Creativity: Not a Linear Process?

ios · Nov 2, 2011

In this post by Dan Miller (of 48 Days fame), he talks about creativity. He says there is no one right way to do creative processes, such as writing a book. And that:

If we make doing good work a linear process – then we eliminate any creative process.

I was always trying to streamline the process, create a system I could do over and over again to save time. And it never worked out. But maybe it never worked out because of the nature of creativity itself and because that each writing project needs its own processes to work out well.

What do you feel about this?

Jodi

Polenth · Nov 2, 2011

It hadn't occurred to me to make a standard linear system, so it's not a question I would have asked. I just write stuff. It gets finished, so I assume it's working.

Jamesaritchie · Nov 2, 2011

The right way is whatever way works for you, linear or not.

Shadow_Ferret · Nov 2, 2011

I wish he had explained what he meant. I have no idea what he is talking about. He never even defines what he means by linear process or why it stifles or hampers the creative process. It just seemed like a brief rant against the education system.

writingismypassion · Nov 2, 2011

If I understand the post correctly, I think it depends on the person. Some people start at the beginning of a project and work their way to the end. Others write randomly and piece the scenes together later. What works for one may not work for another. Everybody has their own creative process, and it is when we try to forsake our process for somebody else's that we end up with a problem. Hope that makes sense.

dangerousbill · Nov 2, 2011

ios said:
In this post by Dan Miller (of 48 Days fame), he talks about creativity. He says there is no one right way to do creative processes, such as writing a book.

I'm inclined to agree. If you could come up with a linear process, you could easily go on to build a machine that would write books with striking, lovable characters; a gripping plot; and a satisfying, twisty ending. I don't see that happening soon.

NeuroFizz · Nov 2, 2011

Any creative person who tries to dictate or limit the creative processes of other creative individuals deserves to have his words flushed down the S-bend (which this particular person may find comforting since it is certainly not linear). This is similar to saying that outlining stifles creativity or that winging it leads to disorganized, rambling stories. While each of these two may be true for some writers, they are pure hogwash when elevated to generalizations.

Note this doesn't apply to the craft aspects of writing, where the experiences of the established and emerging writers here at AW are useful in helping each other, and the newer writers, gain further success in their writing activities, and in staying out of the slushpiles.

dangerousbill · Nov 2, 2011

writingismypassion said:
If I understand the post correctly, I think it depends on the person. Some people start at the beginning of a project and work their way to the end. Others write randomly and piece the scenes together later.

I could be wrong, but I assumed that 'linear' here meant in the analytical, rather than chronological, sense, as in writing a novel by following a fixed algorithm: Step one, step two, step three... step 357, out pops a sure best-seller.

DB

rainsmom · Nov 2, 2011

dangerousbill said:
I could be wrong, but I assumed that 'linear' here meant in the analytical, rather than chronological, sense, as in writing a novel by following a fixed algorithm: Step one, step two, step three... step 357, out pops a sure best-seller.

DB

That's how I read it too -- and I agree with that statement.

timewaster · Nov 2, 2011

ios said:
In this post by Dan Miller (of 48 Days fame), he talks about creativity. He says there is no one right way to do creative processes, such as writing a book. And that:

I was always trying to streamline the process, create a system I could do over and over again to save time. And it never worked out. But maybe it never worked out because of the nature of creativity itself and because that each writing project needs its own processes to work out well.

What do you feel about this?

Jodi

Completely. The brain finds new ways of screwing up every time. I have used broadly similar techniques on a number of novels but they don't always work and you always have to be prepared to try a different approach. I think that's normal.

NeuroFizz · Nov 2, 2011

But I'd suggest that writers come from a full cross section of the population and there will be some who will take a linear approach to story development (as described in the original article). This approach does not doom these writers to full rigidity in the actual writing of the story nor does it limit their potential for creativity or flexibilty in letting the story evolve through the first draft and subsequent editing. Who is this guy to tell them their strategy is inferior?

LadyDae · Nov 2, 2011

ios said:
In this post by Dan Miller (of 48 Days fame), he talks about creativity. He says there is no one right way to do creative processes, such as writing a book. And that:

I was always trying to streamline the process, create a system I could do over and over again to save time. And it never worked out. But maybe it never worked out because of the nature of creativity itself and because that each writing project needs its own processes to work out well.

What do you feel about this?

Jodi

I agree. That's why it's called creative writing or anything creative.You can have a general process when it comes to writing, but sometimes the story want to be written in the way or manner that it wants to be even it breaks up our normal process. It depends on the story.

veinglory · Nov 2, 2011

Getting stuff done involves being creative and being organized. Any one person's process might do this via any number of explicit or implicit processes some of which may or may not be linear....

jaksen · Nov 2, 2011

He's saying there's no one way to create something and that every time it can be different.

I agree. But once again, don't over-think things. Just do. Trust instinct. Trust yourself.

timewaster · Nov 2, 2011

NeuroFizz said:
But I'd suggest that writers come from a full cross section of the population and there will be some who will take a linear approach to story development (as described in the original article). This approach does not doom these writers to full rigidity in the actual writing of the story nor does it limit their potential for creativity or flexibilty in letting the story evolve through the first draft and subsequent editing. Who is this guy to tell them their strategy is inferior?

I don't think there's anything wrong with a linear approach, it just seems probable that no approach works all the time or for everything. I write in order and as I write for children my stories tend to develop in linear chronological fashion ( though not always) my first draft rarely requires restructuring ( though for some books it has) I don't know if that makes me linear or not. No two books are exactly the same and if you write enough sometimes tried and tested methods fail.

ios · Nov 2, 2011

Shadow_Ferret said:
I wish he had explained what he meant. I have no idea what he is talking about. He never even defines what he means by linear process or why it stifles or hampers the creative process. It just seemed like a brief rant against the education system.

I took it to mean that one system does not fit all people or works. That is, unlike with building something on an assembly line, there is no certain order to creativity. Sometimes you can hop right in. Other times you need to do research first. Sometimes you can start without an outline. I took it to mean, say for one novel the system is research, create a premise, then create an synopsis, then an outline, then write draft one, and so on. But you can't plan on that same system and same order working for every novel.

Lol, at least that is what I took from it.

Jodi

SJp · Nov 2, 2011

Didn't Emerson say something like consistency is a hobgoblin of the mind?

Myth · Nov 2, 2011

I can't write without laying down anchors. Whether it's fiction or non-fiction, I pick something I want to build up to or build on, write that out, then connect the dots. The longer the story or article the more points like that I'll create. This lets me start with my strongest writing because I rarely need to edit something I've already pictured in my mind, and as a result the rest of my work benefits because it's easier to stay focused with the core sentiments already laid out. What he's saying could easily apply in that sense. Perhaps some people write best when they work linearly but I'd imagine anyone can benefit from breaking the mold once in a while.

Nothing kills creativity faster than a checklist. The intellect is necessary to describe and refine the images you hold in your mind but you can't think strictly within its terms and create art. That's what checklists are-an attempt to apply rational thought to what is, by its nature, irrational. To be useful it has to be as flexible as you are creative and that's why there are so many different styles.

This is what comes to mind when I read the quote. I didn't click the link but is there more to it or was he simply vague? If the latter, perhaps it was intentional-filling in the blanks is a creative act when you think about it. It's a wonderful way to get in touch with what moves you.

Layla Nahar · Nov 2, 2011

SJp said:
Didn't Emerson say something like consistency is a hobgoblin of the mind?

more like 'a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds'

Yah, this post is about trying to comfort a guy whose creativity (as he sees it) is inefficient. The blogger is kind of saying that the mind is not a machine & that to expect creative work to be like factory work is a bad idea.

Linear is an interesting concept. Modern language is pretty linear - you have word order, right? so putting ideas into words is a linear process. But what if you have a fully inflected language, like ancient latin or greek, which depended entirely on the endings? hmm (I guess those languages had a word order, but it was a matter of convention rather than necessity. Just wondering about how linear ancient verbal, or fully inflected verbal expression is...)

backslashbaby · Nov 2, 2011

You can have a system to prompt your creativity, for lack of a better word, and that works out fine, I think.

Or are you talking more about writing to a formula, basically? That does not work out well, imho.

The dude's post confused the hell out me, actually

Creating software is more like art than dentistry? Maybe he meant creating an interesting new idea for software or for a new algorithm? Coding is way more straightforward than being a dentist, imho. I don't think it gets more straightforward than programming.

eta - here's the part I'm talking about:

...But creating music doesn’t fit that model at all. Writing a book does not, creating software or a new app does not. Painting a piece of art does not. Landscaping a house does not. Building a sculpture does not. If we make doing good work a linear process – then we eliminate any creative process. Go to work in a factory, get a job as an accountant, drive a truck or be a dentist.

...

NeuroFizz · Nov 3, 2011

An approach that kills creativity in one writer may well be the spark that ignites creativity in another writer. The advice given in the cited article may be good for the person for whom it was directed, but when that advice is elevated to generalized statements aimed at all writers, I get that twitchy bullshit feeling.

SJp · Nov 3, 2011

NeuroFizz said:
An approach that kills creativity in one writer may well be the spark that ignites creativity in another writer. The advice given in the cited article may be good for the person for whom it was directed, but when that advice is elevated to generalized statements aimed at all writers, I get that twitchy bullshit feeling.

But I'd suggest that writers come from a full cross section of the population and there will be some who will take a linear approach to story development (as described in the original article). This approach does not doom these writers to full rigidity in the actual writing of the story nor does it limit their potential for creativity or flexibilty in letting the story evolve through the first draft and subsequent editing. Who is this guy to tell them their strategy is inferior?

Any creative person who tries to dictate or limit the creative processes of other creative individuals deserves to have his words flushed down the S-bend (which this particular person may find comforting since it is certainly not linear). This is similar to saying that outlining stifles creativity or that winging it leads to disorganized, rambling stories. While each of these two may be true for some writers, they are pure hogwash when elevated to generalizations.

Honestly, I don't know why you've chosen such an antagonistic position against the author when the two of you sound so much in agreement. Not to be flippant, but did you read the article? Where do you see the author telling somebody that one strategy is inferior over another? Where did you get that the 'linear process' was related to story development?

What I read is that a musician is concerned that his creative process, though successful, may be haphazard or too unconventional. The author is reassuring the musician, and all artists generally, that it's okay if their creative process doesn't follow a formulaic (Step 1: Do this; Step 2: Do that) method as long as what they do works. If there was a set formula, "then lots of other people can be easily trained to take your place. When there is a creative/artistic component to your work, the outcome is less predictable."

Now what I read from you is that the author is full of shit, because while one method may work for some people, it can't be generalized rule for everybody. It sounds like the same thing to me. What am I missing?

NeuroFizz · Nov 3, 2011

"If we make doing good work a linear process – then we eliminate any creative process. Go to work in a factory, get a job as an accountant, drive a truck or be a dentist."

Maybe his definition of a linear process and mine are different, but there is no doubt about "...eliminate any creative process." I'm not willing to say that any approach to any activity eliminates the creative process. Even the most stereotypical of jobs are open to scrutiny and improvement by creative individuals. The comments in relation to the writing process were made for the various responses in the thread. And while he does say there is no right way for "a creative process, like writing a book" (from the OP), his quote above suggests there is a wrong way.

And if anyone thinks being a dentist doesn't involve a significant level of creativity and even artistry in some of their cases, try shadowing a dentist for a few days.

There are writers in some genres who produce very formulaic works, and some forms of non-fiction are equally rigid and what I'd call linear in their organization, and yet there is plenty of room for creativity in their presentation. In particular, scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals are very linear in their staid organization, yet there is a great deal of creativity in writing within that stereotypical and rigid framework.

Jamesaritchie · Nov 3, 2011

dangerousbill said:
I could be wrong, but I assumed that 'linear' here meant in the analytical, rather than chronological, sense, as in writing a novel by following a fixed algorithm: Step one, step two, step three... step 357, out pops a sure best-seller.

DB

There have been bestselling writers who claim to take exactly this approach, and write how-to books that claim to show anyone how to write a bestseller step by linear step.

It works for those writers who make it work, and flops for others.

bearilou · Nov 3, 2011

SJp said:
Honestly, I don't know why you've chosen such an antagonistic position against the author when the two of you sound so much in agreement. Not to be flippant, but did you read the article? Where do you see the author telling somebody that one strategy is inferior over another? Where did you get that the 'linear process' was related to story development?

I read the article and I found, typical of 'writing advice' found online these days, that it wasn't very informative or specific. He spoke in vague generalities designed to make him look like he was saying something but ended up that it was open to a wide variety of interpretations, as witnessed by Neurofizz's take on what was said. His read was the same as mine.

Creativity: Not a Linear Process?

Weirdo.

Mushroom

Court Jester

~Charity~

Retired Illuminatus

The grad students did it

Retired Illuminatus

Feeling like an old timer

present

The grad students did it

New AW user. Veteran Writer 8+

volitare nequeo

Caped Codder

present

Weirdo.

Currently buried in schoolwork.

Seashell Seller

~~~~*~~~~

The grad students did it

Currently buried in schoolwork.

The grad students did it

DenturePunk writer

*