Innovation

[junior37]

I've been musing a lot lately (because this is ultimately what we PhD types are encouraged, and sometimes paid, to do), and I realize I'm consistently faced with the reality that I am an editor - I can shape, distill, correct, and evaluate with the best of 'em. But what comes much more difficult to me is the innovation - the ground-up construction, the generation of new ideas, the expansion into uncharted territory. When I look at my training, this makes a certain degree of sense. Even when the focus is on designing research, for example, the methods of instruction generally take the form of close critique and evaluation of those who have come before, presumably so that we may identify, learn from, and later avoid their mistakes while capitalizing on their successes. Less structured and explicit, though, is the guidance in how to actually take those steps forward rather than get mucked down in the tweaking of extant avenues.

Clearly, no worthwhile innovation can occur without a solid foundation of knowledge in what has come before. But does the ability to truly strike into new territory without close imitation of predecessors require a fundamentally different skill set than those of the editor? And if so, can innovation be reliably taught or even directly sought, or is it really reliant on a fortuitous mixture of good editing and some element of luck/inborn ingenuity?

Your thoughts requested. I threw this up on facebook, but they've let me down. Don't be like that.