A somewhat elderly screed on a topic already raised here ... tales of plagiarism, homogenization--and other aspects of somehow compressing Something into 20 min-magick.
(I 'intuited'? something bogus along with the others, after ~the third one, way-back.)
Maybe it's: that so many of the teeth are whiter-than-White?
So here's a necropsy for YAN Pop-phenom apparently about at its Sell-date. FWIW.
TED talks are lying to you
The creative class has never been more screwed. Books about creativity have never been more popular. What gives?
BY THOMAS FRANK
[. . .]
Or so our literal-minded correspondent thought back in 2002. Later on, after much trial and error, he would understand that there really had been something deeply insightful about Richard FloridaÂs book. This was the idea that creativity was the attribute of a class Â which class Florida identified not only with intellectuals and artists but also with a broad swath of the professional-managerial stratum. It would take years for our stumbling innovator to realize this. And then, he finally got it all at once. The reason these many optimistic books seemed to have so little to do with the downward-spiraling lives of actual creative workers is that they werenÂt really about those people in the first place.
No. The literature of creativity was something completely different. Everything he had noticed so far was a clue: the banality, the familiar examples, the failure to appreciate what was actually happening to creative people in the present time. This was not science, despite the technological gloss applied by writers like Jonah Lehrer. It was a literature of superstition, in which everything always worked out and the good guys always triumphed and the right inventions always came along in the nick of time. In Steven JohnsonÂs ÂWhere Good Ideas Come FromÂ (2010), the creative epiphany itself becomes a kind of heroic character, helping out clueless humanity wherever necessary:
Good ideas may not want to be free, but they do want to connect, fuse, recombine. They want to reinvent themselves by crossing conceptual borders. They want to complete each other as much as they want to compete.
And what was the true object of this superstitious stuff? A final clue came from ÂCreativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and InventionÂ (1996), in which Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi acknowledges that, far from being an act of individual inspiration, what we call creativity is simply an expression of professional consensus.
[. . .]
Anyway, TMI for me, but for anyone wavering ~~~ this might explain a few things.