Making Is ConnectingDavid Gauntlett2011

On Everyday Creativity

In Short

When we understand creativity as a process with a focus on the emotions it arouses and the presence of the people involved (rather than as some exclusive talent), we frame even the simplest craft activities of everyday people as empowering, meaningful, and important.

In Depth

Everyday creativity refers to a process which brings together at least one active human mind, and the material or digital world, in the activity of making something. The activity has not been done in this way by this person (or these people) before. The process may arouse various emotions, such as excitement and frustration, but most especially a feeling of joy. When witnessing and appreciating the output people may sense the presence of the maker, and recognize those feelings. (p.76)

Gauntlett uses the book to show how broad issues of happiness, social connection, and political engagement can each find roots in small, everyday creative acts (whether in digital or physical media). The foundation of this argument is a reframing of creativity by the definition above.

He carefully defines creativity as a process. You don’t need special talent, external validation, or a novel output to be creative, only the will and passion for making something in the world. This is the author’s way of opening the door for everyone to be creative and encouraging a “shift away from a ‘sit back and be told’ culture toward more of a ‘making and doing’ culture.” (p.8)

His definition also puts priority on the ways creativity empowers the maker, allowing them to express their emotions and assert their presence through what they make. In this, he highlights the pleasure of making things and the way it helps us shape meaning of our existence, a point that has always resonated with me. He takes cues from DIY culture to make his point:

It feels good to do it yourself: it’s really good for self-esteem - a crucial dimension of personal psychology - where as getting it done for you is disempowering, and often frustrating, and less meaningful. (p.56)

In design, I see Gauntlett’s idea of everyday creativity echoed in the idea of design as a process or approach to thinking that foregrounds human agency, rather than problem solving or the creation of novel products. If we accept that there is power in people’s everyday acts of creativity, then we are directed as designers to create tools, services, and environments that encourage and facilitate the creative drives of others, rather than treating people as passive consumers.