Continue from last post…..The desire for creative liberty seems to be like a pressure valve that needs to be released every so often, at indeterminate intervals. Depending on what kind of problem, one’s mood, how efficiently one is working, the pressure rises, and once it reaches a threshold, one will run into a problem or creative roadblock in the project.
At this point, it is necessary to do some action to relieve this creative urge. This can be in a number of ways. The difference between the two poles of the model I have just presented in the last article, supporting creativity, is that stage one, creative liberation, could be summarized as action, and stage two, creative delibaration, could be summarized as thinking. However, this is a slightly different kind of thinking in the head. This type of thinking follows more closely with the distributed cognition definition of thinking. Humans use our environments in order to work out problems and manipulate material and physical entities (words, paint, objects, etc.) to help conceptualize a problem.
The four step theory of creativity widely cited in the creativity theory literature is a good place to begin thinking about computational approaches that can augment and supplement the process.
This kind of thinking usually happens in the context of problem solving. It is usually not an open ended creative context, such as the scenario of abstract art I have discussed before. However, on this side note, the abstract art previously discussed enters into this phase after a perceptual logic has been constructed.
The art of science. A seeming dichotomy, which may be less distinct than once imagined. Science is the careful crafting of knowledge through experimentation and verification. Methodology varies, but verification typically relies upon statistical, computational, logical, or a combination thereof in order to make its way into the realm known as knowledge. Science, as a totality of human effort, is an organic being. And knowledge, as its extension, is also an amorphous, far-reaching entity in itself. The digestion and interpretation of knowledge in humans breeds an entirely new creature: thought. (These terms are here loosely defined in order to put forth a feeling of an idea that I have. This may be a typical occurrence in this space, analytic philosophy aside…)
Learning how to craft new materials enables the mind to conceive of novel manipulations, therefore expanding the realm of thinkable thoughts within one’s mind. For example, a sculptor may look at a pile of scrap metal and see a creation, whereas a layperson will see trash.
There may or may not be a difference between an artist and a creator. I’ll explore this line of thought here, as a fun tangent. An artist, let us say, a sculptor, as the example earlier utilizes, may view the pile of rubble as a potential. However, he may not view a pile of sticks as a potential art piece, or a tree as a sculpting aparatus, as a land artist would (a medium that has inspired me lately, and one I have explored in the past). However, a creator, always seeking to enrich and enliven one’s environment sees potential whenever in the write mood. If in the creative spirit, the creator can make art out of whatever is close by. Paint is a convenient method of expression and is often close to the creator, that is, if he is well versed in listening to the ever-so-subtle whisper of creative force coming from within.
My art is abstract. I have three pieces in particular, titled ‘The Royal Family’ that exemplify my style thus far.
This blog is designed to be a space to draft and catalogue artistic ideas and progress. I like to see the creative process through time, so this will be a place to analyze projects I have completed as well as those I wish to embark upon in the future. In addition, I will discuss art theory, art philosophy, and the cognitive science of art and creativity.
In so doing, I hope to create a record of thought and a place to compile ideas so that I may help to aid my own creativity and that of others.