Asimov on ideas and creativity

[PennLady]

Found this today. Haven't had time to read it myself but Mr. Asimov is usually worth a read.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/531911/isaac-asimov-mulls-how-do-people-get-new-ideas/

 

[49greg]

I saved it, to read later. The guy was a genius. I read a lot of his sci fi many years ago.

 

[Handley_Page]

He made science so entertaining and informative

 

[PennLady]

Finally got to read it, although I'll probably have to have a second pass at some point.

I agree that isolation can be key to creativity. I know I find it hard to focus on a story, let alone write, when the kids are around, or chores need doing, etc. I don't need to be a recluse but I definitely need to feel like there are few or no other claims on my time. And apparently I'm not quite at that point yet.

 

[3113]

Read kinda dry to me. Asimov's stories are often fun to read, and he's had some great insights on certain things, but I think we should note his short comings before rating him a genius on this topic. Personally, I'd rather hear from a Steve Jobs, Jackson Pollack or, if we're keeping to Sci-fi, Ursula Le Guin or Theodore Sturgeon.

As for isolation...it may be good for some artists, writers and scientists, but the opposite can generate it in others. Connie Willis (another sci-fi author) wrote a wonderful book called "Bellwether" all about the process of ideas, discoveries and creative thought process. Her very compelling argument in that book (with many more examples from science than Asimov presents here) was that chaos, noise and a lack of isolation are what brought about some of the most amazing discoveries in science. Including those by Einstein who worked out his formula for relativity while dealing with a wife, children and a job as a patent clerk—not in isolation and quiet.

I remember hearing one award-winning author say that she wrote best (got the creative juices flowing) while working as a dog groomer. After doing her work there, she was able to write and write and write. The secret, as she would have it (and Einstein might have it as well?), would seem to be not isolation, but rather work that doesn't require brain power. Meaning mindless menial work that allows the brain to rest, drift and formulate, but keeps it fed by way of physical activity and outside stimulation.

Granted, of course, that all thoughts on creativity and generating ideas should be taken with a grain of salt as those who theorize about such can't take all creative individuals and the manner in which they came up with ideas into account.

 

[lovecraft68]

Finally got to read it, although I'll probably have to have a second pass at some point.

I agree that isolation can be key to creativity. I know I find it hard to focus on a story, let alone write, when the kids are around, or chores need doing, etc. I don't need to be a recluse but I definitely need to feel like there are few or no other claims on my time. And apparently I'm not quite at that point yet.

I have always been an introvert. In fact lit is more of a social life for me than real life. My reasoning is because I can shut you guys down whenever I want too

But seriously I have worked at the same place for 25 years and only a handful of people know I have kids, maybe three know there names. I keep to myself and even when I go to the dart and pool leagues I sit off tot he side and watch sports and drink rather than talk.

So for me to spend the hours it takes to really focus and write is no issue for me.

 

[PennLady]

Read kinda dry to me. Asimov's stories are often fun to read, and he's had some great insights on certain things, but I think we should note his short comings before rating him a genius on this topic. Personally, I'd rather hear from a Steve Jobs, Jackson Pollack or, if we're keeping to Sci-fi, Ursula Le Guin or Theodore Sturgeon.

Well it might have been a bit dry, but it wasn't a story. It was an essay on creativity and of course we can agree or disagree with it. Also it should be noted that he wasn't talking about writing, not specifically. He was just talking about how people get ideas, and what might go into creativity and what might stifle it. It was also 1959; his ideas might have changed later.

As for isolation...it may be good for some artists, writers and scientists, but the opposite can generate it in others. Connie Willis (another sci-fi author) wrote a wonderful book called "Bellwether" all about the process of ideas, discoveries and creative thought process. Her very compelling argument in that book (with many more examples from science than Asimov presents here) was that chaos, noise and a lack of isolation are what brought about some of the most amazing discoveries in science. Including those by Einstein who worked out his formula for relativity while dealing with a wife, children and a job as a patent clerk—not in isolation and quiet.

There's no question in my mind that while some people need a lot of quiet and alone time to be creative, to write or paint or whatever, others need the stimulation that comes from being with other people. And I didn't get the impression that Asimov meant that a creative person should always be alone. He advocated that creative people should interact in small groups.

Granted, of course, that all thoughts on creativity and generating ideas should be taken with a grain of salt as those who theorize about such can't take all creative individuals and the manner in which they came up with ideas into account.

Exactly. I find I can *get* ideas from just about anywhere -- other stories, songs, seeing people at the mall. The problem is the time to develop the idea, and to me that's more where the creativity comes in, when you try to take the idea and apply it. That is difficult to do when other people are talking to you, etc.

 

[3113]

Well it might have been a bit dry, but it wasn't a story. It was an essay on creativity and of course we can agree or disagree with it.

IMHO, if an essay is dry that's as much on the head of a writer as a dry story. I'm not saying this isn't worth reading or doesn't have useful advice. But I don't think the dryness of an essay on this topic can be excused given that Asimov has written essays before and after this date that were at least entertaining. Of course, if we're really going to discuss the need for solitude to create, and essays worth reading on the topic, shouldn't we go back farther? To Woolf's "A Room of Own" or Thoreau's "Walden"?

~“So long as you write what you wish to write, that is all that matters; and whether it matters for ages or only for hours, nobody can say. ” —Woolf~

~“A woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction.”—Woolf~

~"You think that I am impoverishing myself withdrawing from men, but in my solitude I have woven for myself a silken web or chrysalis, and, nymph-like, shall ere long burst forth a more perfect creature, fitted for a higher society."—Thoreau~

~"If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music which he hears, however measured or far away."—Thoreau ~

 

[Athalia]

I'm not sure that Asimov is right when he says that "My feeling is that as far as creativity is concerned, isolation is required." To be sure, a degree isolation is necessary so that new ideas can emerge from conventional wisdom. But history has shown that creativity, when it shows up at all, usually emerges from a situation where many creative people meet and feed on each other's ideas in a synergistic sort of way. Where would Steve Jobs be without the Homebrew Computer Club? Where would Shakespeare be without Marlow? Michelangelo without Raphael? Bob Dylan without Tom Paxton and Dave Van Ronk or the other people who set the New York folk scene in which he flourished?

I see progress the way James Burke did in Connexions ... lots of ideas floating around, waiting for somebody to put them together and make something of them.

And when this "critical mass" is reduced, the creativity dries up, and the scene shifts elsewhere.

That's how it looks to me, anyway.

 

[PennLady]

The thing to remember, though, is that Asimov wrote this in 1959, before the internet, before flat long-distance phone rates, before all kinds of stuff. Maybe in 1959, what he wrote had a lot more truth to it. In 1959, you couldn't really bounce an idea off of people unless you were physically with them. Today you can video conference, skype, call, whatever. You don't have to know them, let alone see them.

It could be that the interconnectedness of the internet made a lot of what he said irrelevant or inapplicable anymore.

One thing I do think is that while writers may need others around for stimulus and ideas, when it come to the actual writing, a little isolation is helpful.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Edward de Bono published a wonderful book about creativity back about 1970: A FIVE DAY COURSE IN THINKING. It made me clever. Its not magic or gay rocket science, its a simple collection of problems you cant solve logically. Its about recognition of what things are. Like if you know clay is a crystal, iron oxide is a crystal, and DNA is a crystal, you know they all replicate.

Another awesome book CHANGE YOUR MIND AND KEEP THE CHANGE by Bandler-Grinder taught me to well-form problems and let my 'unconscious' mental processes find solutions. I generally harvest simple, elegant solutions.

 

[TxRad]

I think creativity is as individual as the people who do it. Some like social interaction and some like solitude. Ideas come from where you find them. Personally, I'm a people watcher. Characters are all around us if you are looking. Some of my best characters have come from small ton fast food joint.

But writing them takes quiet and solitude.

So what is the answer? To each his or her own, is my short answer.

 

[Athalia]

The thing to remember, though, is that Asimov wrote this in 1959, before the internet, before flat long-distance phone rates, before all kinds of stuff.

Ah, but Asimov was part of a culture that wrote a lot of science fiction for John W. Campbell and other publishers, and these publishers fostered a network of similar science-fiction writers ... Lester del Rey, Van Voght, Ted Sturgeon, Heinlein ... that kept in touch through reading, conventions, and the like, starting from the years just after World War II. (For more information, read the Wikipedia article on Campbell at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Campbell) This group influenced each other very much, mainly because of Campbell's encouraging them along the same path. Asimov was the first to say that Campbell's community made it possible for him to be a successful author.

But I would concede that when all is said and done, the author retreats into solitude to create his or her art. But when the art is finished and presented to the world, synergy helps it grow and develop and become known. That's the benefit of the community.

 

[neonlyte]

Found this today. Haven't had time to read it myself but Mr. Asimov is usually worth a read.

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/531911/isaac-asimov-mulls-how-do-people-get-new-ideas/

It is an inspiring essay, if somewhat dated.

What is least strange about it is it being written by an individual who did not want to partake in the study of the creative process. I believe this stance is akin to the 'publishing fear' suffered by many writers.

Creativity is intensely private; for writers (and artists) it tends to take place in complete isolation. Unveiling thoughts, ideas, output, is disturbing to the individual particularly given that the broad sweep of review has a tendency to be critical.

Unfortunately, creators have a tendency to be sensitive to criticism, largely unfounded, it is simply that even well meaning criticism grates against greatness, or the self-perception of the same.

The article's author gives the example of Darwin and the Theory of Evolution describing how the 'idea' was the culmination of thought and reading. Now Darwin's theory is taken as a given, just as Joyce, Saramago and Pessoa - who each 'invented' different ways of writing - are accepted as important writers.

As a writer, never take the Rules of Writing as a 'given'. The rules are simply boundaries against which you can push. Even scientists acknowledge that the rules of science are incomplete because scientists haven't yet discovered the extent to which the rules can be applied.

Witness the popularity of meta-physical beings that inhabit stories. They don't exist except in the mind of the writer and reader - open your mind to creativity.