Sticky Creative Ideas

What makes an idea, creative product or other innovation "stick" or "go viral" or otherwise catch on? What is the relationship between popularity of the idea and the level of creativity?
There is a difference between creative product and a sticky product. Innovation recognition depends often on the societal “readiness” and culture in its willingness to embrace any new idea. This is also dependent on both the accumulation of culture as well as recent or present situations or circumstances. For example, any catastrophic event that affected a society or culture such as a large hurricane or terrorist attack would shift the societal ethos and “readiness” for any particular type of either creative or sticky idea. Furthermore, the familiarity of any culture with particular ideas, skills, or techniques, may make some ideas less creative or sticky than they would be otherwise. The classic example would be the glass beads traded to the early Native American peoples for food and other trade goods. To the European culture, they were commonplace, but to a different culture, their stickiness and worth was valued much higher.
As an example of how people often can mistake the sticky product from one that is creative comes from the popular home-improvement show, “Ask This Old House”. They run a segment each week called “What is it”, in which they ask some of their crew to try and imagine what some odd creative construction invention is used for. The answers are often absurd, humorous, or downright ridiculous, but always creative. Often the correct answer to this weekly puzzle is even more outrageous than the ones given by the crew. Now, even though this TV segment is obviously scripted, it is based on some of the impressions from many different viewpoints on how any particular item may be used. This, I think, is an excellent example of how any individual’s judgment of the “creativeness” of a product is very much colored by their individual perspective. Now, whether or not any of these items are “sticky” may yet depend on how they are received by the public, but first impressions in this case are not always on the mark, which leads us to consider society as a whole and how they view any types of new ideas.
Is there a bell curve to popular ideas? I often wonder if the general public places value on any product or idea based on how much it will appeal to the middle of the bell curve of use for living. If something has a use for enough people that they will go out of their daily routines to pursue it, then it is considered “creative”, however this may not always be the best indicator of whether any single idea is really creative. A so-called sticky idea that follows the SUCCESs method from Heath and Heath’s book “Made to Stick” would be Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, and involve a Stories. However, not all creative endeavors produce simple or even completely concrete products. Some may involve some of the Success method and not other parts. For example, a good play or dramatic performance may not be simple. Take the Michael Frayn’s play, “Noises Off”, as an example. It is extremely complex, but incredibly hilarious and engaging. It also does not produce anything concrete except perhaps a spoiled plate of sardines at the end, so it may not meet all of the aspects of the Success method, yet I would argue that it is amazingly creative. In fact, I happen to think it is one of the best plays in its genre ever written.

So, what creative ideas, then do I think will “stick” in the future, (besides duck tape)? Here are a few examples:
1. How about holographic ultrasonic interactive images.
http://fusionfilter.com/?p=1702
Being able to feel a holograph might be a good way to interact with people from quite a distance apart. Ultrasonic compression wave emitters developed for some of this technology could have significant applications. Imagine tiny ultrasonic bugs that could take out real insects by zapping them with ultrasonic waves, or disinfect surfaces by zapping them with this type of compression energy. The right frequency could rupture cell walls and perhaps even explode the casings of viruses! However, this might be dangerous unless we could find highly specific frequencies of resonance for the size and shape of certain viruses. Who knows, a tune by someone like Michael Jackson played at a rate of 100 KHz might be just what is needed to eliminate H1N1 from a surface!
2. What about a pill or therapy to increase your “creative” genes/ mutations.
According to recent information, (http://fusionfilter.com/?p=2499) each person has between 100 and 200 mutations in his/her genes. This means that each person has the potential to derive some type of creative impulse from a different part of the nature equation in at least a slightly different way from any other person. In other words, no two people have exact genes AND the epigenetic factors of the environment both present and past contribute to differences that may be even larger in our lives than the genes or mutations themselves. Now, we have not as yet identified which particular genes may contribute to creativity. Is there a creativity gene? However, my question is whether or not any of these genetic mutations could offer us any particular benefit in our creative abilities? Is this something we should pursue? Can or should we engineer genetic mutations to move ourselves forward in the evolutionary ladder or will we, in the process, just turn ourselves into mere human machines? Could we possibly give ourselves gene therapy and make ourselves more “creative”? I think the jury is still out, but the potential exists for a great amount of stickiness here.
3. Here is a sticky one for our energy woes, the ultra-tiny fuel cell:
http://www.greenoptimistic.com/2009/02/19/sugar-cube-sofc-fuel-cell/
Imagine being able to power all of your devices in your house with a gallon of water! Solar energy could be used to electrolyze water, then a set of fuel cells turns the resulting hydrogen and oxygen back into electricity! It operates much like a NASA spacecraft! (And, by the way, we’ve had some of this basic technology since the 1960’s, but until recent years have not done very much to pursue its potential)
Now, ask yourself if you think any of these ideas are “sticky” today. Did you know about any of them prior to reading this blog? Do you think that the general public will find any of them “creative”? Is this, then, more about the timeliness of certain ideas OR whether or not a particular idea has POTENTIAL to have a large impact on society. We know that many creative ideas from the past continue to have influence today, but maybe not all of them. However, the criteria for many sticky ideas may not only lie in the psychology of current human experience, but in our own practiced skill at envisioning how any idea will affect our own future. I think we as a culture are getting better at a more divergent view of potential future directions, but unless you happen to be a Science Fiction buff (ahem…like me.), an artist, engineer, or technophile, you may not have a perspective that is farsighted enough to encompass the potential of a particular creative idea. However, some of these ideas have a way of sneaking up on us if we don’t keep our eyes open.
So, what should you do? (Shameless advertisement spoof goes here…) Why, get some future visionary goggles, they help you see into the future…just dial in the number of years and you can immediately know what’s hot and what’s not for the rest of your lifetime and many more to come…Just imagine how impressed your friends will be with your insight and vision, and you can even use them to help with future investing too. Now, due to the nature of causality, we can only offer them to a few select clients, so sign up now for your free home construction kit…You’ll wish you did.
Put yourself into the future, then look around, you’ll know what sticks then.

Creativity and Compulsive Dissonance

So, what to say about a cache of creative people? Are they similar or different in any describable foray? If we hold a mirror up, do they make a perfect reverse image, or do we get an even more bizarre recollection of them? I propose that what we see in creative people is a type of compulsive dissonance. Some may call it compulsive deviance, but I am not sure that this is correct, because deviance is dependent on a normal scale. However, dissonance exists within anything that has describable structure regardless of whether it is perceived as being outside of the normal by a particular group. Deviance is relative, dissonance exists, but must be manifested.
Creative people exhibit a type of dissonance that defies the usual efforts of a culture to marginalize it into submissive silence. From many of those recent creative people that have graced the stage of class and screen, we often see how they are drawn, pushed, or connected in some way to a type of dissonance with the status quo. Now, sometimes, granted, this is a structure imposed by a culture or society, but not always. In some cases, creative people create totally without regard to a culture or societal normalizing influences. They build or make or do something just because…They are often viewed as, well, just plain “weird”. However, the compulsion to DO something with this dissonant urge is where we see real creativity manifest itself.
So, does that mean that repression defeats creativity? Well, it may quell this compulsive dissonance urge in people, so it may stifle the initial buds of the creative flowers, nipping them into submissive silence. However, not all of them can be cut off so easily. Some find sunshine or a place to extend outward into the wider world. Those that have the resources both internal and external to flourish, will send their shoots skyward regardless of the established fences of repression. Now the enlightenment periods of history do seem to indicate that flowering of expression and potential for creativity happen when there is a shift and recognition of some type of dissonance. How, then can this be effectively described. Consider the following metaphor.
Consider the world existence as a large pond, fed by a stream on one side and a waterfall on another. Inside the pond, things appear relatively quiet, with only a few ripples that move toward the waterfall at the far end. Everything appears to be harmonious, only it isn’t. Small variations in the stream and water coming in will alter the ripples on the surface such that they will move slightly away from their normal pattern. In addition, any rocks or leaves, or other items temporarily caught up in the overall current will move and make their own ripples that may at times go with those of the pond, but at other times move away from them. However, they are still subject to the forces of the water moving them around on the surface. If they don’t then they sink and are no longer relevant on the surface of the pond. Now, if you’ve followed so far, then consider that the creative people are the leaves, sticks, and rocks, in the pond. Actually, everyone could be one of these. However, some are under the surface and, thus, currently irrelevant to the “conversation” on the surface. Those that are relevant are making ripples in their own way toward, away, or laterally in relation to the slow overall current. Larger objects or items, make either larger ripples or ones that move out farther. Smaller ones, make smaller ripples, but they still make ripples, nonetheless. This is, I think, a good metaphor for creative people. The so called small “c” creative people make small ripples ( or waves), and the big “C” creative people make larger waves or ones that have an effect over greater distances. Those that have come and gone are under the surface, but that does not mean that they are gone forever. Any of them could be dredged up to the surface by a change in current objects or a change in the overall flow of the water in the pond…If or when, this happens and more of them create a more interesting ripple pattern in the pond…voila, we have the renaissance! Well, maybe not always, but at least it gives us a relative metaphor for conversation.
Now, here is where it gets interesting. Those who make dissonant ripples in the pond, may even cause the overall current or flow of the stream to CHANGE COURSE, at least in some small ways. If a large boulder gets into the pond, making a big splash, it will cause a complete shift in the direction of the water on the surface of the small pond! This is what we may call a paradigm shift in society or its views. How does this happen? Either the current brings the boulder in, the water level changes, or the boulder FALLS into the pond from outside somewhere and makes a difference. So, there is no ONE way that this dissonance may occur, but many paths. However, the path of the water will have been changed by it and may not go back to its original pattern for a long time, if ever.
Now, the compulsion of this dissonance is the interesting part. What causes these items to move into their position? Gravity? Wind? Water currents? Or, is it a complicated combination of their size, shape, density, environmental factors and HOW THEY INTERACT WITH EACH OTHER? So, the amount of dissonance may be relative, but it still exists, even in a small amount for each object! The overall conditions may favor or prevent full dissonance by any particular object at any time. However, with the right combination of design and environment…one stick can make a big splash in the pond.
Now, similarly, if a stick or leaf wants to make a ripple, but the water has pushed it up onto a rock, then it doesn’t have the chance to do anything in the pond right now. However, it may still have the chance to make ripples later, but the rest of the surface is not aware of it until, for some reason, it falls back into the pond. In the same sense, some creative people may want to remove themselves from the pond in order to prepare their ripple plan or wait until the conditions in the pond are more favorable to their type of ripple…
So, look at the people around you and ask yourself if they exhibit any compulsion for a particular dissonance. Do they feel a need to make waves? Do you feel a need to make a few for yourself? Keep your senses tuned and search for signs of dissonance. You may just witness the creative genius of the next era.

Creativity Butterfly Style

The butterfly effect...

So, for those unfamiliar with this principle...it goes something like this...a butterfly flaps its wings in Los Angeles, and in Central Park, NY you get rain instead of sunshine. Sound confusing? Well, not really. Essentially, it encapsulates the essence of strange attractors as championed in the mathematics of Chaos Theory. Now, what does this have to do with creativity? Well, let's investigate.

I've been musing on my own creative process, trying to distill the nuances of flavors that somehow meld and mend the cracks and crevasses of my own creative psyche. Now, I have not yet completely developed a specific process for this, but I know that somehow it happens. So, I think that there is some type of structure in which this occurs, but often odd bits and pieces creep in, ends fray, edges turn at unusual angles, and shadows fall in places that are unexpected. What do I speak about? Well, in the process of finding my muse for creative enterprise, I often notice that my ideas congeal, but are accompanied by an assortment of seemingly random connections, perhaps even somehow engaged from my subconscious. Now, Freud notwithstanding, I don't tend to think I have any particular reason or need to explore how my id and ego are swapping niceties inside my head, but I do wonder exactly why this somewhat random thought pattern happens at times within the creative process and how it encourages or hinders my idealogical flow. So, thus, I consider the butterfly effect.

It may well prove that a random element is always present in our thoughts, and, in fact, that is true. Quantum mechanics deals with the level of uncertainty in knowing the true nature of anything really small, but still we strive to do so. Our brains are made of nerve cells, made of molecules, made of atoms, made of particles, quarks, and essentially these random movements of perhaps "energy strings". So, the pulses traveling around inside our heads not only follow ther rules of biology, but also the laws of physics... (lost yet?) If we think of a creative process as one of art imitating science or maybe vice versa, then maybe we should investigate the option of some type of quantum theory of creativity! Now, in one sense, we do know that there are nature and nurture components to this ephemeral concept, but to what degree does chaos play in the aha moments?

So, considering how stimulus, response works. If we get inspiration from sensory data or internal dreaming, then the pathways of our neurons fire in patterns that are based on both our physiology as well as the variances due to our own personal experiences.(previous knowledge) Assuming you have more knowledge or a better developed brain, (And I'm not sure I can always assume either for myself.), you may get more firings or a different pattern, etc. making opportunities for some random elements or connections to increase with greater numbers of brain pathways staying open. Now, I'm not saying that "smarter" people are necessarily more creative, but it may help if their brains can make more connections and perhaps, even assemble any random firings of unrelated thoughts into something new.

So, with this picture somewhat formed, here comes the butterfly effect...a random chance experience IN the environment, which could trigger a random neurological/psychological/physiological reaction in our brain or thought patterns...hmmm...

Now, what does my brain do with this random connection? Do I assimilate it or accomodate for it? Do I ignore it? Or, do I try and encourage it? If so, then how? And, if I do, then will that change the fundamental nature of how my brain works and ultimately how I think? I think so...but, maybe, I have been influenced already...wait...I'm thinking about how I think about thinking creatively and wondering if random thoughts are making me think in a different way, but that could even be happening right now! Did a random thought or stimulus cause me to write this? AND, because you're reading my post, it could be happening to you too...Sorry, didn't mean to cause you to think random thoughts, but if you like them, will you try to get more? How do you do that?

Now, I'm not advocating hooking people up to elaborate brain monitoring machines and watching what happens when they wander through the Louvre art museum, but if that what it takes to understand this...OR, perhaps to get to our own creative process, we have to first embrace BOTH the uncertainty in the external world as well as that in our internal thoughts as well. Because, I doubt that any humans thoughts are perfectly ordered all of the time...So, what we need to find out is first IF we have true random thoughts, and IF there is any way to encourage or discourage them, and IF we can influence our randomness of thought towards any particular preferred topics or connections. That's a tall order and I don't know if we have enough butterflies for this project, so maybe we should look for other metaphorical strange attractors of variances. Just allow one of your random thoughts to make a connection and take off, like a butterfly, it just might lead you to something very fragrant and beautiful. Will it cause "rain" somewhere else? I'm not sure. Try creatively connecting Karma and Zen...or is that too much of an egocentric view of the world? Enjoy the ride.

Creative, who, me?

My perception of myself as a creative person?

Gleebelwhatzits...shazam, and droublesnotters (translation later...)

Well...I suppose I am as creative as the next guy...or maybe more so in particular areas, but I suppose its all a matter of sematics, and I'm always up for some antics...

You see, I've tried perceiving myself as a creative person, but I don't know exactly where to start. For example, I tried to put two mirrors really close together once when I was a kid and get in between them--you know, to get that "infinite" number of reflections thing going, but I could never get more than a few dozen or so images of myself and I could never figure out which one was my "creative" side. If you know of an answer to this...let me know.

I also tried once to find the "Lady in the Lake" like King Arthur's legends, hoping she could give me the holy grail of creativity...but somehow it always seemed somewhat narcissistic to pursue my own reflections in a lake, especially a dry one... Besides, the water always seems to be moving the wrong way around (that's counter clockwise in the northern egoshere or perhaps counter-intuitively for the rest of us.)and waterfalls just complicate the matter entirely. However, they do offer some interesting insights when you stare at them for extremely long periods of time. (I recommend not to exceed a couple of hours here, and definitely not more than 15 minutes or so if you plan to drive right afterward...).

So, my perception of myself as a creative person, huh. Well, I would say it is fairly easy for me to put two and two together and come up with twenty-two, and I tend to gravitate towards creative people myself for what that's worth. (does creativty rub off? or maybe it just "buffs out" like car wax...) I also like being a peripheral visionary, where I can see into the future, but only way off to the side. (Got that from Stephen Wright.--I think he has a cure for it now, though.)

So, I see myself in the guise of a graduate student, doing a perpetually deeper study of all things people find interesting, only they never seem to stop finding more things interesting...so my research goes on...and on...and on...so, is this creative? Now, if I could clone myself, then perhaps the two of us could actually read all of the articles published in this area and get our collective dissertation of interesting creative people completed in record time. Connecting dots and spots, and plots, and well, lots...of stuff together in unique ways, is well, something that I find passes my time in life with some type of flow. So, yeah, I guess I am creative.

For my next trick...

Is creativity inherent or developed?

I know this one, it goes something like:

Hmmm...nature or nurture? The answer is obvious, isn't it? Determinism or free-will? No, that's not quite right. I think Forrest Gump said it best: He didn't know if we all had a destiny (like a box of chocolates) or if we were all just floating on the wind like a feather...but he thought it was probably both...

Was the Titanic destined to sink or was it just a fluke of circumstances? Well, creativity floats on a sea of imaginary possibilities, but if we don't keep the boilers lit and fed properly, it tends to stall and sit idle in this sea and may even sink if something slams into it too hard. That's my historical metaphor for today....So, let's explore it some more, Mr. or Ms. Creativity. You're the Titanic (no, that's not a big person joke), and you are floating on an ocean of imaginative possibilities...large waves, small waves, some crashing, some rolling around, some with small caps, some with gentle wisps, but all giving an ebb and flow that is slowly rocking you around and impacting on your consciousness. Then, along comes this BIG, cool idea (get the metaphor now?), and you think, hey, I don't like it, I think it may sink me because I can't handle it, so you try and steer clear, but no matter what you do, you end up hitting it, even a little, and it makes a dent in you. Now, if you had been more careful or prepared to see it coming, you may have avoided it or even decided to stop and admire it enough to take some pictures and make lots of $$ off of it (perhaps taking various parts to keep in the freezer for your buds back in the US.) , but being short-sighted and unprepared, it hit you and you weren't ready. So, now you either adapt (if you can) and make it part of you, or you sink. (Hopefully, not literally, but only out of the ocean of imagination.) Now, where did this big idea come from? IT is a permutation (ice) of the imaginary world (water, ocean) of which only a small portion is visible above the surface. Much more of it may lie hidden beneth the depths--that is what we often don't see (or visualize.) about creative possibilites. So, creativity can be both from nature and nurture. (We have to put something in the boilers, and we have to have an ocean to sail upon.) But without either one, we're just a "sitting duck" (or ship in this case.) stuck in "dry dock" waiting for something to happen.

So, the moral of the story is to keep your boilers lit, keep a sharp eye out for good ideas and cool waves, and enjoy the ride...(see, and you didn't even have to put your tray tables back into their full and upright position on this trip, now, wasn't that nice?)

So, to translate into surfer talk: Creativity is schwankity dank! (rolls with the waves...)

To figure out the top quote, here's a hint: Never eat anything bigger than your head.

Smile, and remember that the universe is not just curved, but is actually totally bent! (kind of like the sides of the Titanic...ironic isn't it?)

What is Creativity?

So...what is creativity? A vision of discrepant or inconsistent possibilities...maybe...or is it just that creativity is an inherent result of the chaos that the universe exudes everywhere? Is there a scale for this or do we just "know" that someone is being creative and not just blowing smoke or descending into madness? Is there really a difference? The lack of a consistent definition is perhaps the ultimate ironic part of creativity...i.e. we need a "creative" definition of creativity, but we can't do that definitively...leading to an enignmatic conundrum. If the definition encompass such ideals as vision, inconsistency, branching, unusualness, and a tendency towards filling the incomplete areas with something, then how is this to be combined except by a creative mind itself?

More questions here than answers, but all possums aside (see picture), the connecting together of past experiences in a new and unusual way is perhaps the easiest way to begin a definition of creativity, but it is not, by any means, the end. From the perspective of one who has studied cosmology and some chaos theory, I have to admit that I think creativity to belong to that group of items that encompas universal chaos--drifting toward disorder. However, I also wonder at how the anti-chaotic forces of creativity may balance this--i.e. how creativity can find the most unusual connections between seemingly unrelated events or items--this is anti-chaotic in nature. Is, then, ultimately, a balancing effect and can we then measure or create a "scale" that reflects this? Hmmmm....I don't know if I have enough possums to conduct this experiment myself, but it is perhaps worth considering. This is why creativity interests me. It happens. No matter where you are or what you are doing, creativity can "strike" at any moment, but somehow some people seem more tuned into it than others--is this mutually inherent or is there a way to enhance creativity or one's ability to "channel" it for themselves? (Now, I doubt that I will create a creativity "drug", but it would cement my retirement significantly...hmmm...a pill or shot that enhances creativity, or perhaps a special info-mercial that people pay to download...) Anyhow, sweeping my mental drifts aside, the out of box thinking exuded above is inevitably part of the human mind's landscape of life. Who has not daydreamed in class (but not creativity class, of course...hehe)? Who has not imagined themselves able to fly (like Peter Pan) or perhaps sailing around the world on a pirate ship? (or on a spaceship?) Imagination, I think, is an important part of creativity and creating the vision necessary for doing the unusual. Life seems to grant us these moments of "inspiration" and as children, we are acutely tuned in...perhaps the greatest irony of today's society--those most attuned to creativity are often the ones least able to act on their creative ideas...however, maybe that can change...

What, then can I do now to be creative? Well...the work on my flux capacitor and time machine has ground to a halt...I can't seem to get it to work--I've even tried taking it past 88 miles per hour...(see Back to the Future movies...) However, I may want to do something smaller, but my nano-bots idea requires tools that are too small for me to move, so I've scrapped that too. So, I should just "build a better mousetrap", huh...well...I don't need to get rid of mice, plus, I've sponsored so many Rube-Goldberg competitions for kids that I think my brain starts producing alpha waves when someone just mentions his name. Zzzzz...what was I saying?

However, I do have some practical possibilities including designing and making a better portable multi-tool for assembling sets for plays, portable puppet stage plans (I have several ideas), a collapsible telescope design(still working on it, but stay tuned), a full cut-off sodium vapor bulb that is more efficient for outdoor lighting, geodesic structures using recycled plastic bottles (how's that for a "green house"?), rope from recycled plastic bags, an ultrasonic insect trap (makes cricket mating calls as well as those for mosquitoes, etc.), carbon-fiber sneakers that never wear out, and of course my favorite--the George Jetson collapsible flying car...(maybe that is a bit out there...)

So, what is holding me back on all of these and other creative exploits? Well, beyond the obvious time, money, and in some cases laws of physics, I suppose that background knowledge and a swift kick in the pants to get started are the greatest obstacles. The unknown or nifty new idea often finds itself "out of time" (Back to the future again...) meaning that either society, technology, or culture is not in sync enough to make it a reasonable possibility. Case in point-- if you are NASA, you send robots to Mars and the Moon in the 21st century instead of people. I suppose it is also the cognitive load of life that often stands in the way--obligations that we all have towards living--family, duty, honor, society, etc. We don't want to be branded the "crazy one" that went off on tangents and keeps after all of those nutty ideas. So, I suppose this fear paralyzes us to sit idly by, just dreaming of those things that we could do, but rarely doing them. That is also a part of creativity--expression and the drive to make things happen as well as a sense of priority and timeliness. Perhaps the time has come for one of my ideas above or my list of more (which I'll keep to myself), but I think the Possum Collider idea I can definitely throw out. What do you think? Ok...be creative...give a "half smile" :>