In my last article, A Higher Standard, I shared some thoughts on photographic plagiarism (“comp-stomping”) and among other conclusions, proposed that as artists we should focus on holding creativity to a higher standard, particularly with regard to composition.
But what is creativity? What mechanisms in our brains are responsible for creative thought? What happens when we find ourselves creatively stuck, and how can we break free? These are the questions that I will address in this article. My goal is to clarify the concept of creativity by consolidating perspectives from psychology and neuroscience, then apply these perspectives to some advice of my own on breaking out of creative ruts. At the end of this article, I’ve provided interested readers with plenty of links to further reading.
Article contents:
- Creativity as a Process
- The Neuroscience of Creativity
- Uniting Perspectives
- Applying the Science
- Summary
- References and Further Reading
Creativity as a Process#
I was somewhat surprised to discover a widely agreed-upon definition of creativity that has a long-rooted history in psychology. This definition holds that creativity is defined by both novelty (or originality) and effectiveness (or usefulness, value, appropriateness, etc.). There are many variations of this definition (see the References and Further Reading section), but I think that this classic view is generally sufficient when discussing creativity in photography, especially if we allow effectiveness to include impact. For example, a random display of pixels on a screen may be novel in the sense that it has never been seen before, but if it has no impact on its viewers, one could argue that it is not effective as an example of artistic creativity.
However, this definition focuses on creativity as an attribute that a work of art does or does not have. For this article, however, I am interested in creativity as a mental process; as something that we do.
An alternative approach to defining creativity that I found particularly attractive in this regard is psychologist Mark Runco’s view that emphasizes creativity as a personal, dynamic process that involves the “construction of original interpretations of experience.” The critical words here are c_onstruction_, implying the conceptual building of something new, rather than a simple reflection of experiences; and interpretations, which captures an internal understanding of our experiences that is key to creative thinking and may be expressed in many different ways. For a photographer, that interpretation might result in creative methods of composing or processing an image.
Runco’s definition of the creative process also requires intentionality and discretion:
Intentionality: Creativity is not an accident. Those moments of serendipitous creative breakthrough are real, but it is the intention to be creative that results in action as a result of that creative breakthrough.
Discretion: This criteria refers to knowing when the expenditure of energy toward creative pursuits is actually useful rather than wasteful. The alternative to constructing original interpretations would be relying on “memory, habit, tradition, or assumption.” As a photographer, I would also include convention in this list.
One important consequence of thinking about creativity as a process — as something that we do — rather than as an attribute — as something that a work of art has or doesn’t have — is the disentanglement of creativity from external evaluation. For example, we no longer need to determine if a work of art is “effective” by considering whether it meets some external standard or goals. This determination is separate and distinct from creativity as a process, one that takes place at the level of individuals before any external evaluation can occur. Establishing this separation equips us with a means to explore the underlying mechanisms responsible for creativity in the brain.
The Neuroscience of Creativity#
With a better understanding of how the brain implements the process of creativity, we gain perspective not only on why being creative can be so challenging, but also on ways that we might overcome certain barriers to creativity. Fortunately, neuroscientists have already begun to understand some of the mechanisms that are responsible for the creative process.
Cognitive neuroscientist Roger Beaty provides an informative and approachable high-level overview of this topic. In Beaty’s telling, creativity boils down to two processes: idea generation and idea evaluation. Put simply, creativity comes from the sophisticated interplay between these two processes and the networks that support them in the brain.
The primary brain network involved in idea generation is the default network, so named because it is engaged “by default” when we allow our minds to wander, not focusing on anything in particular. It is active when we daydream and spontaneous thoughts carry our minds away, whether those thoughts take us to recollected memories of the past, alternate variations of the present, or visions of potential futures.
The other process involved in creativity, idea evaluation, implicates regions of the brain that are associated with cognitive control, which is active during goal-oriented tasks that involve more attention and inhibition.
Normally, the default and control networks are functionally complementary: when one is active, the other deactivates, and vice versa. This makes sense: when we allow our mind to wander (and the default network activates), we are not exerting a great degree of control over our train of thought. But when we focus on a specific task, we’re doing the opposite: maintaining focus, directing our attention and redirecting it when we get distracted, intentionally not allowing our mind to wander.
However, Beaty summarizes a study in which neuroscientists observed increased communication among regions associated with the default and cognitive control networks when participants were engaged in creative tasks. Furthermore, individuals who scored higher on assessments of creativity were more readily able to co-activate these networks during creative problem solving tasks. This evidence suggests that creativity arises when we activate these networks that are normally complementary in a cooperative manner. It is the result of two processes working together in a harmonious mental symphony: spontaneous generation of ideas driven by the activation of the default network, and critical evaluation of those ideas modulated by cognitive control regions.
(If you’re interested in reading more about the particulars of these studies or about the neuroscience of creativity in general, check out the References and Further Reading section at the end of this article.)
Uniting Perspectives#
I’m not a brain scientist, but it seems to me that the perspectives from neuroscience described above are consistent with Runco’s view of creativity as a personal, dynamic process.
The first component of the creative process that Runco discussed — “constructing original interpretations of experience” — corresponds to the idea generation phase. Runco’s phrasing emphasizes the role of our personal experiences in this process, which form the building blocks for new ideas. In fact, studies have demonstrated that regions of the brain associated with the default network are also involved in reconstructing past experiences. I think most of us are probably familiar with the process of piecing together a distant memory: it isn’t like tuning in to a TV show where we can rewatch the past as it rolls by. Rather, without perfect recollection of every detail, we must reconstruct it based on what we do know. The same regions of the brain that enable this reconstruction of past experiences are also critical during creative thought.
The other components of the creative process in Runco’s telling — intentionality and discretion — are encapsulated by the idea evaluation phase. During idea evaluation, we engage in an intentional selection process that advances “good” ideas and filters out “bad” ideas, where good and bad correspond to the degree to which the idea satisfies our creative desires, vision, or instincts. I think of discretion as a throttle on this process: knowing when to push the gas pedal and exert more mental effort to evaluate an idea, or alternatively, knowing when to ease off and let an idea go.
Applying the Science#
Thinking of creativity as a process involving idea generation and evaluation provides a simple framework that helps us understand why some of the advice for breaking out of creative ruts comes up so often. In this section, I will offer some advice of my own through the lens of this framework.
Let’s consider some barriers to creativity that I believe can be characterized as impairments to our idea generation capabilities:
Stress and worry can all take hold in our minds and preoccupy our attention, ensuring that our mind never gets a chance to roam. When this happens to me, I can sometimes find temporary reprieve by distracting myself from my stressor. This is usually sufficient to facilitate small creative breakthroughs while simultaneously working through the bigger or longer-term issues. Here are some approaches that have worked for me in the past:
Change your surroundings or explore new environments. Sometimes the excitement of exploring a new locale is enough to jostle new ideas loose.
Use techniques that are outside of your comfort zone. Some examples of this: intentional camera movement (ICM), switching to a different lens (telephoto if your go-to is a wide-angle, or wide-angle if your go-to is a telephoto), macrophotography, or black-and-white photography. Part of the goal here is to reframe the broader challenge of breaking out of your creative rut — to trick yourself into thinking that the real challenge is learning or getting reacquainted with a new technical approach.
Seek out or create new challenges. Impose artificial limitations on yourself, perhaps by only shooting with a single lens or your cell phone. Maybe submit an old image to a photo contest. As with the previous suggestion of trying out a new technique, the idea here is to reframe the challenge of being in a creative rut.
I’ve saved my favorite remedy for last: indulge in your curiosities. Play around. Have a spark of an idea? Pursue it. Find something unusual while walking the dog? Check it out. This approach pairs well with any of the above — while you’re exploring a new locale, trying out a new technique, or challenging yourself with new limitations. Part of the challenge is learning to identify and acknowledge that feeling of curiosity, which can take practice. I think many adults (myself included) fall into the trap of taking things too seriously or thinking that playtime is only for children. That’s not the case: embrace your inner child. Blow the dust off of your imagination. Don’t worry about being judged. Grab your camera and go play around like nobody’s watching.
A lack of motivation, something that I myself deal with often, can grind the entire idea generation process to a halt. This one can be a little tougher to work through, especially since a lack of motivation can often accompany more significant challenges in our lives, but here are some ideas that have helped me address the symptoms:
Embrace inspiration. It doesn’t have to be photography: read a book, watch a movie, or visit an art museum. If you’re struggling to create for yourself, the best-case scenario is that this approach can help you find inspiration; the worst-case scenario is that you’re providing nourishing input to your creativity system.
Pursue other creative endeavors. This could mean shooting new or unfamiliar subjects, or trying out a different genre of photography, such as taking pet or portrait photos. Alternatively, it may be worthwhile to look into creative pursuits outside of photography entirely. For me, writing has proven to be an effective outlet when I’m having trouble picking up the camera.
Above all, allow it to happen. Understand that the creative process is long and cyclical, and have faith that inspiration will return. Most often, the external factors at play are only exacerbated by the pressure we put on ourselves to create. Consequently, convincing ourselves not to worry about that missing spark can actually be helpful outside of our creative pursuits as well.
“Evaluating our work on someone else’s terms betrays our own artistic sense and expressive ability.”
While stress, worry, and a lack of motivation can impact our ability to generate new ideas, there is another common barrier to creativity that I consider to be a condition of the idea evaluation phase: creating images that aren’t our own.
It’s easy for the steady stream of dazzling images we see from our friends, famous photographers, or on Instagram to disrupt our usual process of self-evaluation. Rather than consider our work on our own terms, we allow our judgment to be influenced by external factors like someone else’s preferences or priorities, or in the case of Instagram, by the hive mind of social media or algorithms that are beyond our control. Evaluating our work on someone else’s terms betrays our own artistic sense and expressive ability. My advice is easy to state but difficult to follow: focus on expressing yourself. Work on insulating yourself from undue external influence. Remind yourself what made you pursue photography in the first place. Comparison is the thief of joy and social media can be a toxic trap. By focusing on expressing yourself and listening to your own artistic voice, you can recalibrate the idea evaluation systems in your brain and grow into the artist you want to be.
Summary#
To recap:
How we think and talk about something matters. The classic definition of creative as a characteristic that encapsulates both novelty and effectiveness is useful as a starting point, particularly if we are interested in talking about creativity as an attribute of a work of art. As artists, however, it can also be empowering to consider creativity as a process. I think Mark Runco put it best when he called creativity the “construction of original interpretations of experience.”
Defining creativity as a process equips us to look at the mechanisms that are actually responsible for creativity in the brain. To oversimplify an overview from Roger Beaty, creativity boils down to two components: idea generation, which is backed by the default network in the brain, and idea evaluation, which involves the cognitive control network. The cooperative interactions between these networks are what enable creativity. Supporting evidence for this includes the finding that increased cooperation between regions associated with these networks is generally indicative of increased creative ability.
Taking cues from neuroscience and thinking about creativity as a process that involves idea generation and idea evaluation can help us understand why some tips on breaking out of creative ruts are more effective than others.
I’ve only scratched the surface here. If you’re itching for more, I’ve provided links below to a number of resources that I found particularly useful, insightful, interesting, or inspiring.
Thank you for reading this article. If you have any thoughts, comments, or questions that you would like to share with me, or if you’re having trouble finding additional resources on any of the topics covered here, feel free to comment below or message me on Instagram or directly.
References and Further Reading#
Referenced in this article:
Further reading In psychology:
Creativity Enhancement Methods for Adults: A Meta-Analysis (Haase et al. 2022) (added Jan 2023)
Slides from Dr. Keith Simonton at UC Davis that provide an overview of some of the variations of the classic definition of creativity, including references to the following:
On the Usefulness of “Value” in the Definition of Creativity (Weisburg 2015): “novel and intentional”
The Cambridge Handbook of Creativity (Kaufman & Sternberg 2010): “novel, good, and relevant”
The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms (Boden 2004): “novel, valuable, and surprising,” where surprising is consistent with the US Patent Office’s “non-obvious” condition for obtaining a new patent
Summary of Bruner (1962), who characterized creativity as “an act that produces effective surprise.”
Summary of Rhodes (1961), who introduces the 4P model of creativity: person, process, press, and products. While I didn’t include any discussion of the 4P model in this article, I was able to find the original paper from 1961 and thoroughly enjoyed reading it — Mel Rhodes is a thoughtful writer and a clear, effective communicator.
Summary of Wallas (1926), who introduced the four stages of creativity: preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification
Further reading in neuroscience:
The following articles about the creativity of neuroscience and the default network are both informative and approachable:
If you’re more interested in a deep dive into the nitty gritty details, or if you’re accustomed to reading scientific research papers, or if you want to know more about how research in neuroscience is conducted, I recommend the following papers:
Further reading in photography:
Colleen Miniuk is a skilled photographer and a talented writer, and her blog has been an important influence on my own writing. I highly recommend all of her articles, but the following share a lot of overlap with this article in terms of subject matter:
Guy Tal is legendary in the field of photography. Both his images and his writing speak for themselves. As with Colleen Miniuk, I recommend his entire blog, but the following articles are a great place to start if you’re interested in the topic of creativity:
Staying Motivated by Eric Bennett, another fantastic photographer and influential thinker in photography.
Nature Photographers Network regularly features helpful articles from other photographers about creativity (among other topics):
Working Through Creative Slumps by Gary Randall
Overcome Your Creative Rut by Jackie Cramer (added on 15 December, 2021)
Creative Self Expression When Everyone is a Photographer by Brenda Petrella (added on 2 June, 2022)
Developing Your Creative Spirit, a short article by Eva Polak with an important message about being open to creativity as an ongoing process. (Added Aug 2022)