The Problem with Creatives

by · April 21, 2010

As I watched the video for the Adobe’s latest release, CS5, I was reminded that to make something look good continues to get easier and easier. We have brilliant software, beautiful stock photography, stunning brushes, intricate stock vectors the list goes on and on of all the resources available to make something look good.

Which is good, but it’s not enough.

Great designers are not simply pixel pushers, we are problem solvers. Our goal is not to create something that is stunning to look at.  In fact, I don’t care what the degree says, you are not an artist.

artist: a person who produces works in any of the arts that are primarily subject to aesthetic criteria.

“Primarily subject to aesthetic criteria” doesn’t work. Our goal is to create something that makes a connection in such a way that makes what is being communicated stick. Look to the shop sign maker. He wasn’t just an artist, carving something in wood which looked lovely. He was a problem solver. He found beautiful ways to solve the problem of people walking by not knowing what was inside.

I see a great example of that with Mark Horvath and how he tells the stories of homeless people. No production team, no budget, just Mark and a little camcorder. But the stories of invisiblepeople.tv have touched thousands of people. Instead of using the lack of money and equipment as a reason he could produce great content, he embraced it and produced real, honest videos of these people’s lives. If he had a big crew with the latest HD equipment, it would look better…but maybe not as authentic, and most homeless people would run from instead of connecting with Mark.

Stefan Mumaw recently talked about regaining our role as problem solvers:

We always complain about the constraints when we should be coveting them. They provide purpose and make ideation real. Without constraints, we are beautifiers, not designers.

To be a problem solver means we embrace problems, not run from them or try to smolder them. We see the problem not as a wall, but as a challenge to be overcome. So the next time someone gives you an impossible deadline, a difficult subject matter, a lame title…let yourself give a little smirk, knowing that this problem is no match for the creativity that the creator has poured into you.

Filed Under: Be Inspired, Culture

  • http://www.timdan.com Tim Allen

    I have to admit, this article frustrated me. It's this sort of thinking that has prevented the church from being a place for creatives to truly thrive. Your statement that “Great designers are not simply pixel pushers, we are problem solvers.” is correct. But to say that they are not artists? All because the definition of Artist, states their work to be “Primarily subject to aesthetic criteria?” That statement only validates the fact that designers are truly artists. Let's dig deeper into the definition.

    art·ist:
    –noun
    1.a person who produces works in any of the arts that are primarily subject to aesthetic criteria.

    aes·thet·ic
    –adjective
    1. pertaining to a sense of the beautiful or to the science of aesthetics.

    aes·thet·ics
    –noun(used with a singular verb)
    1. the branch of philosophy dealing with such notions as the beautiful, the ugly, the sublime, the comic, etc., as applicable to the fine arts, with a view to establishing the meaning and validity of critical judgments concerning works of art, and the principles underlying or justifying such judgments.
    2. the study of the mind and emotions in relation to the sense of beauty.

    The study of the mind and emotions in relation to the sense of beauty. Art is all about communicating. Figuring out how are minds and emotions will be influenced by our work. It's about communicating ideas and emotions. Branding is art. Marketing is art. It's using visual queues to communicate a message or evoke an emotional response. Such things are indeed lacking in most churches.

    If you reduce designers to just problem solvers then they indeed become just “pixel pushers”, but perhaps “strategic pixel pushers”. It's this kind of philosophy that makes a working environment for the artist in a church almost unmanageable, and degrading. Ultimately, it will lead to a burned out designer, and a high turnover with your creative team.

    The problem with creatives is that – in the church – they are not seen as artist, and not given the time, resources and freedom to do what they do best.

  • http://twitter.com/brianckaufman Brian Kaufman

    Tim, great thoughts – you want to be a guest author on Stc!?

  • holycowcreative

    Great perspective Tim. While I appreciate, and can even embrace, your thoughts on marketing as art I too often see the primary focus to be on simply how something looks. Perhaps it's not that we're not artists, but that we're not fully embracing the role of an artist.

    I will contend that if we embrace the role of creative problem solvers, the church would find more value to our role and what we bring to the table.

    Thanks for expanding the conversation and my definition of artist.

  • http://www.timdan.com Tim Allen

    Agreed. I'm not suggesting that we focus on form over function. If there is no message – or not a good one – then just making it look good isn't going to help. In my experience the problem often comes from leadership not involving the “artists” soon enough in the process. The best campaigns I've been involved with were the ones where the creative team was consulted from the very beginning.

    As a filmmaker I never just ask “Will this look good?”, but “Is it [holistically] good?”

  • http://www.timdan.com Tim Allen

    Yeah… that'd be cool!

  • holycowcreative

    And it's definitely a both/and not an either/or. Both form and function, both creative and leadership. Leadership absolutely does the message and all involved a disservice by not bringing in creative at the ground level. Artist can often fall short by only focusing on how something looks.

    Sounds to me like you're setting a great pace for others Tim.