An Open Letter To Creatives (Matt's thoughts on creativity, motivation and meaning)
Keep up the work. Keep up the work. Keep up the work.
I have been thinking a lot about what it means to be creative and a creative.
In all my years studying creativity at school, they always told me that work had no use unless it had a deep meaning. This meaning had to be about something other than art, the art or creativity, usually. If art didn't fit a specific formed template, then it had no purpose. If it couldn't be categorised, where would it go? I found this a lot when studying music and film. My Brother found this when studying visual arts and film. While we were always both academically and technically proficient, I feel we both failed our teachers because we didn't/couldn't fit in with our work. This is weird to me because I always did well academically, because I sought to fit to the criteria, learning early that would get me higher grades, (more on this later). At the same time, I knew teachers didn't respect my art because they often didn't see value in it, if it didn't fit a style or meaning they had prescribed. If I look to my Brother, his work was always gorgeous and well made. He knew what he wanted and he did it. I think it was his less academic mind that, well let him down academically. But he made work that was powerful and beautiful. I think that is more important in the end. I have heard similar experiences from other musicians that, (for example), didn't fit the 'school band model' that schools often push. This isn't a poke at the education I had, it is merely a comment on a system.
Genre, style, movements and forms; I believe have always served as more of a historical tool. A way of grouping like work in order for it to make sense. Subcultural studies often are historical. Yet, there is present tense categorisation. I find that this is more used to create an image of a group or find meaning with social circles. I know this is important. Socialisation with art, is often all people want. I respect that. Meaning is interesting, because in my experience a lot of it is added to work, for it to be seen as something else. I am not angered or annoyed by this; more that I am trying to make sense of it. A lot of work does have meaning, and that comes from within or from outside the creative. I sometimes do this when I look at work. The pretentious, use it as a power tool. A form of understanding that the lowly public couldn't have. (I won't go into a breakdown of High and Low art here, but it is truly disturbing to me how people see themselves above others in this context.) There is use for meaning, and no meaning in art. It is raw emotion brushed with colour onto a canvas. It is strategically placed notes to create and experiment with pattern and process. This makes sense. There should be both. I have always lived between two worlds with this.
When I studied creativity at university, there was a slight shift. It was more acceptable to create work with and without meaning, (though the latter always did better at getting grants and placements in institutions). It was unit to unit, that I saw changes in how art should be taught. This only accounted for the pure creative work, as truly there would always be an accompanied written piece, (and in my experience), I found I could still do well here. It was (a lot of the time)
my prose, knowledge of desired structure and understanding of use of reference and others' academic quotes, I could almost justify anything. While some units truly inspired and advocated creativity, new and experimentation; some saw no meaning in process. I knew I had found who my true mentors were by placing people into one of these two education styles. While meaning is an important part of the analysis discussion, some of my true mentors saw art as an emotional development tool, for the creative and the outside world.
I believe that people should experiment. Even if that means experimenting by emulating existing style. This experimentation could be purely personal. This could be just experimentation for the artist, but not new as a whole. A lot of people say they appreciate creativity, but I can see they don't now when I have become an educator. It is that fine balance of trying to reward true process manipulation and 'the new', while marking to a criteria that often says that the best fits within certain parameters (and those aren't creativity). The hypocrisy of trying to give credit to new ideas, when 'practically' or 'aesthetically' they are lacking. I think it comes from the judgement and evolving criteria that changes with life. Some people lie about appreciating development of the work, the artist and society.
Some of my mentors taught me the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, (more on this later). The worlds I have lived between are seeing through the theoretical lies, added to create meaning, and the pretentiousness of telling those lies myself (only when I saw fit, or when I was inspired). That leaves me where I am today. I am a self confessed tester. I test and try new things. That is what keeps my tinkering mind ticking along. While I used to rely on copying new styles to feed this part of me, I now achieve this with process and algorithmic work. Random can only be the truly new and outside of my comfort (until random and chance becomes my new comfort, I guess).
When it comes to extrinsic and intrinsic motivations, I have always been torn. It seems that my heroes and mentors have always said that they don't care about extrinsic motivations; that I shouldn't care about extrinsic motivations. People I know and people I look up to, have always said to keep the process and keep up the work: That all your work is awesome and to keep doing what makes you happy, because that is what matters. I usually go along with this thought and am a happy subscriber to this. The cynic in me (who I have always been punished for, for whom I have always fought and who keeps me analytical and alive), tells me that maybe these people can only say this in retrospect. Maybe only when some people have been successful, they can say these things. Or, maybe it is because they never found success, and they try to ascribe meaning to a life's body of work. I shouldn't think this way. These heroes of mine should guide me. People like Nick Cave, Patti Smith, Brian Eno, Laurie Anderson, Lou Reed and David Byrne; they always stuck to their guns. They knew what they wanted, but conversely, went with what they found inspiring at the time. Extrinsic motivations add a lot of purpose to a lot of people. Maybe I only distrust these motivations like recognition, respect and renumeration, because I have never really had them. Maybe there is a deep jealously I have about these motivators, and the people who have them as their ally. I guess all of us artists really must have some level of extrinsic motivation, or else we wouldn't let anyone see the work. We might only keep our creations locked away. One also must consider that one must have food, shelter and money to survive. Certain types of creative output don't lend themselves well to these endeavours. Thinking about time output for money, vs art, and how to balance both; is a conversation for another day. But remember, that it is a massive consideration in everything we creatives do.
Keep up the work. Keep up the work. Keep up the work.
I think this. I feel this. The only way we can get better at our craft, and produce better work, is by working on it. We know that. Find your own inspiration in your tools and work. This is how I live (or try to, when I am not wrapped up in these thoughts of despair). Dreaming big and small is important. I think it is too easy to get wrapped up in the future and finding meaning in all of the little things. (See the above body of text). The takeaway is to create, be inspired and enjoy what you do.
If you don't find success (intrinsic or extrinsic) in you work you really have four options:
a) QUIT (I do not recommend this option)
b) TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT (I'm all about experimenting, but remember why it is you do it, and what success really means to you, as this determines the true audience and thus, criteria)
c) PUSH HARDER (throw your work out to more people, go deeper down your rabbit hole)
d) ANALYSE (figure out what went wrong, or what could be better)
I think we all need a combination of options b, c, and d. Never pick a. Take criticism when it is needed, but know deep inside when you have to stick to your guns. You are powerful.
I know I am not truly successful yet with any of my intrinsic or extrinsic goals. But maybe that is the secret. Maybe there is no end game. How could there be the final or ultimate work? I know I am not an authority on the matter, but I believe if I keep working, I will find it. Even if that is just a huge body of work I can be proud of in the end of days. If not, then I guess there is no hope. I can't believe there is no hope or meaning, I just can't. I guess this was probably more helpful to me than you, but I hope this helps. Thanks for taking the time to read this. Remember that while you can improve, you are beautiful. Keep up the work.
With love and admiration always,
Matt
