The concept of creativity has been explored from many angles in psychology, including creativity and intelligence, personality traits and psychopathology. Even the definition of creativity constitutes a large body of literature. A common definition of creativity is something that requires novelty and usefulness, authenticity and aesthetic appeal (Thomson & Jaque, 2017).
Csikszentmihalyi (1988) proposed a systems perspective of creativity that located creativity in the intersection between three shaping forces – the domain that will preserve and transmit selected variations of cultural information to following generations; the individual that creates a variation of cultural information; and the field, a set of social institutions that decides which variations produced by individuals are worth preserving.
Csikszentmihalyi’s (1988) framework has been appraised in the context of the internet age. Henriksen and Hoelting (2016) argued that the transformation of the way art and culture is created and shared via new applications available on personal computers and content sharing websites, has shifted the location of the field or gatekeepers. The individual is now able to bypass traditional gatekeepers and communicate directly with audiences.
Similarly, Glăveanu (2010) relocated the field in Csikszentmihalyi’s (1988) model from being understood as an institutionalised authority to be inclusive of any audience – be they art critics or family members. Glăveanu argued for an understanding of creativity as a socio-cultural-psychological process and proposed a model, influenced by Vygotsky, where the creator externalises cultural expression, creating a new artefact, to be integrated into the world of existing artefacts, where it is internalised as a form of enculturation by the audience. The audience and creator interact in multiple and dynamic ways in the creation and reception of the new artefact.
A review of creativity from a cross-cultural perspective considered variations in cultural acceptance of change and growth, with some cultures linking conformity to tradition with creativity and others linking originality with creativity (Lubart, 1999). In the context of Csikszentmihalyi’s (1988) model, in some traditional cultures, the field may not select significant variation in cultural information and art may conserve bounded and internally homogenous culture. Lubart’s (1999) review focussed on twentieth-century cultures and he conceded that in the context of globalisation of media access “it may become increasingly difficult to study creativity in isolated cultures” (p. 680).
Pursuing work in the creative industries has been characterised as a protean career (Bennett, 2009; van den Eynde et al., 2016). Protean refers to the mythological Greek sea god Proteus who changed form at will in order to avoid danger, and adaptation is at the core of the protean career (Bennett, 2009). Protean careers are self-directed, and values driven. Measures of success are subjective, such as self-fulfilment and psychological success, rather than objective, such as income or promotion within an organisation (Briscoe, 2006; Hall & Chandler, 2005). Work in the arts and creative industries is often experienced as a calling (Hall & Chandler, 2005).
It is difficult to define the professional identity of artists, as many are freelancers or self-employed, and as such they perform all aspects of business management in addition to their art practice (Throsby & Zednik, 2010). Others are employed across a range of roles including performer, teacher and low-skilled administrative or technical roles (Bennett, 2009; Bridgstock, 2005).
Bain (2005) discussed the influence of waged work on identity formation in her exploration of identity construction among Canadian visual artists. She concluded that in the absence of a clear distinction between professional and amateur status and the lack of recognition of artistic labour as real work, to construct their identity, the artists drew on shared myths and stereotypes that idealise artists and romanticise their creative abilities.
The personal nature of creative practice, together with financial difficulties and ambiguous professional identity, can make working in the creative fields challenging, and a high incidence of mental health concerns such as anxiety and depression has been observed (Maxwell, Seton, & Sabo, 2015; Robb et al., 2018; van den Eynde et al., 2016). Conversely, the experience of responding to a calling can give a sense of purpose and meaning in life. Despite the challenges, creative people have reported considerable passion for their work (van den Eynde et al., 2016).
Furthermore, art is considered to have important social value. The value for artists, audiences and broader communities are the subject of much research. Specific impacts attributed to art include improved educational performance, employment rates, engaging hard to reach demographics, crime reduction, social cohesion, promoting community participation, personal development and wellbeing (Barraket, 2005; Clift & Carmic, 2015; Creative Victoria, VicHealth, & Castanet, 2013; McHenry, 2009; Mulligan, Scanlon, & Welch, 2008).
An upcoming post will expand on the importance of artists, performers and creative people to our communities.
References:
Bain, A. (2005) Constructing an artistic identity. Work, Employment and Society 19(25), 25–46.
Barraket, J. (2005). Putting people in the picture: The role of the arts in social inclusion.
Bennett, D. (2009). ‘Academy and the real world’: Developing realistic notions of career in the performing arts. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 8(3), 309-327.
Bridgstock, R. (2005). Australian artists, starving and well-nourished: What can we learn from the prototypical protean career? Australian Journal of Career Development (ACER Press), 14(3), 40-48.
Briscoe, J. P. (2006). Protean career. In J. H. Greenhaus & G. A. Callanan (Eds.), Encyclopedia of career development [electronic resource]. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Clift, S., & Carmic, P. M. (2015). Oxford textbook of creative arts, health, and wellbeing: International perspectives on practice, policy and research. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/med/9780199688074.003.0007
Creative Victoria, VicHealth, & Castanet. (2013). Making art with communities: A work guide.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). The systems model of creativity, In Eds. R. J. Sternberg and J.E. Davidson, Conception of Giftedness, pp 325−339, New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Glăveanu, V. P. (2011). Creativity as cultural participation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 41(1), 48-67.
Hall, D. T., & Chandler, D. E. (2005). Psychological success: When the career is a calling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2), 155-176. doi:10.1002/job.301
Henriksen, D., Hoelting, M., & the, D. P. (2016). A systems view of creativity in a YouTube world. TechTrends, 60, 102-106.
Lubart, T. I. (1999). Creativity across cultures, In Ed. R. J. Sternberg, Handbook of Creativity, (pp. 666-689), New York: Cambridge University Press.
Maxwell, I., Seton, M., & Szabo, M. (2015). The Australian actors’ wellbeing study: A preliminary report. About Performance, 13, 69-113.
McHenry, J. A. (2009). A place for the arts in rural revitalisation and the social wellbeing of Australian rural communities. Rural Society, 19(1), 60-70.
Maxwell, I., Seton, M., & Szabo, M. (2015). The Australian actors’ wellbeing study: A preliminary report. About Performance, 13, 69-113.
McHenry, J. A. (2009). A place for the arts in rural revitalisation and the social wellbeing of Australian rural communities. Rural Society, 19(1), 60-70.
Mulligan, M., Scanlon, C., & Welch, N. (2008). Renegotiating community life: Arts, agency, inclusion and wellbeing. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement, 1, 48-72.
Robb, A. E., Due, C., & Venning, A. (2018). Exploring psychological wellbeing in a sample of Australian actors. Australian Psychologist, 53(1), 77-86. doi:10.1111/ap.12221
Thomson, P., & Jaque, V. (2017). Explorations in creativity research. Creativity and the performing artist: Behind the mask. San Diego, CA, US: Elsevier Academic Press.