Boxing Day
Preface: Douchiest entry ever. I know.
I've noticed that some people are genuinely not creative. I'm not sure if this is a leader/follower typology, but it seems like some people are truly capable of comprehending information and processing that, either through a creative or critical lens, and developing a thought based on that input.
And then other people are just parrots.
I never completely understood why posers existed, or why some people seem totally devoid of wit, but I think that's it. Some people just lack critical/creative faculties. And if you're one of those people, probably the best thing you can do is be really well-read. Just make yourself a human index of knowledge so that you can insert your piece of trivium into the conversation and hope the other person doesn't notice.
This isn't just about people not knowing enough to carry on a conversation, because I've seen that, too. These are people that, even when discussing something they claim to be wildly passionate about, do little more than repeat things that they've read or that other (presumably creative/critical) people have said.
It's maddening to have a conversation with someone who can't create. Because conversation is one of the roots of creativity--you have a conversation, you essentially create a shared reality. I've heard the complaint, "She seems smart, and she makes good grades, but when you try to have an intelligent discussion with her she just repeats things that she learned in class," or "When he talks, it's just an endless stream of jargon, and he can't explain any of it or back it up." These are the people. So are these the world's followers? Probably.
My question is, then, can you develop adult-onset creative/critical faculties, or will you always be a parrot?
This is a horribly elitist argument, but this is also an emo book, and I finally thought of something that was bothering me.
I've noticed that some people are genuinely not creative. I'm not sure if this is a leader/follower typology, but it seems like some people are truly capable of comprehending information and processing that, either through a creative or critical lens, and developing a thought based on that input.
And then other people are just parrots.
I never completely understood why posers existed, or why some people seem totally devoid of wit, but I think that's it. Some people just lack critical/creative faculties. And if you're one of those people, probably the best thing you can do is be really well-read. Just make yourself a human index of knowledge so that you can insert your piece of trivium into the conversation and hope the other person doesn't notice.
This isn't just about people not knowing enough to carry on a conversation, because I've seen that, too. These are people that, even when discussing something they claim to be wildly passionate about, do little more than repeat things that they've read or that other (presumably creative/critical) people have said.
It's maddening to have a conversation with someone who can't create. Because conversation is one of the roots of creativity--you have a conversation, you essentially create a shared reality. I've heard the complaint, "She seems smart, and she makes good grades, but when you try to have an intelligent discussion with her she just repeats things that she learned in class," or "When he talks, it's just an endless stream of jargon, and he can't explain any of it or back it up." These are the people. So are these the world's followers? Probably.
My question is, then, can you develop adult-onset creative/critical faculties, or will you always be a parrot?
This is a horribly elitist argument, but this is also an emo book, and I finally thought of something that was bothering me.