A lot of people are fascinated by term ‘creativity’ and most are jealous of those who work in domains that require creative way of thinking and innovative decisions. However, not everyone understands how exactly this creativity works and how to acquire one? In her article called Creativity in Crisis? for Journal of Singing (67) Lynn Helding illuminates notion of creativity and discusses reasons of its decline in Americans. Being an Associate Professor of Practice in Vocal Pedagogy at the University of Southern California Thornton School of Music Helding studies and develops relatively new sphere of science – vocology. Also, for a long time she leads column Mindful Voice for the Journal of Singing where she discusses current issues in neuropsychology, sociology and cognitive studies and how these scientific domains counteract with music performance and teaching. In her article Helding provides various data to support her main thesis that in order to increase creativity in students one should decrease usage of gadgets such as smartphones or limitless access to the internet. She claims that in order to create something new and truly innovative one should free one`s mind from constant buzzing and texting because if one`s mind is not busy by sending messages or surfing the net one will have enough room in it for new ideas. However, it should be mentioned that Helding focuses mostly on the negative side of technologies forgetting that her concepts may apply not for all people because people are all different and one may benefit from technologies if using the right.
Creativity in Crisis? written by Lynn Helding sheds light on the most mysterious notion of people`s life – creativity. In a simple and informative way of presenting facts and research data step-by-step she explains notion of creativity and illuminates ways of its decline in Americans. Thus, author divides her article into six paragraphs where she explains different issues connected with her topic. In paragraph called Creativity: An Explosive Field she prepares background for her further investigation of this issue. Helding presents physiological researches that were done in order to explain and define notion of creativity and what it means to be creative? Thus she defines two kinds of creativity – “Big C” and “little c.” (Helding, 598) “Big C” is the revolutionary creative thinking that can turn the whole world upside-down and “little c” in its turn is something that can be achieved through watching tutorial or reading instruction how to do it. In paragraph The Building Blocks Of Creativity Helding dwells on theme of “Big C” and “little c” depicting how these things can be applied to people and what exactly motivates us in order to be creative. Then she links cognitive processes, problem solving and cultural boundaries and traditions with creative way of thinking in her third paragraph The Box therefore trying to explain how all these things work together and what is dominating and in which way. Stupid And Stupider: Google And The Internet and A Space Of One's Own these are two paragraphs that prepare basis for author`s main thesis about connection and, if to be precise, interference of technologies with one`s mind. Helding gives various examples of how technologies consume time and prevent people from creative thinking. In her final paragraph Texting: Cantus Interruptus writer reveals her main thesis of negative effect of cellphones and texting as well as gives a solution “So I suggest one simple yet powerful way to counteract the "creativity crisis" in our sphere of influence: ban the use of cell phones during both lessons and practice.” (Helding, 602)
Taking into consideration all grounded evidence that Helding provides for blaming technologies and dependence on cellphones she fails to state that the situation is not that devastating and is not critical. In her last paragraph she suggests to prohibit any usage of phones during classes, which is reasonable and comprehensible in terms of etiquette and respect. However, it may only partially bring attention and student`s involvement into class participation because the lesson or lecture is limited in time and then they will come back to their phones and computers again. There is no guarantee that student`s mind will not be filled with thoughts about sending message to someone or how to reply to comment he or she has received before class, for example. Simply ignoring technologies or reducing their impact on people will not solve creativity crises. It is clear that technologies will not go away they will only evolve into more advanced ones, so why fighting them? One should take the best out of technological revolution and this action of benefiting from it also requires creative thinking and not just “little c” but “Big C” in terms of pedagogical approach to teaching.
Also, Helding states that constantly seeking for new information in the internet kills time therefore possibility to create something new by oneself. It is also partially true and can be applied to some number of people; however there are a lot of inspirational web sites in the internet dedicated to various artists. It is an axiom that creativity thrives not only from problem solving but also from inspiration received from new impressions and emotions.
All things considered Helding in her article revealed only one side of decreasing creativity in American students therefore one way of solving it. However, simply taking away cellphones will not be a solution to creativity crises. In order to stop it one should create way of benefiting from it but not banding it.
References
Helding, Lynn. “Creativity in Crisis?” Mindful Voice. Journal of Singing 67, no. 5 (2011): 597-604
