neither am I.
All we can do is keep asking the ques­tion, “Is this a pillar” about every aspect of our busi­ness, our craft, our rea­son for being alive etc and go from there. The more we ask, the bet­ter we get at spot­ting pillars, the more quickly the pillars vanish.
Ask. Keep asking. And then ask again. Stop asking and you’re dead.

47 Responses to “pillar management”

  1. t3knomanser says:

    Now, I don’t deny I’m a hack ama­tuer wri­ter, but I can’t write on paper. I find paper a frus­tra­ting medium, being that it’s a) slo­wer than my mind runs, b) has out­put that is often ille­gi­ble, c) dif­fi­cult to make and dis­tri­bute copies of.
    Then again, I haven’t willingly used paper since I was in middle school.

  2. Dayv says:

    He’s not tal­king about paper vs. computers/typing. Rea­ding and com­prehen­sion are two sepa­rate skills.

  3. you says:

    there are plenty of worthy artists who use expen­sive and cutting-edge technology/equipment.

  4. Greg Kucharo says:

    It cuts both ways. Howe­ver the truly crea­tive per­son would do what they do regard­less of what tools they had on hand. I’m a musi­cian, and I hap­pen to have a lot of equip­ment but not for the sake of having a lot. I use everything I have and each tool has a spe­ci­fic pur­pose. I don’t “hide” behind what I have, it’s part of how I create music. It’s my tonal palatte in the same way Van Gogh had his six colors of paint. I would make music if all I had was a kazoo. Use what you have, and use it to the max.

  5. Sergenth says:

    It’s like buying nice pens and vellum paper thin­king they will help you feel bet­ter about dra­wing. When I did that, I for­got that I really dis­like sketching on and “was­ting” nice paper :P I think that must have been a pillar battle!
    Still, as an aside, it’s impor­tant to find the tools you can use without fear. I don’t fear click pen­cils, or pig­ment pens, or Adobe Pho­toshop for colors. And Magic Rub era­sers are surely tiny divi­dends of a lenient deity!

  6. Young Freud says:

    This is why I love oekaki boards. I’ve seen peo­ple but out some won­der­ful work out of the limi­ted tools of an oekaki board, stuff that makes my jaw drop. In fact, a lot of the stuff I’ve seen blows any ras­ter­ba­ted Photoshop/Illustrator work out of the water.

  7. Greg Kucharo says:

    What someone thinks of the tools used to create a work flows from what they think of the work itself. Someone who hates CGI pro­bably hates 3D mode­ling tools or com­pu­ters in gene­ral. 8 trac­kers are 8 trac­kers both out of neces­sity and pro­bably because they dis­like a big recor­ding stu­dio and all of it’s atten­dant gear.
    Liz Phair’s Exile in Guy­vi­lle was writ­ten on a 4 track machine in her bedroom, while Steely Dan recor­ded in big time stu­dios with ski­lled ses­sion musi­cians. I like both of them, and the crea­ti­vity shi­nes through both approaches.
    In the end, if crea­tive work gets done, it doesn’t really mat­ter. Graf­fiti or the Sis­tine Cha­pel. It’s all great art to me.

  8. Dinah says:

    Seems like the point here is “ask your­self: am I get­ting this new equip­ment to solve a real pro­blem, to eli­mi­nate a real road­block, because it will truly inc­rease my crea­tive pro­duc­ti­vity? Or am I just making up an excuse to let myself have a new toy?”
    I just bought a new Power­Book and though there were abso­lu­tely parts of get­ting it which are “fun new toy”, it is already having the effect of moti­va­ting me to unders­tand my tools more, to beef up my skills in wire­less tech­no­logy & mobile com­pu­ting, and kee­ping me wri­ting about the web & tech tools.
    To refe­rence another point of Hugh’s, my cash work is as a pro­duct mana­ger for some web-based appli­ca­tions and my sexy work is metagrrrl.com & my other per­so­nal web­si­tes. I don’t want to make the lat­ter have to sup­port me — I want it to be for my own plea­sure — but I’ve been able to create a life where the skills I use for both bleed over into each other.

  9. stephen says:

    The coun­ter­point to this dic­tum is “Judge a crafts­man by his tools”. While osten­ta­tious props such as the “sil­ver Car­tier foun­tain pen” are coun­ter pro­duc­tive, a good brand of ball­point pen beats out a cheap one. While a truly good artist can use just about anything to get the job done, a high qua­lity but work­man­like tool often ser­ves as an ampli­fier.
    The other dan­ger is the inverse snob­bery prop. An older less effec­tive tech­no­logy is often bran­dished as a sign of cre­di­bi­lity. This beco­mes most odious when the use of such inverse snob­bery impo­ses hardship upon folks downs­tream. Just think of the ago­nies of having to transc­ribe Joyce’s longhand! Use of an archaic sta­tus sym­bol such as a foun­tain pen these days is para­mount to saying “I’m important/rich enough to have someone else do the transc­rip­tion to word pro­ces­sor!”. The cult of the typew­ri­ter is mar­gi­nally bet­ter simply be cause the long suf­fe­ring transc­ri­ber can at least use an OCR to scan in the first pass.
    An exam­ple of this is the emer­gence of the lap­top. The ori­gi­nal mar­ket for the lap­top was the exe­cu­tive who could gene­rate docu­ments while tra­ve­lling. This mar­ket flop­ped spec­ta­cu­larly because exe­cu­ti­ves don’t type, it’s just too “cle­ri­cal” for them. On the other hand wor­king jour­na­lists glo­med onto lap­tops with a pas­sion, since they beat the hell out of pos­ting typew­rit­ten or, god for­bid, handw­rit­ten dis­patches via the local telex office. Nowa­days, sub­mit­ting a dis­patch in longhand marks a jour­na­list as a hope­less twit.
    The two dis­tin­guishing fea­tu­res of a craftsman’s tool as oppo­sed to a twit’s prop are: Is it the most effi­cent way of doing what you need/want to do? Is it actually used/worn?

  10. Great set of posts!
    re: This par­ti­cu­lar one — I think there’s real value in your “pillars” theory, but you may have taken it a bit too far.
    This sta­te­ment is defi­ni­tely true: “The more talen­ted some­body is, the less they need the props.”
    But to say there’s zero corre­la­tion bet­ween access to a high-quality tool and crea­tive out­put is to go over­board. Obviously a pho­to­grapher can’t do her thing with just a pen­cil and paper. A nove­list isn’t going to be as pro­duc­tive with chalk and a black­board as he would be with a typew­ri­ter. A genius digi­tal illus­tra­tor stuck with Illus­tra­tor and Pho­toshop on a half-dead old PC that runs at a snail’s pace and crashes every five minu­tes isn’t going to be as happy as the same per­son with a new $2000 com­pu­ter.
    You have a great point here, and you’ve sta­ted it well for the most part. But that one place where you push the point to an illo­gi­cal extreme to make a point, wea­kens the rest a tad.
    Any­way, thanks for the ins­pi­ring and inci­sive essay!

  11. I think the main of gist of this sug­ges­tion is: Don’t tell your­self, “I can’t write a mas­ter­piece UNTIL I have a Car­tier pen or a brand new lap­top.” This isn’t an attack on good tools, or on the peo­ple who get good work from them. It’s a remin­der that you can still write that mas­ter­piece with a BIC pen. It may “look” nicer with the best tools, it may “feel” nicer with the best tools, but what makes it a mas­ter­piece is the talent. Don’t use the lack of tools as a crutch for being unpro­duc­tive or uncommitted.

  12. moofmoofmoof says:

    Methinks, based on the com­ments, that you have struck a nerve; I found myself searching for a rebut­tal, any rebut­tal, before I rea­li­zed what was hap­pe­ning.
    Not that there are any second-raters here; nonethe­less, the res­pon­ses are nearly as inte­res­ting as the original.

  13. Fred says:

    Feh. I write and per­form poetry. [Not for a living: ain’t no such crit­ter in the English-ritin’ world.] I write my mate­rial with (pre­fe­rably) pen­cil or pen. I then transc­ribe it myself to com­pu­ter. During the pro­cess of transc­rip­tion I also edit. Final ver­sions are then prin­ted — back to ana­log. No hired minions to do it for me.
    I also take pic­tu­res. B/W film still kicks ass over any digi­tal camera equi­va­lent. But post-processing is much easier in Pho­toshop… even though prin­ting back to Kodak can be a bit of a trick.
    And I illus­trate as well. I start with pen and ink, then scan.
    In my crea­ti­vity I start with ana­log and move onto digi­tal. That’s just the way it is. I don’t own a Car­tier pen, but I do have a Par­ker, and that’s what I use when it comes time to do a “pre­sen­ta­tion” handw­rit­ten ver­sion of a poem. It may well have been edi­ted digi­tally, but the final ver­sion is pre­sen­ted in ana­log.
    I don’t care. In the end, the tool ser­ves the pur­pose. The pro­blem ari­ses when the tool sup­plants the pur­pose. There’s any num­ber of mediocre “crea­ti­ves” using top-of-the-line hard­ware. So what? Suc­cess has always been easier to attain for ass-lickers than for the truly talen­ted: that’s just the way of the world. I just dis­like the taste so much, I’ll never suc­ceed on those terms… (and after all, I may not be truly talented).

  14. Fred says:

    Feh. I write and per­form poetry. [Not for a living: ain’t no such crit­ter in the English-ritin’ world.] I write my mate­rial with (pre­fe­rably) pen­cil or pen. I then transc­ribe it myself to com­pu­ter. During the pro­cess of transc­rip­tion I also edit. Final ver­sions are then prin­ted — back to ana­log. No hired minions to do it for me.
    I also take pic­tu­res. B/W film still kicks ass over any digi­tal camera equi­va­lent. But post-processing is much easier in Pho­toshop… even though prin­ting back to Kodak can be a bit of a trick.
    And I illus­trate as well. I start with pen and ink, then scan.
    In my crea­ti­vity I start with ana­log and move onto digi­tal. That’s just the way it is. I don’t own a Car­tier pen, but I do have a Par­ker, and that’s what I use when it comes time to do a “pre­sen­ta­tion” handw­rit­ten ver­sion of a poem. It may well have been edi­ted digi­tally, but the final ver­sion is pre­sen­ted in ana­log.
    I don’t care. In the end, the tool ser­ves the pur­pose. The pro­blem ari­ses when the tool sup­plants the pur­pose. There’s any num­ber of mediocre “crea­ti­ves” using top-of-the-line hard­ware. So what? Suc­cess has always been easier to attain for ass-lickers than for the truly talen­ted: that’s just the way of the world. I just dis­like the taste so much, I’ll never suc­ceed on those terms… (and after all, I may not be truly talented).

  15. Grammer Nazi says:

    It’s yacht not yaght.
    Maybe a fancy lap­top with spellcheck would have been valua­ble here :)

  16. Al Abut says:

    It’s like the dif­fe­rence bet­ween Mark Cuban and Donald Trump — one loves get­ting rick and the inhe­rent cha­llen­ges to doing so, the other loves loo­king like he’s rich and ban­krupts his com­pa­nies in the process.

  17. mb says:

    I agree with most of what you say here, but a crafts­man needs his tools. While I enjoy wri­ting with paper and pen, I find having a Power­book hoo­ked up to the Inter­net help­ful too (although I find that I do my best work with just a text edi­tor and the Geneva font).
    I sup­pose the ques­tion to ask is, am I get­ting this expen­sive piece of equip­ment to make up for any lack of crea­ti­vity, or am I get­ting it to be more effi­cient and to be able to do more with my ideas?
    Frankly with my poor handw­ri­ting and care­less­ness, a lap­top with spellcheck would pro­bably be a good idea. Heheh.

  18. S Lynn says:

    I found out when my iMac died out from under me a year ago that the mini­mum requi­re­ment for me to write is a wor­king com­pu­ter that’s capa­ble of tal­king to my prin­ter. Too much com­pu­ter would be a dis­trac­tion, though; I now have a secondhand iMac of the same make as the decea­sed, and though I would *like* something fas­ter, I recog­nize that my very poverty is pro­bably kee­ping me on-track and off the digi­tal crack like battle.net! (As it is I spend too much time online since I ended up with DSL, but it’s research, I swear… :) )

  19. It’s not a mat­ter of tools, they are just tools to get you to where you ulti­ma­tely want to be. You can create great art with low cost or no tools or high cost tools.
    The pro­blem is, and I have expe­rien­ced this, whether or not you allow the tools to direct or inhi­bit your crea­ti­vity.
    I have used the sta­te­ment “I don’t have the tools” as an excuse not to do things. Then I spent money on web design soft­ware and now use note­pad almost exc­lu­si­vely.
    In college I spent a whole lot of money on expen­sive oil paints and can­va­ses and then became afraid to use them because they were so expen­sive. When I went to old house paint, my crea­tive explo­ded because that “pillar” was out of my way.
    If you need expen­sive tools and that works for you and allows you to be cra­tive use them, if you can’t afford them or don’t have them, don’t use it as an excuse to not be creatve.

  20. Lowly Chemical Engineer says:

    I am a fan­tas­tic world-renowned wri­ter and I write all of my mate­rial using my own blood and my own fin­ger and the side­walk. i used to just write in the dirt with a stick but that had no sta­ying power.
    Your art is your anything — you do it because you love it not because peo­ple buy it. Tools help you get your art to your audience. The more effec­tive and trans­pa­rent your tools, the bet­ter your audience recei­ves and unders­tands. If free­dom from tools is really true artis­tic free­dom — I ask ever­yone what hap­pe­ned to all of the oral tra­di­tion story tellers? They were artis­ti­cally free but they had very limi­ted reach. If you don’t care if anyone sees your work — jab­ber on — if you want others to read/see/critique/digest/discuss/repel from your work then pick up a pen and paper or a lap­top or a can of spray paint and get going.

  21. mary Beth says:

    “I think the main of gist of this sug­ges­tion is: Don’t tell your­self, ‘I can’t write a mas­ter­piece UNTIL I have a Car­tier pen or a brand new lap­top.’”
    And the flip side of that is the myth that peo­ple have that only the correct piece of equip­ment will ena­ble them to create some mas­ter­piece. This begins the some­ti­mes life­long search for just the right tool be it com­pu­ter, camera or sewing machine that will let them do wha­te­ver. This igno­res the fact that you still have to learn how to USE wha­te­ver tool you have in hand. There’s just no way around that. Use and mas­ter what you need.

  22. Frankenstein says:

    It’s ama­zing how many kitchen gad­gets can be repla­ced by a sharp knife and someone who knows how to use it.

  23. krawdaddee says:

    i now feel jus­ti­fied in not see­king more expen­sive gui­tars in my life. they won’t make me bet­ter. i’ll keep on suc­king, on the cheap …

  24. AcouSvnt says:

    Pro­blem is, can or will we ever choose to have fewer toys at hand? That’s a tough one. I get more ideas wor­ked out when I shut off the com­pu­ter and sit with a note­book, but I’m not very good about making a cons­cious effort to do this more often. And I would never get rid of the com­pu­ter alto­gether.
    This kind of ties in with Hugh’s other sub-topic about the day job, because when I’m at work I’m in a situa­tion where I don’t have access to my com­pu­ter and all I *can* do is write in my note­books. This turns out to be a very good thing for my actual productivity.

  25. Katherine says:

    How many hours of labor do the Car­tier foun­tain pen, the anti­que desk, and the SoHo loft repre­sent? How much more crea­ti­vely pro­duc­tive could you be if you didn’t have to exchange those hours for cash to buy props? Or if you exchan­ged those same hours for crea­tive fuel (books, museum visits, tra­vel, wha­te­ver) ins­tead?
    Ever­yone likes to have nice things. Don’t let your desire for nice things become a trap.

  26. Barbara says:

    Ya know, I like stuff, too, but I’m lucky enough to be struck hard and often by the scrib­bling bug. Much of what I write down on paper never sees the Word pro­gram, but it keeps the fire bur­ning until I can.
    ‘Nuff said. *goes back to reading*

  27. AcouSvnt says:

    I have one ques­tion. By “props” do you mean “things to prop your­self up with”, or “acces­so­ries for use in a per­for­mance”? Because it’s kind of cool that it makes sense either way.

  28. Mary Beth says:

    I want to add to my pre­vious com­ment that I think that bad tools MAY impede your work. I encoun­ter peo­ple trying to make things with tools that are seriously defi­cient. That can be sad and I encou­rage them to invest wisely in bet­ter tools to help them achieve their vision. Having a good tool really helps (with the caveat that you still need to learn how to use it well).
    What I was trying to say was that many peo­ple seem to think that if only they could find the correct tool, they would become fabu­lously great and famous.

  29. juma says:

    Hey…all of my shoes are over a year old most of them approaching two…I just bought a new camera…to replace the one I had for just over three months. In the time that I had the camera I took close to 9,000 shots (I’m not a pro­fes­sio­nal pho­to­grapher). My new camera is clo­ser to state of the art, 10 x opti­cal zoom yada, yada. I hate a machine that moves slo­wer than I do, that’s why I’m gonna get a new, bet­ter, sys­tem soon. A gig + of ram, yada yada.
    But guess what…
    Next year…I’m still gonna have these shoes…cuz these shoes were made for wal­king and thats just what they do…and every year they do it well.

  30. juma says:

    Hey…all of my shoes are over a year old most of them approaching two…I just bought a new camera…to replace the one I had for just over three months. In the time that I had the camera I took close to 9,000 shots (I’m not a pro­fes­sio­nal pho­to­grapher). My new camera is clo­ser to state of the art, 10 x opti­cal zoom yada, yada. I hate a machine that moves slo­wer than I do, that’s why I’m gonna get a new, bet­ter, sys­tem soon. A gig + of ram, yada yada.
    But guess what…
    Next year…I’m still gonna have these shoes…cuz these shoes were made for wal­king and thats just what they do…and every year they do it well.

  31. andrew says:

    A tool is a tool. I’m a geek! I like my ‘puter etc. I would be a total fool to think that it makes my work bet­ter. A tool is just a tool no mat­ter how fancy.

  32. andrew says:

    A tool is a tool. I’m a geek! I like my ‘puter etc. I would be a total fool to think that it makes my work bet­ter. A tool is just a tool no mat­ter how fancy.

  33. M says:

    Whether we’re tal­king about limi­ted resour­ces or cons­trai­ned bud­gets, limi­ta­tions fan my crea­tive jui­ces and force me off the “tried and true” paths.

  34. Nabil says:

    Of all “how to be crea­tive” artic­les, this is the only one I’ve actually disa­greed with.
    Pillars are more than something to hide behind. They also sup­port the rest of the struc­ture. Hol­ding out for the best mate­rials and tools may be unrea­lis­tic, but you still need SOME tools and mate­rials. With that in mind, if you have the resour­ces to go with the bet­ter tool, why not do so?
    I know a num­ber of mediocre artists of var­ying types, and they’re about evenly split on those who use nee­ding bet­ter tools and mate­rials as an excuse, and those that hold the expec­ta­tion that their work is somehow “bet­ter” because they DON’T use those tools. If someone uses Pho­toshop or Pain­ter to make a great piece of art, it isn’t somehow inva­li­da­ted because of it, and if your hand-drawn art isn’t as good, it simply isn’t as good. Period.
    Keep up the inte­res­ting wri­ting, Hugh, I look for­ward to rea­ding more.

  35. Logan says:

    Some peo­ple are so affec­ted by what the guy wrote that they feel attac­ked because they live those lives.
    They are screa­ming out in defense.
    What about just taking the thought to unders­tand what holds us back.
    I think the res­pon­ses to this one said a lot.

  36. hugh macleod says:

    Hmmm… some peo­ple might think I said “only bad artists use good tools”. But they would be wrong ;-)

  37. Nathan Skreslet says:

    I can see both sides of this argu­ment.
    On one hand I’m a graphic desig­ner and I do a lot of work on my com­pu­ter, but I usually begin the ini­tial design on a little pad of paper with my depen­da­ble Shar­pie ultra-fine point. The com­pu­ter is simply a tool it doesn’t make your work bet­ter or worse but you still need it to be a func­tio­ning pro­fes­sio­nal in the field.
    On the other hand, the saying hold true that there is a pro­per tool for any job. Take car­pentry, for exam­ple. This is a very equipment-dependent bus­ness. If you don’t have the right blade, the right drill bit or the right jig you simply *can’t* do cer­tain things, no mat­ter how talen­ted you are.

  38. Gatsby says:

    This is a great article – too bad some peo­ple didn’t quite get what you said.
    I’m an ama­teur actor and wri­ter. I lear­ned a long time ago that acting has nothing to do with the phy­si­cal situa­tion. You can act a scene on a bare stage, or in a room nothing like a stage, sans cos­tume or makeup, miming your props, impro­vi­sing the bloc­king and adlib­bing the parts of the script you can’t remem­ber. We call it rehear­sal. And when the actors are good, ever­yone watching for­gets to notice they’re in street clothes hol­ding an invi­si­ble book – espe­cially the other thes­pians they’re acting with. Props and other tools are like icing on a cake: the icing may be the only part you see, but only a todd­ler thinks you need it to have a good cake. In fact, the icing is usually the least impor­tant part.
    It took me a long time to figure out this applied to wri­ting as well. I’ve always wan­ted to write, but for most of my life I thought I couldn’t. In my nai­vete I bla­med my envi­ron­ment, inc­lu­ding my tools. My desk was too messy, my com­pu­ter was too clunky, my handw­ri­ting was too slow. When new, often expen­sive tools that sho­wed up for Christ­mas and birth­days didn’t make the words come any fas­ter, I figu­red I just didn’t have the talent. Four years of college later I finally know what the pro­blem was, thanks to the inva­lua­ble wis­dom impar­ted by my favo­rite pro­fes­sor. Put simply, wri­ting is work. It is often enjo­ya­ble, rewar­ding work, but it is still work, and no mat­ter how many crea­tive helps you may employ, a large part of wri­ting will ine­vi­tably con­sist of sta­ring at the empty whi­te­ness you’re trying to fill. And then filling it. And dele­ting it. And rew­ri­ting it. Over and over again.
    I pre­fer to write on a lap­top. I didn’t start out liking it, it’s what I’ve got­ten com­for­ta­ble wri­ting on by not having any other options for an exten­ded period of time. But during a recent six-week trip to Alaska, I opted to bring a hard­co­ver jour­nal ins­tead. Less hassle, less wear and tear. And you know what? I wrote every day I found the time…sometimes jour­na­ling for two hours straight. Simi­larly, I love a soft­ware pro­gram called Movie Magic Screenw­ri­ter: once you know how to use it (which means lear­ning what three keys do) you can write a screen­play or sta­ge­play in the pro­per for­mat as fast as you can write a prose novel – often fas­ter. Only pro­blem is, it’s expen­sive and I mis­pla­ced the CD. Doesn’t mean I can’t write a play without it; just means they take twice as long and the for­mat sucks.
    Saying you need the pro­per tool is like saying the knife a chef uses or the plate he ser­ves it one will make a meal taste bet­ter. Tools aren’t the impor­tant part of a crea­tive endea­vor – the impor­tant part is the thing you’re creating.

  39. Kim says:

    Having just retur­ned from a five-day visit to Gettys­burg, I feel com­pe­lled to correct you. Lin­coln did NOT write the first draft of the Gettys­burg Address on a lunch sack. The first draft con­sists of two pages; page one was writ­ten in ink on Exe­cu­tive Man­sion sta­tio­nery and was most likely done in the White House. Lin­coln arri­ved in Gettys­burg with his speech yet unfi­nished, and asked his host for a piece of paper on the eve­ning of Novem­ber 18, 1863. He was given a sheet of lined paper, and wrote the remain­der of the address with a pen­cil, while sit­ting in a bedroom of David Wills’ home.
    Paper bags were still being made by hand and were expen­sive in 1863. The first machine to make paper sacks appea­red in the U.S. around 1869, and the first machine to make a sack with a fol­ded bot­tom was inven­ted in 1894. I think it highly unli­kely that peo­ple used paper lunch sacks as we know them during the Civil War.
    Any­way, who cares WHAT we use to create with? What mat­ters most is that we strive to create in the first place…

  40. Jenny says:

    I don’t think Hugh is arguing that you shouldn’t use tools that actually make your work easier (a com­pu­ter that doesn’t crash every 5 minu­tes, etc.). I think the dis­tinc­tion bet­ween a “pillar” and something legi­ti­mate is, are you really USING the tool, phy­si­cally, or are you just using it as a sym­bol of your iden­tity, or per­sona, of Artist? Having a roman­tic vision of one­self as an artist and actually crea­ting art are two very dif­fe­rent things– and they are often at odds, as many of us have dis­co­ve­red.
    I’d be pilla­ring if I took my note­book, went to a cafe in the West Village where lots of wri­ters repor­tedly hang out, dres­sed up like some sort of Pari­sian “bohe­mian,” drank cof­fee, tried to think of something to write about, but couldn’t con­cen­trate because I was too busy hoping all the other cafe patrons thought I was a wri­ter and envied my thri­lling life.
    I wouldn’t be pilla­ring if I were wri­ting in my note­book and then deci­ded to switch to a com­pu­ter because it was easier.
    The trou­ble comes when you start to think that using props to fuel your “artsy” self-image will help fuel your real creativity.

  41. john g says:

    In 1999, I had a cheap com­pu­ter and a drum machine (a hard­ware device that con­tains drum sounds). I wan­ted to com­pose a CD of ori­gi­nal music, but didn’t have the money for my own home stu­dio. So, ins­tead of twidd­ling my thumbs, I wrote music for the drum machine. As far as I know, I’m the only per­son to ever have pro­du­ced a CD with nothing but a drum machine.
    Jump to the pre­sent (2004). I’m wor­king on my 3rd CD. I have a very power­ful com­pu­ter, with two moni­tors and $1,500 worth of music soft­ware. Essen­tially, I have a com­plete recor­ding stu­dio within my com­pu­ter.
    Moral of the story: If you can afford good tools, don’t deprive your­self. Else, work with what you have. Regard­less of what tools you have, use them imaginatively.

  42. leigh says:

    “This is why I love oekaki boards. I’ve seen peo­ple but out some won­der­ful work out of the limi­ted tools of an oekaki board, stuff that makes my jaw drop. In fact, a lot of the stuff I’ve seen blows any ras­ter­ba­ted Photoshop/Illustrator work out of the water.”
    Photoshop/Illustrator rat­bas­tard? Just because someone’s cho­sen tool or media hap­pens to be something as expen­sive as a com­pu­ter doesn’t make it any less valid. My cho­sen media is the com­pu­ter; Illus­tra­tor, to be more spe­ci­fic. And this is an opi­nion I have to deal with every­time I tell someone what I do. Let me just say, the com­pu­ter can only do what you tell it to do. If you are a no-talent hack, there is no com­pu­ter in the world that can change that. So many peo­ple think that because I use a mouse ins­tead of a bruch, I am less of an artist or crea­tor. I can throw down and com­pete against anyone, and I don’t have to worry about stai­ning the car­pet while I do it.

  43. leigh says:

    “This is why I love oekaki boards. I’ve seen peo­ple but out some won­der­ful work out of the limi­ted tools of an oekaki board, stuff that makes my jaw drop. In fact, a lot of the stuff I’ve seen blows any ras­ter­ba­ted Photoshop/Illustrator work out of the water.”-Young Freud
    Photoshop/Illustrator rat­bas­tard? Just because someone’s cho­sen tool or media hap­pens to be something as expen­sive as a com­pu­ter doesn’t make it any less valid. My cho­sen media is the com­pu­ter; Illus­tra­tor, to be more spe­ci­fic. And this is an opi­nion I have to deal with every­time I tell someone what I do. Let me just say, the com­pu­ter can only do what you tell it to do. If you are a no-talent hack, there is no com­pu­ter in the world that can change that. So many peo­ple think that because I use a mouse ins­tead of a brush, I am less of an artist or crea­tor. I can throw down and com­pete against anyone, and I don’t have to worry about stai­ning the car­pet while I do it.

  44. leigh says:

    LOL-Rasterbated.…Ratbastard…
    Ras­ter­ba­ted Ratbastard.……Good Times

  45. nickthebassist says:

    I think one of the rea­sons there are so many second-rate artists with fancy tools is that there are so many second-raters period.
    It’s easier to take notice of some­body doing lousy work with fancy gear because it’s just so dan­ged obvious. At the same time, it’s easy to roman­ti­cize the greats and their paths, the­reby cur­sing anything cut­ting edge or high tech.
    Those points aside, I agree wholeheartedly.

  46. thermocarb says:

    Hello there,
    Iwas brow­sing the web and found this blog. Some inte­res­ting quo­tes. Keep them coming!
    Alice
    ther­mo­carb

  47. misnomer says:

    This is bri­llant, and so true.
    espe­cally the part about the macs..ahah