August 18, 2004
a reader writes…
A regular reader just sent me the following e-mail:
i started to leave this as a comment but then decided to do by email instead. there’s a shift in tone in your list (not a shift for those who’ve been reading gapingvoid for a while like me, but a shift for the newbies) that a few people are picking up on, and i wonder if it threatens to unravel the ‘how to be creative’ list. from ‘everyone was born with crayons’ and ‘getting more out of the job you already have’ to ‘lose the losers and get out and hunt wooly mammoth’. what made the former so popular among the blogosphere is undermined by the latter, i think. we can’t all hunt wooly mammoth. someone’s gotta do some gathering. and gathering is not incompatible with being creative. just my two cents.
Well, fair enough. Though I do think being creative isn’t just about opening up your metaphorical box of crayons… there’s some external components to consider, not just freebasing the inner recesses of one’s psyche. Thoughts?
It’s all about the attitude. The “how to be creative” posting began as inclusive, non-judgmental, and (relatively) positive but have taken a turn for the sanctimonious. Perhaps a good thing has been ridden too far. Frankly I don’t even know what your comment on your readers email means, but then I didn’t really understand how your reader could be pointing out a shift in tone for newbies (but not for long time readers like him/her) when they’re not the one that would be feeling that shift.
I’m confused by the whole thing and prefer it when things avoid the serious and philisophical and just stay mean, nasty, and funny.
“inclusive, non-judgmental, and (relatively) positive…”
hmmmm.… sorta like the cartoons
the ‘regular reader’ is me, and i’m sorry you are confused by my comment, though i am confused as to how it can confuse you when you say you have noticed the shift yourself.
and hugh i agree that the external realities need to be considered too … i just think the shift could’ve used more lube.
“mean, nasty, and funny.” That’s how I like it too.
Lately I’ve seriously considered dropping this blog from my to-read list. And the reason why is the stench of smugness coming from you, which has grown thicker as the “how to be creative” list has grown longer.
It’s great to be the go-it-alone creative forger who follows his muse no matter what. But more and more you seem to be making a value judgement that people who for whatever reason are not that type of person are somehow lesser beings.
If that is truly how you feel about the rest of us humans, you’re entitled to feel that way, but I’m not going to keep reading you.
I like the fact that you say what you think bluntly, and I dont’ mind if you exaggerate to make your point.
I’m amused by the paradox in lux’s comment. On the one hand lux accuses you of value judgement and treating people as lesser beings. And prefaces this by commenting on “a stench of smugness coming from you”. What’s that if it’s not a value judgement? Lux wants it both ways. Fair enough, I think we all do.
I notice that the blogs I read most are the ones with passion, whether I agree with them or not. And I think that passion is a pretty useful component of creativity.
And I also think creativity in teams is under-rated and I know for myself that the metaphor of lone-artist-starving-in-garett-in-face-of-adversity has its limits.
There, that’s probably annoyed everyone…
Hugh, I think you’ve just fallen into the trap of starting out discussing a general concept (creativity) and as your material has thinned, your insights have become more personal, more introspective, and thus more *proprietary*. As the posts become more autobiographical, it’s natural to draw lines between “what makes me special” and “everyone else”.
Of course, why anyone would care (much less be offended) is beyond my comprehension. I mean, if you’re going to stifle yourself and let other people dictate what your write, you might as well be getting paid, right?
Well, I come here for “informed and lighthearted and sometimes highhanded primal,” not “let’s be nice, somebody might feel insecure.”
“The price of being a sheep is boredom. The price of being a wolf is loneliness. Choose one or the other with great care.” — Hugh MacLeod
Wolves are lonely because they make people (including themselves) uncomfortable. Sheep are bored because they’re afraid to explore the things that make them uncomfortable.
Incidentally, hunting wooly mammoth is a group endeavor. Many creative pursuits are group efforts (movies, theater, many types of music and dance, etc.) There’s no contradiction between suggesting that everyone should pursue their creative potential and observing that some environments are more friendly to that potential than others.
no one is suggesting the contradiction you are denying. people just don’t like being called losers. that goes beyond making people uncomfortable. and that’s why wolves die alone.
and you can’t quote hugh as proof that hugh is right.
Wow, to have gone from a seed of an idea to a polarizing pariah in a matter of weeks — not bad, Hugh. Such is life in the breakneck-paced blogosphere. I predict a “Where Are They Now?” blog to do an article about this very list in five weeks…
Personally, I say some days will be more sugary than others. If Hugh’s in a place where he needs to vent, it’s his blog. If he’s stopped holding your hand and started slapping it, you either need to find a new role model or develop thicker skin. Neither is a bad thing or a good thing. It’s just evolution.
cynthia: I didn’t say Hugh is right. I said he’s consistent.
I’m not sure there is a “right” answer for anything connected to creativity. The very nature of the process is that it’s unique. Some people thrive in environments that others find stifling.
If you care whether Hugh thinks you’re a loser or not, you haven’t yet internalized his advice.
Jeez you people take things way too seriously. Hugh writes a good blog and in this whole How To Be Creative thing has written very little I don’t agree with. As for this watercooler controversy — where’s the controversy in saying “don’t work your guts out for people that only want you for what they can get out of you”?
And why shouldn’t you feel better than people that essentially waste their lives trying to please The Man and not themselves (whether that includes Being Creative or not)?
Jeez you people take things way too seriously. Hugh writes a good blog and in this whole How To Be Creative thing has written very little I don’t agree with. As for this watercooler controversy — where’s the controversy in saying “don’t work your guts out for people that only want you for what they can get out of you”?
And why shouldn’t you feel better than people that essentially waste their lives trying to please The Man and not themselves (whether that includes Being Creative or not)?
“The master in the art of living makes little distinction between his work and his play, his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his information and his recreation, his love and his religion. He hardly knows which is which. He simply pursues his vision of excellence at whatever he does, leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing. To him he
I don’t see any real contradiction going on — there’s the aspect of personal creativity, no matter what is going on inside your head or what your creative needs are, and then there’s the reality of working. Working may be a great environment for you and your creativity or it can be so so or it can be awful. Sometimes you can leave sometimes you can’t. that’s life. I read Hugh’s writing with his point of view in mind and think about how it applies to my own work, which isn’t at all the same as his on a day to day basis.
In terms of the material here — I think the discussion, whether in agreement or not, is more than half the reason for reading. In any discussion there’s room for disagreement and there’s bound to be some discomfort. With all discomfort there’s a range of personal comfort. The good news — much learning happens on the fringes of discomfort as we expand our knowledge and understanding.
I’m a relative newbie to this site (found it about 2 months ago), and if there *has* been a tone shift with the recent posts, I don’t really mind. I find Hugh’s musings to be generally upbeat and positive, so I tend to leave here with a feeling that lies somewhere between inspiration and a foot in the ass (with both resulting in a li’l spurt of motivation!).
Sometimes we’re more disgruntled, jaded, bitter, etc. than others. The key thing is to not have that be standard operating procedure (i.e. the recent “Watercooler Gang” post).
I worked for several years at a computer game developer where there were constant bitter struggles between the creative and the administrative depts. It occurred to some degree on every game we made, and it eventually took it’s toll on me after a couple of projects where I headed up the art team in a management role.
Daily battles to preserve the creative integrity of the project made me a miserable s.o.b. I grew to hate my job, which I considered thankless. I clashed constantly with my producers and complained openly about virtually every facet of the project. It finally came to a head when I got called on the carpet by my supervisors and came within an inch of being fired for being so negative and contributing to the already sinking morale.
Long story short: I eventually straightened up and got some perspective. I was a hell of a lot happier once I began to regard my job for what it was– a job. I still had days where I was incredibly frustrated, but I really tried to keep things positive and glean what good stuff I could out of the job.
Besides, the yahoos that owned the company ran it into the ground shortly thereafter, so most of the creatives (including myself) felt a small degree of vindication despite being rendered jobless.
I never said I was *entirely* without a dark side…
Apologies for the earlier double posting — AOL grrr!
“If you care whether Hugh thinks you’re a loser or not, you haven’t yet internalized his advice.”
yes, in a perfect world we could all be as cruel as we wanted and no one would ever get offended. my point, though, was about hugh perhaps alienating the core readership that was brought here by the ‘how to be creative’ list. many of whom are the very so-called ‘watercoolies’ who have not yet, as you say, “internalized his advice.” and if they feel belittled, they’re not GOING to internalize his advice, they’re going to turn off. this is why i originally sent this as an email to hugh rather than a public comment – it was simply my take on a potential flaw in his execution, not a morality lesson.
Jeez, Cynthia, I know. So hard not to alienate the lesser beings