Is it reasonable to assume that the net and cheaper, more accessible digital media tools are making us more creative? More to the point, would it be a good thing if we were? Would a more creative society be a better one – more generous (nothing more generous than sticking your neck out in the cause of art), better at problem solving, more enterprising? Pass. No idea. I do know that lots of organisations are investing money in boosting the creativity of their people, though.
They think a more creative workforce will produce better profits. If this is true, isn’t it likely that an effort to make the wider population more creative might have a similar effect on the national economy? Could we effectively reduce expenditure on unemployment benefits, anti-depressants and incarceration if we gave more people the warm glow of making something, entertaining someone, expressing themselves? I wrote about the next generation of ‘personal creativity tools’ in The Guardian yesterday (I was filling in for the legendary Jack Schofield).
Comments 3
Steve – nice article. If you haven’t already, check out threedegrees, Hello and even Wallop.
Posted 16 Dec 2003 at 11:09 am ¶Good post, Steve.
I was quite creative when I was a boy. Then I discovered girls.
Posted 17 Dec 2003 at 2:18 am ¶but which begets which. is it not reasonable to assume that our creativity is driving evolution of the net and digital media tools?
Posted 18 Dec 2003 at 5:20 pm ¶did the invention of the printing press lead to us being more creative, or was it the other way around?