The Creativity Conference in Philadelphia, March 4, 2009

I was in the City of Brotherly Love a few weeks ago, attending the The American Creativity Association’s annual conference at the Marriot Courtyard Hotel. I left Portland, Maine in the midst of a typical Northeaster blizzards, the planes having to be de-iced before take-off, but I did get out, close to on-time, while a lot of others did not.

The three day conference was a gathering of people, whom I had hoped would have been creative people, inventors, musicians,writers, poets, like me, all slightly crazy, right brian artists. Instead, I found academics, theorists, intellectuals; people who study creativity burt seldom do anything about it. There were a few former academics who now consult with large corporations and institutions trying to motivate their employees to greater innovation.  While not what I expected, the three days were not a waste, far from it. I got what I came for, tho perhaps not what I was looking for. That’s always good.

I was there to learn about this group of people who espouse creativity -- it’s in their name -- and to share some of what I’ve learned as a photographer, inventor, entrepreneur and workshop leader. I’ve been writing my long promised book creativity: On Being Creative. I wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing out on anything. Locked up here in Maine these past 35 years, running workshops for people who have to creative as their jib description: photographers, writers, filmmakers, has left me a bit lop-sided in terms of creative research.

I got to attended most everything else, except the final dinner, which had as the speaker Ray Kurzell, inventor, best selling book author, futurist, visionary. That would have been  worth staying for, had I known, but I’ve been on the road a lot the past 2 weeks, and the kids needed me home. But I did get to listen to some stimulating presentations, nap through a few others, and come away with five pages of notes.

Some of what I heard was, to my way of thinking, overly intellectual.

Key elements of the Conference for me were:

1. Meeting people who are actively researching and teaching creativity. You can get a graduate degree in creativity, even a PhD.

2. The lunches were great.

3. Tuesday afternoon, I got to spend a few hours over lunch with Garret Brown who lives in Phily. We talking about ideas. Garrett is an inventor, filmmaker, musician, fellow sailor. He invented the Steadicam and the SkyCam, the devise  that floats a TV camera over football games. He’s now working on adapting the Steadicam arm, the key to floating a camera in space, to supporting a surgeon's hands during long operations, as well as for other workers who have to carry heavy tools for long periods of time. We were sharing our respective collection of iPhone apps and got into a discussion of the need for an app for every one of the world’s museums. This app has a floor-plan, individual rooms with thumb-nail images of each piece in the walls, with text or voice descriptions.  These can be provided in various languages, spoken and written, with direct access to the museum's collections and retail store . . . . . Discussing ideas with Garrett is always one of life’s great treats.

4. On Wednesday morning I gave a 90-minute presentation on how to overcome Fear in the creative process.  The talk went well, I thought. I audio taped it so I could create Podcast some time down the line. The points I made are on a Keynote presentation that I’ll include in the podcast. There was good interaction, questions, and good feed back. It would have been nice to have evaluations forms for feed back on our presentations. That may be asking too much.

5. If I am to claim I am an expert on “creativity” and write a book about it . . . . I’ better explore what else is being done in the field, who is writing, lecturing and and leading workshops. This conference helped, but I’m not about to embark on a PhD degree path . . . maybe I can get an “honorary degree.”

6. Peter deJager, an impressive (the sheer size of him) Canadian who consults and lectures on innovation and management gave an energetic and insightful talk at lunch on Wednesday. He talked in an animated why about organizational change. While people are resistant to change, they will embrace it if the change means something to them, personally--they can buy in, if there is a personal connect to the change. He was entertaining, a motivational stand-up comedian.

7. One of my more memorable presentations was a by Gerry Lantz, a former Madison Avenue advertising exc who hammerer away at storytelling, writing and editing. He gave us a very good look into what makes story. He also gave us a short writing exercise, then walked us through the editing stage, which brought greater clarity to our original concept. The simple act of editing, of having to say something with fewer words  has always been a good way to see what it is you are searching for. I do it every day, but seldom apply it to my personal direction. Good exercise."

8. I learned how the brain works, or how the academics think the brain works. . . which is not how I see it working. I feel these academics are missing something. Case-in-point: The neocortex, which they called the innovative part  of brain, to me is a stumbling block to real creativity. Ask any athlete or artists what slows down their creativity, and it’s thinking. Sending an emotional impulse around asking permission from the intellectual brain, not only slows down the process, this long route allows doubt to creep in,  shame, possible embarrassment, and all sort of other psychological creative blocks to stop the process. Ask a ski racer what they think while while speeding down the course at 65 MPH. Ask a concert pianist  what they are thinking about in the middle of a Chopin concerto. Ask a photographer what they are thinking about while photographing a political rally or a refugee camp and they will all say: “Think? You got to be crazy. There’s no thinking involved, it’s all pure intuitive response.” The time to think is after you done something spontaneous. Did it work or not? Were you working from a place of honest and truth, or did ego, or your emotions, or your “thinking brain” step in and screw up the process? What would you do differently next time? This process of responding naturally, then looking at what you did, is the process that trains to brain to respond more intuitively. This allows the intellect to take a back seat (which it hates to do) as you develop thrust that the Intuitive part of the brain will do its thing. This often flies in the face of what the intellect, the Internal Editor, is thinking. The intellectual reasoning process is slow and ponderous. By the time the intellect has made a decision, the skier has passed the gate, the musician has become all thumbs, and the photographer has missed the moment. Don’t think, respond, be naturally spontaneous. The more you do this--and learn from what you’ve done-- the better choices you wind-up making.

9. I did get to hear a number of good presenters and a few who were new to the game. I’ve learned from them all what works and what doesn’t. Everyone had a PowerPoint presentation, but so did I.

10. The shoulder bags they gave out at registration are now packing my kid’s books on their way to school.

More information on the American Creativity Association can be found at 

http://amcreativityassoc.org/index1.htm