Can creativity be taught /learnt?

Reason I ask is that I am quite an analytical person and I’m more than happy with anything mechanical/electrical/technical/complex etc, I use solidworks as part of my job designing equipment/mechanical items but when I try and design something creative like a piece of home furniture or something that requires a bit of style rather than being functional I am completely stuck!
I’ve never been any good at art/drawing/painting etc and I completely hopeless at anything musically!

Its never really bothered me as I know where my skills lie but I was curious if creativity could be taught or if it could be ‘picked up’ by being in a suitable environment?

Yes.

Creativity does not mean art… creativity means putting things together in a way to create something which is new or is more than the sum of the parts.

Baking a loaf of bread from the raw ingredients is creative.

And I agree w/ Matt. I think creativity is inherent in all of us – everyone has ideas – which is essentially what creativity is – in many of us I think our essentially creative natures are trained out of us as we progress from childhood to adulthood by societal norms and our formal education system – so yes, it can be ‘taught’. Or in my view – ‘revealed, released or re-revealed…’

Every post on this forum is creative in it’s most basic sense, although some more than others 🙂

To elaborate more, yes creativity can and is taught. More precisely, techniques, stimulations and the ability to tune in and record them can be simply taught.

well, designing home furniture that’s stylish isn’t exactly easy. Form follows function and all that, a good rule to adhere to. Unless you’ve got a very good “eye” for design, then you could end up creating something that just looks shit. I think alot of people would. Afterall, designing furniture is a skill, if it was that easy, everyone would do it.

You can learn techniques which help unlock your creativity and increase your exposure to environments which stimulate creativity.

This is good – Hegarty on Creativity: There are No Rules https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/050051724X/ref=cm_sw_r_awd_Lmj-vbJV7HX05

It’s a bloody good question… although doubtless some have natural talents, essentially, anything you practice you will become better at.

Given the well documented link between whether the left or right side of the brain is dominant and its effect and the characteristics we exhibit, it requires a deep level of training, but like anything, if you put the hours in, it should become instinctive.

Many years ago I trained as a Creativity and Innovation Facilitator! The rationale was that we could all be creative and contribute to creative / innovative thinking. You can train to be creative, and do some things which help encourage it, BUT the reality is most education actually is about removing your creativity and showing your the “right” answer / way to do things!

What I think you are asking is can you learn “style” – and to a certain extent you can, although I think some people are more natural than others. I’m sure there must be workshops for people to learn what’s “hot” and what’s not. I’m sure there will be stuff on aesthetics in CAD too.

However if that’s not your forte then perhaps you are more of a “clever function” guy. To be honest “designers” who do the style stuff are relatively common place (albeit some are better than others) – the true innovation is the person who spots a better way of doing something or making something which might be where your true skills lie?

okay – creativity probably isnt the best word – I am massively creative – but only in my little bubble/comfort zone and sit at the function over fashion side of things.

I was wondering though that a person could be forced/taught to become more form biased? to develop an eye for things that wasn’t there previously?

Creativity does not mean art… creativity means putting things together in a way to create something which is new or is more than the sum of the parts.

Baking a loaf of bread from the raw ingredients is creative. I’d suggest its not. It is creating something, but its not creative. Creativity would be thinking nobody has ever put XYZ and ABC together in a loaf and doing it (possibly iteratively until you get an edible combination!).

I was wondering though that a person could be forced/taught to become more form biased? to develop an eye for things that wasn’t there previously?

I would probably say yes, assuming there is some tiny glimmer of talent there, or at least a passion, enthusiasm and a will to learn. If you want to express yourself in some visual medium, first you have to immerse yourself in that medium and learn the language.

It’s highly unlikely that someone would create a beautiful sculpture or painting without first making a lot of crap, studying and striving to improve.

You might never create something genuinely original if all you are doing is studying and replicating for the sake of it (without a desire for self expression), but I’d say most reasonably intelligent people could be taught to do something resembling artistic.

It possibly can be learned, but I think it’s very difficult. Just basing that on being a scientist, in an environment where there are very few limits to being creative, in fact it’s your job to create new knowledge and new thinking, and seeing how few people manage this. The majority of people are very incremental and non-creative in their approach, despite being generally bright and creatively aware.

The people that manage to achieve creative work have a lot of status, because everyone knows how difficult it is. It doesn’t necessarily mean their work is important, or even well-known, but they stand out as being different.

I’d suggest its not. It is creating something, but its not creative. Creativity would be thinking nobody has ever put XYZ and ABC together in a loaf and doing it (possibly iteratively until you get an edible combination!).

Having spent 10 years in ad agencies and worked in a proper creative environment (although as a suit rather than a creative myself), I agreed with everything in your first post about what creativity really is.

I agree with your distinction above about doing something which has never been done before being true creativity but how is ‘creating something’ not ‘creative’?

I was wondering though that a person could be forced/taught to become more form biased? to develop an eye for things that wasn’t there previously?

I think the phrase you might be looking for is “visual awareness’?
I remember in the beginnings of my art education a tutor saying “well you are just not visually aware”. 25 years later visual awareness is second nature and I make a living from it so although you could argue I was taught to be visually aware I would argue that I along with most of the others who were in the same education system were there because they already had visual as well as drawing skills.
In fact I knew I had an ability at infants school when we were told to cut out pictures and stick them down on paper in a wet (indoor) lunch break, most just cut things out and stuck them down, I created a fantasy world with garden pics from a seed catalogue, Disney castle and. WWII commemorative plate advert by the FranklinMint. It was this epiphany that made me realise I wasn’t going to be a doctor or fireman.

If I was to explain why I thought something is visually right or wrong I have no idea if it would have any effect or not? Maybe it would be like somebody explaining long division or physics to me, I just don’t process that kind of thing very well and just fail to get it.

*nothing to do with draughtsmanship, or people who copy photographs in pencil. I don’t really associate that with visual awareness.

The simple answer is yes, the full answer is yes but it takes time and mistakes. Having survived being a design and tech teacher and seeing what students can come up with when given freedom was amazing.
If you’re good on cad I’d suggest buying some pencils and paper! My old lecturer said creativity slaughtered at the alter of productivity. Cad is a brilliant tool and I teach that now at college but it limits you. It limits you in a way the stifles the flair, that’s why many car designers still do the clay model thing. Pencil and paper gives more freedom of movement, it can be turned upside down but still be facing forward and added to modified.
Play about with shapes, I’d get my students to have a sheet of a3 and scribble with their eyes closed, nice flowing big scribbles and use the whole piece of paper, no sharp movements. Once they’d done that take a few minutes and see what shapes they could see.
Get inspired, books are great, better than the Internet, take time turning the pages and really see the designs. The internet is too quick! You scan over stuff and don’t take time to take it in. Look at the classics, gaudi to me is superb and flawed, Bauhaus is fascinating, to me, but restrictive. I love rennie mackintosh or the feel of it but it can be fussy. Make your own way.
Look at the material you want to use, is there a clue there? Oak was used for war ships partly because of its strength but also partly because of the way it grows. Look at natures way of creating strength if you’re doing a structure, there millions of years of practice there.
Play. Enjoy it don’t force it.
Yes you can be creative, it just takes time and open eyes,ears and brain.

As nickhart says, a creative process and techniques can definitely be taught but (as with all skills) what people then do with those is down to application and some aspect of inherent talent.

As an art teacher, I can teach a student how to create something ‘original’ by following a certain process, but I could never teach every student to be Picasso (extreme example maybe, but find and watch ‘Le Mystere Picasso’ to see true creativity in action).

As a technical designer you are in the world of objective design. Is it strong enough, fit for purpose etc. In creative design it is far more subjective. How do you judge the success of a piece of furniture or indeed a work of art? I think confidence is important. I work with a few creative types and they are all full of confidence, believing that their vision is the right one (although I suspect behind that outward persona there’s a hidden layer of self doubt). There are lots of avenues into creative design, I’d just say have a go. See what works for you. Try not to get too bogged down in the how; it sounds like you have the skills to sort that out at the end so don’t fixate on it at the start. Like any skill it takes practice and there will be a learning curve.

Very much as above.

There are definitely skills and methods that ‘release’ folks to become more creative. Understanding rules (even if it is to consciously break them) and methodology can make a real difference. Similarly experience of looking at and absorbing good design and giving yourself time to appreciate what makes it stand out can help your own work. Finally an understanding of material properties and knowledge of manufacturing methods can make a huge difference as you can see innovative solutions far more effectively.

Is creativity inherent? I would say very much yes. I taught a young man who is the latest generation of one of the most famous British design families until he was 18. The creativity oozing out of him was mind blowing to witness. Was it because he was surrounded by great design as a child or was it in his genes? I suspect a bit of both. He is now in blowing minds at St Martins and I can guarantee will be a household name in his own right in the not too distant future. The other bit of creative/innovative genius I have had the privilege of watching first hand was Thomas Heatherwick. I got to spend a couple of days in his studio. He had just come back from Tokyo and all his teams of talented designers had been working on projects in his absence. He breezed in and walked between the teams which all discussed the issues and problems they had had in his absence. Within 5 minutes he had made suggestions and improvements to all the groups. The faces on the designers as he left each group was priceless – this dumbfounded look of ‘how can the guy just see stuff we can’t’ on every face. It was like being in the presence of greatness.

Creativity to me is very much linked to innovation. Innovation is not necessarily what you are talking about. An aesthetic eye and an ability to consider shape, proportion and silhouette is a key skill but it would be perfectly possible to use these effectively to design a piece of furniture to tried and tested principles without an ounce of innovation.

Oh, and ditch the SW. I love Solidworks but as a tool it has little place at the beginning of a creative design process – way too slow, even in the best hands.

Brooess, The dictionary definition is:
relating to or involving the use of the imagination or original ideas to create something.

Thus to me, and I believe the OP, creativity is about originality not simply copying / replication.

I’m not aware that NASA had any artists either aboard or in control room of Apollo 13. Creativity isn’t art it’s seeing things in a new way and doing something differently. Look at most art and music, the majority is derivative although it may show great skill. The photos you are proud of thread is a great example, hundreds of technically great and visually beautiful photographs but almost devoid of creativity in the respect that they are not really that different to other images we’ve all seen. It’s not meant as a criticism though, just an observation that they are images designed to be understood by a mass audience.

Anything can be learned if you put enough time and effort into it, but some people will naturally be better than others.

it requires a deep level of training

There is truth in this, but don’t think it requires a *deep* level, just an understanding of how to unlock the creative side of your brain.

Dali used to do sleep deprivation (amongst some more illegal things) to unlock this and cause waking hallucinations – he’d go without sleep for days at a time then start to sketch the things in his head. Of course the technical skill in translating it to a medium is harder to master though.

Likewise, a technique I often use is speed sketching – I make myself sketch an idea a minute, no matter how bad, just sketch. Others doodle for hours (or days) and wait for things to erupt from the page.

Very few people actually break new ground. Most copy and tweak. So look at lots of stuff you like and tweak it.

I’ve often wondered the same as the op, my job is technical, it requires a lot of thought and interpretation, but is essentially applying set standards to processes, which isn’t very creative. I’m also quite mechanically minded, do my own bike maintenance/builds these days, prepare my own rally car, build stuff at home, do DIY etc, but not so much of the creative stuff. I can literally stare at a blank page for hours and ‘see’ nothing.

I think you can become more creative, perhaps not learn it, but you need to be in the right environment, 9-5 technical, repetitive job and a busy/hectic personal life with little ‘spare’ time probably isn’t it.

All i can do is echo the above

I’m really not an Arty person, I’m physics graduate

But i dabble in photography and with feed back from others i have developed. Although I still lag behind the online photographers I hang out with who have visual arts jobs

I teach physics and i can teach anyone physics. But some learn faster than others

My stuff

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/john_clinch/popular-interesting/

he’s an architect

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ianbramham/popular-interesting/

he’s a graphic designer

http://www.flickriver.com/photos/leechypics/popular-interesting/