Innovation vs. Creativity

Prior to taking this class, I always conceptualized creativity, or the act of creating, as starting completely from scratch with a brand new idea, developing it, and then introducing this entirely new product or service into the world. Innovation, on the other hand, was about continuously building upon already-existing ideas, either by improving them, or applying their uses and abilities in new and different ways. Although I'm beginning to re-imagine both of these definitions through the work we're doing in this class, I was curious about how other people understood innovation, creativity, and the distinction between the two.

I did a little bit of research into who has written about innovation and creativity recently and came across The New York Times Magazine's "The Innovations Issue" from June of 2013. As the introduction to the issue explains, "This special issue of the magazine is devoted to innovation and its assorted mysteries." I was curious to see how the magazine understood, conceptualized, and then wrote about "Innovation," so I read the entire cover story, which answered the question, "What made that?" of 48 innovations the magazine deemed important. For this blog post, I reacted to all 46 innovations, deciding whether I thought they were ultimately examples of innovation or creativity based on nothing but my own gut instinct. A few on the list really spoke to me for personal reasons, and others stood out because of how much thought I put into how to categorize them. Those are in bold in the list below.

1. Air bag - creation because I felt that it was a totally new aspect of a relatively new human invention.

2. Ant Farm - innovation, but not totally sure why it matters or is on this list.

3. A.T.M. - innovation, since it does what bank tellers had always been doing, and because it is one that is continuously innovating, as I've seen the firsthand the incremental improvements from going to the bank as a child with my parents, and now as an adult doing my own banking

4. Band-aid - innovation since it does something that had always been done, just in a more efficient way. That said, maybe the name in and of itself is a creation since I think most Americans refer to all self-adhesive bandages as band-aids, regardless of whether they are the brand or not.
5. Bike share - innovation as I conceptualize it in the United States, especially Boston's version of Hubway, although reading about its European origins as the magazine reported it also makes it seem like it's a creation.

6. Bottle service - innovation, since it was an adaptation of a practice from Paris, and also similar to restaurant-like service in a club setting.

7. Brannock Device (foot measurer from shoe stores) - innovation because it is doing something that people had done prior (measuring the size of feet for shoes). Then again, something about that device is very iconic for me, very reminiscent of my childhood, and which makes we want to say this is an example of creativity, even though I can easily argue against myself.

8. Breath mint - innovation, something people have been doing throughout human history, just the kinds of packaging and flavors are relatively new (from the beginning of the 20th century.)

9. Brunch - innovation (fusing meals we already have) but also a kind of creation, since it's not just the food or time of day, but the entire ethos and reasoning behind going to brunch (celebrating a kind of weekend laziness, friendships, enjoying leisure time and the day, etc.)

10. Bullet - creation at first, (especially since the magazine showed a picture of a lead musket ball from 18th century) but then clearly demonstrated how it had been innovated for the last 200+ years with pictures and explanations.

11. Bunsen Burner - innovation since a device made for producing a flame had been created before.

12. Cat Videos - innovation, and a very strange one at that this is quite emblematic to this period of stagnant innovation which the issue's introduction talked about.

13. Cleats - creation, despite the prior existence of shoes. Also something that has been steadily innovated every since they were first devised by Henry VIII.

14. Condom - creation, then innovated continuously ever since an Italian doctor in the mid-1500s first came up with the idea of a "linen cloth" made to block syphilis.

15. Cuisinart - a classic example of innovation in my mind, taking something that people already did to prepare meals and with food ingredients and creating a specific tool to do it with.

16. Currency - creation with long standing history, and one that it seems like hasn't really seen any innovation until very recently (i.e. Bitcoin).

17. Diet Soda - innovation

18. Digital Camera - innovation, aided by technological advancements.

19. Dog Park - innovation, in tandem with innovations in pet owning and pet culture.

20. Fast Fashion - to be honest, even after reading the description, I'm still not entirely sure what that is, but I still think it's an innovation in clothing and wardrobe based on the name alone.
21. Gay Marriage - innovation, but perhaps innovating the wrong way (trying to make everyone fit into this very specific box, when maybe we should change the shape of the box, or even get rid of it entirely?)
22. Glass Ceiling - This one was tricky for me. At first, it seemed like neither an innovation nor an act of creativity, but then I thought about it in terms of semiotics--giving a specific name to something that previously exists, which in turn makes that very specific thing something that people understand and can talk about. By that rationale, then, I guess it is an act of creativity.
23. Guitar Solo - innovation, music and guitars exist after all.
24. Insider Trading - the act of doing it is a creation (and an old one at that), but the laws attempting to prevent it by criminalizing it are--I would argue--an innovation, by being an extension of something that already exists.
25. Keys - creation and then innovation, as the article wonderfully demonstrated with a beautiful illustrated history of the lock & key from the warded lock to the combination lock to the Yale lock to the key card to the fob.

26. Lacrosse Head - Innovation (talking about the modern version, which drew on Native American inspiration).

27. Liquid Paper - innovation, because this was an example from the Art of Innovation, and because doing something that people were doing anyway, just painstakingly (by starting over and re-typing.)
28. Low-Carb Diet - innovation that goes hand in hand with a lot of other contemporary human innovation, such as standards of healthy, beauty, and the businesses of such things that are constantly evolving.

29. Nose Job - tricky because it seems like innovation of already-existing surgery, but also seemed to create this cottage industry of plastic surgery, but ultimately (and for the same reasons as Low Carb Diet above) I would say this is an innovation.

30. Parenting - innovation in that there were starting to be widespread tactics and strategies to raising children into particular kinds of adults. This idea also evolved alongside public healthy and safety measures, such as mortality rates taking a nose dive, which led to the idea that children could be adored and loved since now the odds were they would live through childhood.

31. PB&J - innovation, and probably my favorite one on this list so far since it's hard for me to think of any food as a creation (humans need sustenance). Then again, it also probably is a creation because of the way it evokes childhood and nostalgia and a particular kind of longing. The picture that accompanies this listing in the issue is of 3 stacked sandwiches overflowing with gooey peanut butter and sticky jelly, and it literally made my mouth water. And while I would argue that my palate has evolved quite a bit since I had my first PB&J in the late '80s...the fact that it looked SO delicious to me makes me put it in the creation category.
32. Pop-Up Store - innovation, thinking of history of merchants and wares.
33. "Previously On..." - innovation, reminiscent of serialized magazine stories from the 18th and 19th centuries that became novels.

34. Prom - innovation from balls, dances, and other kinds of social gatherings.

35. Rachel Maddow - innovation from television journalists (although she happens to be a personal favorite of mine!)
36. Retirement Age - innovation again from the ability of humans to live much longer, of the way wealth has accumulated, and the way we culturally understand adulthood.
37. Rock-Climbing Wall - to me, clear innovation from something that exists in nature and outside. Also one that allows for limitations of human physiology, a nice thing for newbies and those with a fear of heights (in this instance I am both)
38. Salad Spinner - innovation, another example of food technology making it easier and more efficient to do something we've always done as part of food preparation.

39. Sleep-away Camp - ok I know I went on and on about PB&J, but sleep-away camp is another one that evokes so much feeling for me that I have to say it's a creation. I attended for 11 years, and if I had a time machine the first thing I would do is go re-live those summers.

40. Tampon - innovation, and an interesting tidbit about them that I learned from this article was that they were useful for women on regimented schedules, i.e. on factory lines who wouldn't be able to excuse themselves for purposes of regularly changing sanitary napkins.

41. Turnstile - innovation, particularly from the use on farms to their use in public transit. Great jump that to me is the essence of innovation.

42. 12-Step Program - I think this one is actually a creation, but goes hand in hand with development of addiction as a disease that can be managed.

43.Wave - as in "the wave" at sports games, which to me is an innovation and a weird one at that. Really, what does this accomplish? (And for that matter, why do creations/innovations need to accomplish something anyway?)
44. Web page - I believe this is technically an innovation, but to me it feels like a creation, and this is the exact kind of thing that makes the distinction between the two very important and yet also somehow totally irrelevant. I'm sure the concept of the web page wasn't developed from nothing, but has had many antecedents for many more years than I even realize, but the way the world understands the web and web technology and how that has changed so drastically in the last 15-20 years makes me want to put one of the items that contributed to that kind of cultural and social rupture into the "creativity" category.
45. White Lab Coat - innovation, and one that goes hand in hand with notions about cleanliness and sterility.
46. Zip Line - innovation, particularly in its use as a tourist attraction.

Whew, that was a lot of thinking and deciding and categorizing! I think I've realized that even if a particularly item isn't necessarily an act of creativity, if it drastically changes the culture, then for me, I consider it a creation rather than an innovation.

Creativity: Inspiration & Business

Every year in the weeks leading up to the Emmy Awards, The Hollywood Reporter conducts a series of TV Roundtables, in which a couple of THR staff writers interview 6-8 people who work within the same category (i.e. comedy actresses, dramatic actors, etc.) to talk about the current state of television, often with a focus on both the business and creative aspects of the medium. As I'm sure you gleaned from my previous post, I'm something of a television fan, so I tend to watch many of these each year. After our weekend on creativity, I thought that watching a group conversation about the creative process in the field of television, and then sharing my thoughts on what I saw, might make for an interesting blog post.

Below is the hour-long 2014 Comedy Showrunners THR Roundtable. The conversation was moderated by Stacey Wilson and Lacey Rose, and featured the following creators and/or executive producers, all of whom play a major hand in developing or overseeing the creative content of their shows, and are all also eligible for a comedy Emmy nomination in 2014:

Armando Ianucci, Veep (HBO)

Mike Judge, Silicon Valley (HBO)

Jenji Kohan, Orange is the New Black (Netflix)

Jenni Konner, Girls (HBO)

Chuck Lorre, Mom (CBS)

Marc Maron, Maron (IFC)

Michael Schur, Parks and Recreation (NBC)

I was struck by many different notions about creativity is, and the creative process in general (particularly for television) while watching the Comedy Showrunners Roundtable. The biggest takeaway for me was how many of the showrunners were not only inspired by other shows that are currently airing on television, but how many of them are dramas, or exist in completely different tonal registers than their own. I kept track of how many shows were mentioned unsolicited that nobody at the table was involved in; how many were mentioned unsolicited but that somebody at the table had been involved in; and how many were brought up in response to the question of: "What shows make you laugh or make you jealous that you didn't create?" Here is what I found:

Shows Nobody Worked On (brought up unsolicited) 

Game of Thrones, Good Wife, House of Cards

Shows People Worked On (brought up unsolicited) 
Dharma and Greg, Saturday Night Live, Weeds, The Comeback, Beavis and Butthead

Shows People Admired (answering a direct question) 
High Maintenance, Justified, The Sopranos, Louie, Breaking Bad, Top of the Lake, The Americans

What I think is so interesting about this is how sometimes this inspiration for showrunners about the creative process helped them realize the parameters of their own work, or what they didn't think they would necessarily know how to do, or even be able to pull off. For instance, Jenni Konner of Girls mentioned The Good Wife and how she knew she couldn't (or didn't even know how to) hit those dramatic narrative beats and plot turns, but but knowing this helped invigorate her, and enabled her to better focus on what she is doing and trying to accomplish with Girls.

Another useful takeaway for me was about how the showrunners balanced the business aspect of the creative process. Although the last 15-20 years have seen an onslaught of critically beloved shows that have elevated the status of television as a creative and artistic medium, television is intrinsically a commercial medium. Shows are produced to make money for the companies that are paying to make it, and paying to get it out to viewers (which are not necessarily one in the same). Many of the showrunners were careful to say that they tried not to let business concerns seep into their creative processes, but that often that reality was unavoidable. The first topic of discussion at the roundtable was the issue of ratings, which of course is the traditional (although increasingly obsolete) metric by which the success of a television show is measured. Jenji Kohan of Orange is the New Black talked about how having that kind of information was useful when it came to negotiate, which is another issue that marries the creative and business aspects of putting a TV show on the air (or on the web) week to week (or all at once.)

One of the funnier examples of this hybrid issue of creativity/business that many of the showrunners related to (and had good anecdotes about) was the extent to which they incorporate real elements from their lives into their shows, including characters inspired by real-life people. Almost every showrunner had a story about their networks' legal departments cautioning them against naming a character after their real-life model, demonstrating the microlevel of creativity that goes into creating and developing television shows. Mike Judge, who initially rose to fame for creating the iconic '90s characters Beavis and Butthead on MTV, talked about how almost everyone he knows from his high school days have said that they think the characters of Beavis and Butthead are based on them, when in fact they are both based on one specific guy he went to high school with, and who has never said anything to him or anybody (at least as far as he knows) about being the source material.

I found so much of the roundtable incredibly interesting, and although they didn't talk quite as much about some of the ideas we discussed in our first class, I still found that by watching creative people interact with other creative people was not only entertaining, but got my juices flowing and was definitely a worthwhile activity.

Recreating the "Random Stimuli" Approach to Brainstorming at Home

After our first weekend of classes, one of the exercises I enjoyed the most, and hoped to recreate at home, was introducing random stimuli into my brainstorming sessions. Although I'm in a bit of a different situation than the rest of the class (I'm going for a PhD and not hoping to own or develop my own business) I thought it would be interesting to apply this technique in my approach to developing an abstract for a conference I'm hoping to attend next summer.

Called "Console-ing Passions," this conference is held annually in order to investigate issues of "television, culture, and identity, with an emphasis on gender and sexuality." Not only does this conference revolve around one of my main areas of research interest, but it also happens to be taking place in one of my favorite cities: Dublin!

Some friends and I at Trinity College, Dublin in 2006

So, in order to successfully attempt a true random stimuli-infused brainstorming session, I had my friend Meredith write down 6 random things on separate slips of paper and put them in a sealed envelope for me.

"Savit's Brainstorming Stimuli" from my friend Meredith

Next, I pulled up the Console-ing Passions 2015 Call For Papers on my laptop, spread out several blank sheets of paper, and got a box of markers ready, set my timer, and away I went! The first thing I did was write out in the center of the first sheet of paper: "Develop an idea for an abstract for Console-ing Passions 2015." Although this wasn't quite phrased as a problem to be solved, I was still aiming to be able to focus my brainstorming sessions while also being creative and open to whatever directions the random stimuli took me in.

At times I was able to really let the stimuli guide me; at other times I suspected that I was self-editing in order to remain within the confines of the topics slated for this year's conference, the theme of which is "Rebooting Feminism." The topics that are of particular interest to me are:

• "Rebooting Feminism," what comes after post-feminism?
• Media Production and Industries
• Media Audiences and Fans
• Social Media and Digital Domains
• Transnational Cultural Flows and "Expat" TV
• Neo-liberalism and Gender

After my alarm went off, here is what I had come up with:

The results of my brainstorming

Although there were a lot of random thoughts that I was able to jot down (usually set off by something Meredith had written for me) I think I honed in on some particular strands, and different seedlings of ideas. These included:

• Thinking about TV Recap culture and my longstanding history and interest with it (including writing Mad Men recaps for a magazine I used to work for.) This fits in with both the media audiences and fans topic of the conference, as well as media production since it is a form of media production in and of itself. I scrawled out ideas about how the increasingly popular binge-watching form of watching TV is somewhat at odds with recap culture, and jotted down some ideas about how gender can be incorporated into this.
• Similarly, I seemed to focus on the notion of "consumption" on television, particularly the idea of women consuming, and what kind of women consumed. On the sheet of paper on the top row, second from the right, I began listing all the characters and shows that I watched this year that featured women eating, and those that purposefully did not. I'm not sure what I could do with this, but my mind keep returning there.

All in all I think it was certainly a helpful exercise and my mind did go off in directions that I don't think it would have without the random stimuli. That said, I don't think this method is ideally suited for someone working alone, and in hindsight, I wish I had gotten some friends from the GCS program together to do this, especially because these conferences accept full panel submissions, meaning we could have worked together to not only brainstorm and generate an idea, but then continued to work together for our conference submission, and not just simply helped each other generate ideas that we would then go off and develop on our own.