In a world obsessed with finding happiness, there are some
remarkably underexplored channels. Take, for example, creativity. That a
profound sense of satisfaction -- deeper, more character-building than
happiness -- resides in creativity is a truth painfully evident to me and
my ilk (writers, editors). We tangle with the muse regularly, often
against outrageous deadlines, yet tend to be a remarkably satisfied lot,
despite living a tenth as luxuriously as, say, investment bankers.
The prevailing myth, however, is that we were somehow born to do
what we do, that creativity is the property of a very few. Well Robert
Epstein, Ph.D., begs to differ. (Hey, I think I liked it better the old
way; I want to be special.)
At Harvard, where he picked his way around the pigeon droppings in
the famed lab of B. F. Skinner, and in his work since, Epstein has
subjected to the scrutiny of science the process of creativity. Everyone,
he finds, has equal creative potential. He outlines four essential skills
for capturing your own.
Not that it's easy. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Ph.D. -- otherwise known
as the "flow" guy -- has spent his entire career looking at creativity Most
intensively, he has studied by questionnaire and personal interview 91
men and women who would qualify for a creativity Hall of Fame. They are
musicians and artists and Nobel-winning scientists.
While we have tapped him to talk about the personality
characteristics of highly creative people, Csikszentmihalyi is adamant
that we understand one thing -- creativity is more difficult and strange"
than we think. Forget the light-bulb icon. A lot of preparation -- years of
study -- and then a lot of sweat go into it. A great deal of
persistence.
But the process turns out to be rewarding, all his interviewees
agreed. And damned if there isn't a tangible trace -- the scientific
finding, the aria -- that stands as a certain amount of proof that "I was
here. I made a difference. I mattered." With the possible exception of
parenthood, is there a deeper source of joy?
I'd like to think I can say the same about myself. For the past
several years, I've had a dream job -- being the editor of Psychology
Today, helping to make a magazine out of what start out as wisps of
thought. I had the rare privilege of helping reinvent it for the
1990s.
I'll be happy to let my biases show here. It has been my personal
goal as editor to expand coverage of psychology on both ends: Inward,
into the molecules of the mind, where we still have so much to learn
about ourselves (but not so much, I suspect, to warrant denouncing the
importance of experience). And outward, beyond intra-psychic issues, to
connect the individual and the social. After all, the bonds between
people, the need for community are as much a part of our psyche as our
need for self-respect.
I'm loosening my tether to the magazine to become Editor at Large.
That will give me more freedom to do what I'm now itching to do -- delve
more deeply into some subjects. One book is already in the works. Two
more are germinating.
Psychology Today, of course, will go on. With a talented staff of
editors headed up by Owen Lipstein, the magazine will continue to report
on your favorite subject: the intricacies and oddities of human
behavior.
Like the lens through which it looks and the world it monitors,
Psychology Today has evolved since it began in the 1960s. I hope I've
made a difference.
Tags:
b f skinner,
character building,
finding happiness,
hall of fame,
ilk,
interviewees,
investment bankers,
light bulb,
Nobel,
persistence,
personal interview,
personality characteristics,
pigeon droppings,
process of creativity,
profound sense,
Psychology Today,
questionnaire,
robert epstein,
scrutiny
