The counterintuitive truth is that creativity depends on rigid constraints and limitations. Creativity is commonly associated with freedom, the unexpected, and “thinking outside the box” and while being creative does implies doing something in an innovative way, if the solution is not grounded in purpose it is not creative it’s just random. For example, we would not consider jumping up and down a creative solution to a blackout. So the first constraint of creativity is that it is relevant. Secondly, the concept of innovation implicitly requires the context of the expected. It is easy to take for granted the thorough, established, and wide sweeping conventions we have for all activities. Often times, these conventions are the obvious solutions. I recently had a student who confessed that when she was 9 years old she thought she “invented” smudging pencil to create value. In a sense she did “invent” it, she just wasn’t the first to do so. Creativity is measured by what has come before. A more creative and less conventional solution for creating values might be applying heat to paper in order to discolor it.
In a practical sense creativity can be defined as a new and appropriate approach to a problem. The more narrow the challenge the more opportunity there is to be creative. My students struggle (and complain) the most when I give them complete freedom to make whatever they want. Most students would much rather be given an assignment (which they also complain about). This is because it’s difficult to be creative. It is a mental and analytical challenge. The most successful students are the ones who can create an assignment for themselves. It is always easiest to be creative when you understand the problem and impose limitations for solving it. The way you work within or push against constraints is the essence of creativity.
