The Critique Versus The Critic

I have been a longtime fan of film director M. Night Shyamalan. He has written, directed and sometimes even starred in some amazing movies over the years, including The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, Signs, The Village and Lady in the Water.

M. Night is an amazing storyteller with deep characters that are always more than was the eyes can see. His movies always seem to be centralized around estranged difficult relationships that come together in moments of crisis or hardship. Another thing that M. Night is, is an artist in the purest form. He draws heavily on symbolism, story and prose. His visual imagery is soft, suggestive and moving. I did say that I was a fan, didn't I?

Yet M. Night movies are always razed by critics and moviegoers alike. In this digital age, everyone seems to be a critic and nobody on the planet seems to be a vocal fan of M. Night's work even though his box office numbers are not slouchy at all. The Sixth Sense brought in $293 million in the box office. Signs brought in $227 million. The Village brought in $114 million. Yet critics panned his movies except for the The Sixth Sense.

Roger Ebert referenced The Sixth Sense as; "The Sixth Sense" has a kind of calm, sneaky self-confidence that allows it to take us down a strange path, intriguingly." Entertainment weekly said, "It's a psychological thriller that actually thrills."

For his review of The Village, Roger Ebert opened his review by saying, ""The Village" is a colossal miscalculation, a movie based on a premise that cannot support it, a premise so transparent it would be laughable were the movie not so deadly solemn. It's a flimsy excuse for a plot, with characters who move below the one-dimensional and enter Flatland."

Entertainment weekly opened it's review of The Village with; "What an irony -- and a shame -- it would be if ''The Sixth Sense'' turns out to be the movie that first made and then ruined the career of M. Night Shyamalan." There is not a single mention of the movie's [The Village] title being reviewed, see it here.

For his review of The Lady in the Water, Roger Ebert had this to say. "The key to deciphering M. Night Shyamalan's fractured fairy tale, "Lady in the Water," is to remember that it is rooted in the mythology of Stephen Colbert and "The Colbert Report."... The director's deficiencies as a visual storyteller are also on fine display.... Shyamalan could learn from Spielberg and Brian De Palma." Rooted in the mythology of Stephen Colbert and "The Colbert Report? What the hell does that mean?

Entertainment Weekly had this to say about The Lady in the Water. "Muggledom runs amok in Lady in the Water, Shyamalan's most alienating and self-absorbed project to date. His most fanciful, too, since the narrative springs from a fairy tale the director made up for his two daughters" I don't understand why, but these first few sentences, that start with a Harry Potter reference, comes after two long paragraphs talking about all of M. Night's previous films with vague references to M. Night selling out by becoming American Expresses spokesperson. Don't believe me? See it here.

Critics have become a form of entertainment in and of themselves for the most part. Whether it is a movie, music, book or art critic, they all seem to be on the same negative page. Rather than critiquing a piece as a stand alone subject, they have to reference it to other works by the artist, or even other artists. Why is it that Lisa Schwarzbaum, the Entertainment Weekly critic for The Lady in the Water had to throw a Harry Potter reference in for a review of a movie that had absolutely nothing to do with the Potter franchise.

One of the defining characteristics of a critic is their job title; Critic. The dictionary definition of critic, the first definition listed is; "a person who expresses an unfavorable opinion of something". So by definition, their job is to complain about other people's work. Period.

A critique is defined as; a detailed analysis and assessment of something, esp. a literary, philosophical, or political theory. So this means the good and bad should be discussed as a part of the critiquing process.

And that is where a critic and a critique diverge in their paths. And this is where I want to step in and provide some guidelines for providing a critique.

First, when giving a critique is important to not do a comparison.

A critique should be focused on the piece being presented, not the pieces that came before it, regardless of relevance. Focus on what is good and what could be improved with that piece. Using comparison has it's place, such as; the composition of the previous image was stronger than with this image. But to compare a Claude Monet is to a Tsukioka Yoshitoshi is the same thing that most critics do when comparing Harry Potter to the Lady in the Water or M. Night to Spielberg. M. Night and Spielberg's styles are different. When I want to see a Spielberg movie, I watch a Spielberg movie, not a Kevin Smith movie. Even comparing two movies from the same director is not a credible thing to do. Would you compare Jaws to Schindler's List. Both are Spielberg movies, so I should expect the same thing right?

My point is, a critique should be focused on the merits of the work being presented and nothing else.

Second; a critique should offer viable options for improvements.

Rather than the standard critic's modus operandi which is to simply point out the faults by saying something generic like "The composition is weak", a critique would include something like this; "I think the composition would be improved if the subject were either filling the frame or aligned to follow the rule of thirds.

Third; a critique should not be personalized.

In every critic's review of The Lady in the Water the critics were obviously pissed about M. Night's obvious panning of all movies critics everywhere. Let me give you a little back story. M. Night was panned heavily by critics for every movie made since The Sixth Sense; Unbreakable, Signs and The Village. So M. Night included a character in the Lady in the Water that is an unlikable, generally disgruntled film critic, which is how I image all critics lives truly are. This character is truly an unhappy character in the film and ends up having an unhappy time in the film.

I thought it was a great way for M. Night to show critics and his viewers, that he isn't a fan of the critics either. It was tongue and cheek, and funny. The critics didn't think so.

The critic for entertainment weekly, Lisa Schwarzbaum had this to say; "But while the subplot is an up-yours to actual critics and a wink-wink to civilians (who are likely to be busy enough keeping up with the nomenclature), the rise and fall of Mr. Farber results in something far punier: The amount of story time devoted to such an inconsequential naysayer emphasizes the movie's very smallness, its unease as a cohesive piece, and the inner creative discontent at its core. Why a filmmaker so gifted with talent as well as so fortunate in his success should scrunt and scratch his private itches in public — in front of the very audience that has lauded him — is a mystery too deep for this Muggle." 

There was a lot more to the subplot of the movie than just the "Up-yours" to critics, but that is what she focused on.

Even Roger Ebert himself had this to say; "I'm sorry. Don't believe me. I am the villain. OK, not me, precisely, but Film Criticism Itself, embodied by the splendid (movie critic word) Bob Balaban as Mr. Farber, who is this film's own resident newspaper movie critic, offering caustic, self-aware commentary on the shortcomings of "Lady in the Water" as it sloshes along. In Shyamalan's rickety mythology, Mr. Farber represents... well, nothing so much as the filmmaker's pre-emptive strike against the bad reviews he expects to receive for making this poorly written, stiffly directed, audience-insulting story-without-a-cause."

And again, personalizing the material as part of the critique makes Mr. Ebert no better than M. Night, the man he is being critical of.

Critics obviously took offense to that particular message M. Night shared in the movie, but then mentioning it only minimized all of the other comments they had made, whether the comments were valid or not.

Simply calling it out in their review with their childish belittling references showed they were holding a grudge over the entire movie. I personally applaud M. Night for including this subplot in his movie. He personalized the movie, made it part of his own experience and the whole scenario added a bit of humor to the movie.

The best thing that a critics could have done was laugh it off and move on. I mean seriously, if you can't be a critic of yourself, then how can you be a critic to someone else? People take themselves way too serious. I mean come on, they get paid to bitch about things. What is not funny about that?

As participants of a critique, we can't personalize things in other peoples works. It is important to address what is important in the feedback not turn a critique into a school yard brawl.

This is what I try and do with every critique. I am not a critic, but I can be critical. There is a difference between the two and that difference is more like a Grand Canyon's difference and not a fine line. This is one reason why I can enjoy almost all music. This is one reason why I can equally enjoy a movie like, "Movie 43" or "The Toxic Avenger" and at the same time say I like "Mall Rats" and say that I like "Saving Private Ryan", Schindler's List and all of the movies in between. I simply enjoy them for what they are and not for what they could have been.

2014 Goals Starting Now: Life, Balance, Simplicity

For 2014, starting in November 2013, my focus is going to be sharply different than in the past. I need to focus on different aspects of my life. I have been spending the last month reflecting on why my stress levels were so high, my creativity was so low and my creative drive was gone.

My life is typically like a pendulum, extreme in one direction or the other. And right now the pendulum has be way off in one direction. It is time to make a real effort to center myself. This means making sure my life doesn't swing in the opposite direction.

So in an effort to find that center, I have three focus points for the coming year; Life, Balance, Simplicity

Life
I will focus more prioritizing what is truly important in my life. My family, my health and my art is where my focus will be first and foremost.

My wife and children are the most important things in my life. And in the last half-decade my wife and children has fallen down on my list of priorities, most of the time coming second or third, and have been sacrificed time and again in the name of other obligations. 2014 is going to see a shift in this prioritization which is going to require me to ensure that happens. This means that my own perceptions of the expectations on me will have to change. This is going to be difficult, but it is something I need to do. Moving forward my family is getting 4 evenings a week of my time; unplugged and not distracted, unconditionally.

Additionally, I was so busy this year that my own backyard went without the maintenance it needs so badly, as did many other household things. If something wasn't left in disrepair it is because my wife picked up my slack. This too is changing. So one day per month is being dedicated to home/yard maintenance. This will be the last Saturday of each month.

Sunday is going to be my day of rest. Rest is important for me. It allows me to recoup from a typically exhausting week. It allows me to vanquish my stress built up from the previous week. A day of rest allows me to prepare for the coming week. This doesn't necessarily mean sitting on my ass all day, it means focusing on healthy aspects of my life; friends, family and art.

My health has gotten to a point that if I don't make a change now, I won't be around for my family and friends much longer. I need time and energy to focus on both aspects of my health; mental and physical. Energy is almost as hard to come by for me as time is for everyone else, so this is going to require me to again shift my priorities to ensure I have the energy to spend on improving my health. I am going to dedicate 1 hour a day, three days a week, to my own mental health and another hour to my physical health, again three days a week, via exercise and meditation/writing. This will leave me with that seventh day for rest.

My art has been ignored now for far too long. Personal projects have been ignored and set aside for other priorities for far too long. This has created an imbalance, because at the heart of my being, creating is simply for me; breathing. I haven't been able to breathe as much as I need to for far too long, I am either out of breath or have stopped breathing altogether for very long stretches. As an example, the last time I picked up my camera to shoot with intent of creating art was in August and my results then were ho-hum. Creating provides me an expressive outlet and a way to release stress and find satisfaction in this world. Creating helps with emotional balance, e.g. mental health. I have projects that I need to get developed, simply for me, and I need time and energy to develop these.

Balance
Balance is finding that place in life where things are in equal proportions. My health is poor, my art is ignored, my family is sacrificed and at the end of the day, I am exhausted with no energy for anything or anyone. My life is imbalanced. Balance requires saying yes. At the same time balance requires saying no. No has always been a difficult word for me to use. I love saying yes, but to the point that yes becomes too much, even for me. My life over the past decade has been far too many yeses and in doing so I have been passively been saying no to other, more important things, without actually saying no. In my quest for balance, my yeses are going to based on the following evaluation:
1. Does this yes involve me sacrificing my relationships with family/friends?
2. Does this yes involve me sacrificing my dedication to my personal health?
3. Does this yes involve me sacrificing my dedication to my personal art?

If the evaluation requires a sacrifice of two or more of those three things, the answer will likely be no, but not automatically.

I know that this is something new to consider for some. And while my "No(s)" will obviously impact many people, it will positively impact the people in my life that truly matter my family and friends. Each request for obligation will be evaluated and measured against what is happening at the time, so please don't think that

Simplicity
I need to return to a keeping my life simple. I can't take on these over-zealous projects of epic proportions. I can't physically keep up with the demands of a life that requires me to be on the go for 5 straight months 16 hours a day.

Simplicity for me is about having time away from the demands of others. Time where I can just sit back and not stress about what isn't being done and who isn't doing it, what needs to be done and why it needs to be, and being available to everyone all the time via text, email and phone. This will stop. If need be, people can wait a day or two before I get back to them. I have to accept that and own that. This doesn't mean that people can't contact me, it means I own how and when I respond to them. See how simple that is?

In my quest to find simplicity I am going to let go of my self-applied pressures to go big or stay home. I am going to hand ownership of things to others. I am going to tell myself I don't have to be everything to everyone all the time. I am going to focus on those individuals and projects that are important.

Big Question
So the big question on everyone's mind, including my own, is what does this mean to SDPG? It is obvious that SDPG is important to the community that it serves and it is important to me. But at the same time it has been a source of much of the imbalance in my life. It has also been a source of rewarding accomplishments, valued friendships and tremendous growth for me.

I won't be abandoning SDPG, but my involvement will change, which means my role will be redefined. I will let go of some of my "ownership" of the group. I hope that wasn't read wrong. I do not own the group? I have never owned the group, but I have taken a personal ownership of the success of the group and that is the ownership I am referencing. I want to make this clear; SDPG is not my group. SDPG is a group that I belong to. Five years ago I joined the group to grow my photography skills and meet like minded people to learn with. A few months later I was unwillingly thrust into a leadership role within the organization.

Now I realize that I used the words "unwillingly thrust into a leadership role". I know that this could come with some misinterpretation so I would like to clarify what I meant.

I didn't know enough about photography to lead a photography club. I didn't know the first thing about leading any club, let alone a photography club. I was not a people person. I was not a public speaker. I was unreliable as hell. I was simply a person who found something special in the SDPG. I was simply a person who didn't want SDPG to go away when the original leadership needed to focus on the health of his family. I was asked to take on a leadership role in the organization and stepped up to ensure it would be around for a little while longer. And my first order of business was to recruit six others to help lead the group, two of which were previously helping lead one aspect or more of the group.

As a result of my role, I learned more about photography in the first year than I had in the previous 16 years combined. Why? Because I had to teach others, so I needed to know what the hell I was talking about. As a result of my role, I learned about how to run a small organization (mainly through trial and error; and boy did we make a lot of errors.). I learned about how to deal with growing pains of a group as its size grew at a rapid rate. As a result of my role, I learned how to deal with my anxiety around other people. As a result of my role, I learned how to publicly speak and be comfortable with it, mistakes and all. As a result of my role, I learned how to be reliable by meeting my commitments.

I have learned so much from SDPG and for that I am eternally grateful. But alas, I have taken the group as far as I can take it. I have hit a barrier as far as my own capabilities and availabilities. The group needs more, deserves more and is eager for more. There is the catch. My availability doesn't match the growing needs of the group. I have stretched my rubberband of time (availability) and stressed it to the point of breaking. This summer is when I felt that rubber band snap back and bite me; in a alarming way.

I talked with my friend, and one of the fellow leaders of the SDPG, Rick, and together we decided I needed to take the entire month of October off, which happened for the most part. And during this time I reflected on what I can do for the group moving forward and equally important, what I won't be able to do for the group to ensure I can meet the three objectives for 2014 outlined above.

So I will be working with the group to establish boundaries. I will be working with the group to identify additional leaders who can step in and take on events/tasks that I won't be able to do next year. I will be working with the group to get others to own planning and executing events. This requires me to let go, to hand off, to trust. The needs of the group are simple; teach/learn/shoot/often. All the group needs is people that find the group as important as I did five years ago.

SDPG has a strong membership with quality people who are as passionate about the group and photography as I was when I started with the group. It is time for those members to be given the chance to step up and help take the group to the next level.

So as I head into November; life, balance and simplicity will be my modus-operandi.

Hello. My name is Steven and this is my art. This is me breathing.

Revisiting Crater Lake - A Personal Essay

I miss the pure simplicity of that weekend by Crater Lake. No stress. No obligations. No demands.

No car issues, no family issues, no sick pets.

No constant emails telling me this or that; or asking for this or that.

No neglected yard work screaming at me every time I look out the window.

This was my view.

It was simply a weekend between 6 friends, with their cameras, and absolute beauty to behold and capture. Wonderful memories I shared with 5 other individuals that will never be forgotten.

That is what Photography is supposed to be about.

Photography isn't about your deadlines.
Photography isn't about filling up your memory card.
Photography isn't about your next showing.
Photography isn't about your next sale.
Photography isn't about your new gear or even your next piece of gear.
Photography isn't about sharing every single image you have ever shot in your entire life.

Photography is about connecting.

Connecting with the world around you.
Connecting with the people around you.
Connecting with yourself.

When was the last time you connected?
When is the next time you will be connected?

When are you going to abandon the concept that you could be a better photographer?
Accept that you are a better photographer.

You know what you are doing.

You simply have to do it.

Now get it done!

Coming Back From A Creative Near Death Experience

It has been nearly three years since I wrote the three part essay, “The Death of Creativity”. Three years has seen my own creativity ebb and flow like a sine wave; deep dark valley’s rise to high peaks which crash down again; rinse and repeat. During those three years some amazing and some very difficult things happened to me. And all during this time I have been studying the effects of the destructive impact my own actions and in-actions as well as people and events have had on my creativity.

As you might recall from the original article I called out the education system and parents on the complete failure in developing the right brain in young minds. Little did I know that my little introspective essay would spawn so many discussions. I am finding that what I wrote about three years ago rang true then and remains true today, only now that I am three years wiser from my experiences, I see that it is a way of the world and not just limited to the education system.

Here is a little insight to who I am. For me, creating is like breathing. I cannot live without it. I have been creative my whole life. Sometimes I created openly but mostly I created privately. In high school I was in all three choirs and an active member of the drama club. I spent much of my free time during my four years in the military writing poetry, lyrics and composing music. I also wrote quite a bit of fictional stories for a small D&D club I was an active member of. I had boxes and boxes of these writings, poetry, music and musings that ended up being tossed in the dumpster by a girlfriend after I got out of the military. 

Then, when I got into Computer Gaming, I became creative again developing maps, levels and even entire mods for existing games some of which were actually used by the gaming organization I co-founded. I starting writing fiction again in my 30s, which I stopped doing after my now ex-wife read a particularly dark piece and stopped and looked at me with a particularly worried expression and said, “I am not sure if I know who you are.”

Creating is my sustenance in this life.

So let me jump to three years ago…

I was so burned out in my day job. In addition to working 72 hours a week and being the only after-hours support person 24/7/365; I had nothing left . Vacations were a joke as I was tethered to my job via a cell phone. After talking it over with my wife, we made the decision in August that I quit my job in the coming December and I would pursue a career in photography. I would go back to school to join in the Visual Communication program at the local community college and I would make a go at a creative career.

I published the “Death of Creativity…” article on my blog. A few short weeks later, in October, I was laid off from my employer. After the buyout of the company, the new owners decided to eliminate my position.This was a blessing as I was quitting two months anyways. Since I was laid off and I didn’t quit, I got a nice unexpected severance package on top of my expected 401k disbursement and I was eligible for unemployment. Again, this was an unexpected blessing.

I took my payout, purchased $4,000 worth of gear for my business and banked the rest to live on for the next six months while I collected unemployment. My first booked gig as a full time photographer was a wedding for a friend two weeks later. I did it pro-bono. My next gig was a free portrait session with a friend. My third session was a free pet portrait session with a friend.

Before I knew it friends of my friends were asking for a free or heavily discounted portrait sessions. I don’t blame them at all. I could have easily said no. The problem was mine. I got stuck in never-ending cycle of portfolio development with my friends.

The straw for me was after the holidays. People I considered friends had their first grand-baby delivered. I offered to shoot photos for them at the cost of the prints. What happened next confounded me. My wife and I meet them for drinks and the new grandma breaks out her iPhone and shows us twenty new photos of her new grand-baby watermarked by a local mall photography shop known for treating customers like cattle. I know she paid well over $150 dollars for the package and the photos were sub-par to what my personal standards are and my print package was only going to cost $45 and deliver twice the number of prints including a 16x20, which is twice as big as the biggest print they actually got.

After this I seriously looked at what I was doing wrong. I needed to know why I couldn't compete for a “friend’s” business against a cookie cutter shop known for poor customer service and where I provided 3x the value, not only in customer service, but also in tangible product. I did not have an answer and they stopped talking to us shortly after that so I never got the answer I needed.

I started by seriously questioning my work. My work quality was good. My pricing was on par for the region. I found no answers there.

I looked at my marketing. My marketing was obviously lacking. I couldn't afford to drop $800 a month for a newspaper ad. My online marketing was hitting the big two; Twitter and Facebook or as I like to call it; friends and friends of friends. But even when I had an article appear in the paper about my veteran owned business the only response I got to the article outside of congrats from friends was a creepy letter from a State Prison inmate, serving life asking for me to help publish his prison art. It was creepy because in the first paragraph he said, “What caught my attention first were your striking eyes.”  That had a stalker element that made me feel uncomfortable and then to find out he is serving a life sentence.

In the end it came down to I failed to market myself. Now I know that I can’t market myself out of a wet paper bag with a box cutter and a chainsaw.

Since wedding and portrait photography was not working out, I decided to follow my heart and passion and turn 100% of my focus on the fine art side of photography. I really wanted to get in touch with creating emotionally compelling pieces so I signed up for a workshop for photographers based loosely on the Artist Way. That decision was a blessing and a mistake for me personally. The blessing is that I made deep friendships that remain to this day. The mistake was that I jumped in with my whole being and the workshop did not deal with any of psychological issues that come up naturally as part of the Artists Way. The instructor had no intention of dealing with those issues during the 7 week workshop and I was not prepared for the emotional baggage that swept me into a cyclone of selfish loathing and self-destruction.  

Our money started running out and my family started to live only on my minuscule unemployment and my wife’s equally minuscule salary. Since I was drawing unemployment, I followed the rules. I applied for three jobs weekly. It took six months from when I was “laid off” to finally get a call to an interview for a job I really didn't want; I mean I am a photographer artist after all.

I interviewed, because unemployment rules said I had to. Two weeks later I get called and offered a different job with the same business. It was for less money; and by less I mean a 50% pay cut from what I made at my previous position. I can’t decline the job because I will lose my unemployment which would mean my family and I would be homeless in two months or less. I reluctantly accepted the position kicking and screaming the whole way. The deep depression began its dark onset.

Things spiraled completely out of control for the next six months. I announced my resignation from the board of my local photography club and agreed to hand over the position to another individual. I withdrew from any and all shooting opportunities. I stopped painting. I stopped drawing. I stopped everything but the one thing I should have stopped; blogging.

If you ever want to know who your true friends are, have a public emotional breakdown like I did. I made the mistake of blogging my breakdown. My blog was automatically published to Twitter, Facebook and eventually Google+. I was really trying to get a grip on myself and express the feelings I was experiencing, and begging for help because I lacked the tools to do it alone.

Those that are not true friends or are simply using you will scatter like cockroaches when the light turns on. I understand the scatter effect to some extent. The professionals I had relationships with were simply protecting their reputation and had a business first mindset. The “friends” I thought I had simply shielded themselves from my far-too-numerous-to-count moments of W.T.F.!

But when my best friend of 10 years, who was also the best man at my wedding, literally broke up with me via a Facebook message, claiming that he couldn't be a part of what I had become; well I was stunned. I felt judged by the one person who didn't normally judge. I got angry at that moment and I developed  a “Fuck You” chip on my shoulder for anyone who challenged me and that only made things worse. Friends began telling me I was selfish and uncaring and I eventually pulled away from them. This all fed into a destructive cycle that led me to rock bottom both creatively and emotionally.

I lost several business partnerships with people I at one time respected and trusted. I gave up my share of the studio I shared with other artist because I could not afford to rent a space, as beautiful as it was, when it made no money what-so-ever. I lost a business partner that I was developing a weekend long workshop with as he decided to take his ideas and my ideas and find someone else to execute them with after deciding that he didn't want to be associated with me. This particular relationship came to a head several months later in which he publicly declared I plagiarized him. It got ugly for a brief moment or two.

Then my wife quit her crappy job, with my support, because they treated their employees like shit. But that meant no unemployment for her because she quit. So her income vanished.

People stopped calling me altogether. Life became lonely. Life became quiet for a few months. Lonely was not a good feeling, as it rarely is. But quiet; quiet allowed me to heal. I kind of went off the grid for a few months as I worked things out and found a balance between this return to an office job I had to have to keep my family cared for and where my passion was. I started painting, drawing and creating again, quietly. In the fall, almost one year to the day that I was laid off, I rejoined and resumed my former role with the leadership team of my photography group.

Within a year of getting my new job, my wife and I were on the brink of complete financial ruin. I sold most of my photography studio equipment and that combined with help from a friend we were able to hold on until my wife was able to get a short termed position, which lasted a month. But once she was done with the job she got unemployment. Her unemployment lasted long enough for me to get enough promotions in two years to a position that had me back in a place to make enough to not completely sink month to month.

And while I remained busy working, creating, and helping to run the photography club I kept things quiet. During all of this quiet time I spent some time evaluating what happened. I had to know how I could go from living my dream to being an unraveled sweater lying on the floor exposing myself in the most uncomfortable and inappropriate ways. I needed to know how in six months I could go from my dream to be a photographer to being ready to walk away from it all and never look back.

Early on, it was easy to blame everything on something else. I would blame the economy on my business struggles. I would blame the community for lacking value in art. I would blame some people for betrayals, some people for taking advantage, some people for holding me back and even some people for abandoning me. I would blame my family for making things so difficult. I would blame everyone and everything for the failures happening except the one and only person responsible. 

In the end all of the struggles, hardships and failures were nobody’s fault but my own.

That realization hit me hard, but I accepted it.

First and foremost, I accepted that I was a failure and more importantly I was responsible for that failure. That acceptance is a lot harder than it sounds as I don’t usually fail. What I mean by “don’t usually fail” I mean:

·         I have applied for 39 jobs in my lifetime.

·         I have had 37 jobs in my lifetime. That is a 94.8% success rate in obtaining a job.

·         Of those 37 jobs I was fired from only 2, laid off from 2 (one voluntarily) and I quit the remaining 33.

      That is an 89.1% success rate in keeping a job for as long as I wanted it.

·         I taught myself computers enough to get an IT job two years after buying my first computer without any formal education.

·         I played my first live gig with a guitarist and two singers for a church audience of 15 two months after buying my first bass guitar.

·         My first painting since elementary school was a full wall Noah’s Ark mural on a 10’x13’ wall 25 years later.

Those are just some examples to help you understand what I mean with the statement of “I don’t usually fail”.  It has been my experience that if I set out to do something I succeed. I figure it out and I get it done: Usually.

Failure was and still is a hard pill for me to swallow. The human ego sucks. The ego is like a hemorrhoid; you don’t notice it much until it gets some pressure applied to it and failure is life’s jackhammer to the hemorrhoid known as ego.

I failed to understand my market as not only a wedding and portrait photographer, but also as fine art photographer.

I failed to realize that I am unable to say no to friends. Ask me to shoot a wedding, a portrait or whatever and I would have said yes. That isn’t so much the case any longer, but it was then. I am not a good businessman because I cannot separate business relationships from personal relationships.

I failed to protect my friends and my family from my vacuous spiral into negative void of my rampant despair.

 

I failed to hang on to the real reason I wanted to become a photographer; the love of art and creation. Instead I was becoming the guy who would not pick up his camera unless he was getting paid. I was refusing to make art unless there was going to be a paycheck involved. That was not who I was at my core, but I was well on my way to becoming that.

I failed to be thankful for the opportunities I was provided. I landed a nice job in a time when most jobs, let alone nice jobs, were not plentiful and I hated everything about that opportunity. I hated being in the corporate livestock trade again, so much so that I nearly walked away from my desk, several times, in the first few months without so much as a mention as to where I was going and whether I would return or not.

I failed.

Friends did not fail me.

I failed.

Customers did not fail me.

I failed.

The economy did not fail me.

I failed.

My family did not fail me.

There it is.

I failed.

It took me nearly a year to be able to say those words and know they were true.

I failed.

Today I am doing better. I am doing more. I give more. I create more. I am involved more.

Today I am better. I am a better man. I am a better husband. I am a better father. I am a better friend. I am a better employee. I am a better artist.

I still have my ups and downs today as everyone does. I can’t even measure today’s down cycles with the same measuring stick I would've used back then; I would have measured my down cycles by the mile back then. Today my down cycles are measured in millimeters in comparison to those days. Do you know how many millimeters are in a mile? 1609344.

It was a long painful road to go down. And while I gained much knowledge, wisdom and appreciation during that time, I also lost a lot. I lost friends, professional resources and passion. I have everyone around me to thank for the things I learned and only myself to blame for the loss I incurred. I am simply blessed that the loss wasn't considerably more, because it could have been more and worse.

Today I have balance in my life. I work to live, rather than the other way around and that is balanced with I live to create. Today I give so much more than I take and I am happier being that person because it is who I am at my core. It takes so little energy to give, in contrast to the enormous energy it takes to try and take.

Balance is found by being who you are and I am well on my way there.

I would like to thank my family and friends for all of their support, inspiration and compassion. It is because of them that I have had the support I need. It is because of them that I have found the balance I need. The last year has been amazing and the coming years are looking so very promising. I can’t thank each of you enough for everything you do, but I have to start somewhere… so I start here with a thank you to each of you.

My Wife
My Kids
Rick
Shawn
Liz
Nathan
Michael
April
Janeen
Chris
Steve
Holly
My Dog and Cat
and everyone else around me that give each and every day!

Luck - The Good and the Bad

Sunset on the Water

Seneca, a first-century Roman philosopher, once said luck is when preparation meets opportunity. That is a great explanation of good luck. Bad luck on the other hand is the cause of one of two things; the lack of opportunity or the lack of preparation. 


I take ownership of my own luck, at least as much as I can. If I am not prepared it is my own fault. That's right, my fault.


If I know there is something that I want to photograph, I make sure sure to do what I can to make myself available to do it. 


Sometimes luck means I have to abandon something else that I want to do, like stay at home and have a quiet evening with my wife. But each and every time, luck requires me to say yes to opportunity when it comes knocking. 


And opportunity knocked on my door yesterday. And I said yes.

Faded Brillance

My friend, and fellow photographer, Liz Smith, called me up yesterday and asked me if I heard about the possible Aurora Borealis happening. I said, "No". 


She asked if I would be interested in going out and shooting it. I said definitely. It has been a goal of mine to just see an Aurora Borealis since I was a kid and learned about them. One of the biggest challenges has been my luck.


See I have spent my entire living at or below the 45th parallel, that is halfway between the North Pole and the Equator, in Oregon. As luck would have it, the Aurora Borealis don't dip down to the 45th parallel very often. 


Another bit of luck is the fact that I live in the state of Oregon. If you are not from around here, there tends to be considerably more overcast days than not here in Oregon. That is not a complaint, but simply an observation supporting my story of luck. I don't complain about the weather like so many others I know. I love cloudy skies during the day because cloudless skies are boring for a photographer.

Starry Sunset

To be an aspiring astrophotographer living in a perpetually overcast state like Oregon usually can be, is sort of bad luck. Being an aspiring astrophotographer looking to photograph the Aurora Borealis and living beneath the 45th parallel is a double tap to the bad side of luck. 


So when opportunity presents itself, even if it is only a thirty percent chance, I jump on it. Thirty percent was the chance that the  Aurora Borealis would be visible at the 45th parallel.


The skies were clear; opportunity. The sun had sent a sizable, M-Class, coronal mass ejection (CME) right at us; opportunity. I made myself available; prepared. I tracked the coming solar storm online; prepared. But alas the Aurora dream would remain such, a dream. 

The Aurora Borealis never made an appearance at the 45th parallel because the CME was not strong enough; no opportunity.


But I didn't let that take away from the beautiful evening and great company of my wife and Liz. 


We even had a surprise encounter with another photographer friend, Nathan Smith and his wife and son, Heather and Noah.


All of us made the best of the Aurora Borealis show, sans the Aurora Borealis, and had a great time and captured some amazing images of sky, both during and after sunset.

In the end the Aurora Borealis never made the opportunity available. But I made some beautiful photographs and shared a beautiful evening with some wonderful friends and my wife. It was a lucky day after all.


Are you prepared? If not; Why not?

Artist Versus Analyst

Following the Rule of Thirds

Let me preface the following statement with: this is not a post about how great a photographer I am. My ego is in healthy check. Now that I have said that I can say: I am generally a pretty good photographer. 

As a photographer and teacher of photography I preach the rules of photography. I preach about composition; the rule of thirds and filling the frame. I preach about exposure and the histogram. I preach about subjects needing to be interesting. I preach about light and shadow and how to make them work.

I also practice these things, some times to a point of my Analyst squashing my Artist. My artist asks what-if questions and my Analyst doesn't like what-if scenarios. My Analyst knows that 1 + 1 = 2 and that is not to be challenged, ever.

The image above was an attempt by the Analyst to make a technically good photograph. I followed the rule of thirds. The horizon is not in the center plane of the photograph. I properly exposed the subject. I did everything right. Yet the image lacks pop and impact. This image would not be able to move a turd with bulldozer, let alone move someone emotionally. I might as well have photographed a black cat in a black room with the lens cap on. If I were to post this by itself, it would have likely received a few obligatory comments, if that, but it definitely would not have moved anyone.

Following my Artist

Then there is this photograph to the right. The photograph breaks several of the rules mentioned above. Lets start with the composition. The horizon is on the center plane of the photograph. The subject, the sun, is dead center in the image. Rule of Third/Fill the Frame rule is thrown out the window.

Now let's talk about exposure. In relation to the rest of the image, the lower right corner is under exposed. This leaves a dead spot in the image technically speaking.

Technically speaking, this image is a train wreck. But from an artistic standpoint, this image moves people in spite of the rules. This photograph evokes an emotional response that the first photograph could not. Why? Because I allowed the scene to move me before I tried to capture it. My Artist saw what was beautiful about the scene and captured it shutting down my Analyst

So when I posted my Artist's photograph on social media sites it received more comments and "likes" than most of my images usually get. As a matter of fact, I had five "favorites" from complete strangers, people I don't follow or don't follow me, within fifteen seconds of posting it.

What makes one photograph work and the other not? The first photograph was a true attempt at capturing the scene of a setting sun. It was shot with a Nikon D200 using the 200mm lens with careful consideration on exposure and composition. It was edited using Adobe's Lightroom with some dodge and burn and noise reduction. A professional photograph from professional equipment.

The second image was made using my cell phone and an HDR app that anyone can buy for $3.49 from the Android App Store of your choice. The photo was edited on my phone using Instagram. Both photos were taken by the same photographer; me. So why the huge disparity between the two? Is a camera phone that much better than a Nikon DSLR? I have said it many times, it's not the camera that makes an image it's the photographer. The failure of the first was a result of my Analyst being in control and the success of the second was the difference between my Analyst and my Artist.

Trusting my artist

Sand Patterns

I think I know what happened; how my Analyst got in control at the start. When I first got to the scene I was thinking, location, shot lists, exposures and composition. I set up, pointed the lens, fired a frame or two recomposed, refocused, fire again. Rinse and repeat. I didn't let the scene talk to me and let me know what it was showing me. My Analyst doesn't see such things. I was focused on getting the specific shots I wanted or thought I should get given the rules of photography. I was hell bent to get "The Shot" even if the scene wasn't really showing me "The Shot". My Artist was buried in the world of technicalities.

I finally put my camera aside, unhappy with the results. Took in the breath-taking scene for several minutes. I saw what was happening; I wasn't seeing the sunset through the sun. I shut down my Analyst and my Artist came rising to the surface. I grabbed my phone, opened the HDR app and fired off three frames. I stuck my phone back in my pocket as the HDR app was processing the three image series. I grabbed my camera and walked back to the campfire we had on the beach to warm up. 

I put my camera away and sat on a log by the fire. I grabbed my phone, saved the resulting photograph and shared it via Instagram. I didn't dink around with lots of post processing and cropping and tweaking. The photograph didn't need much of anything to make it pop. The photograph captured exactly what my Artist saw in the scene. The photograph captured exactly what the scene made me feel when I finally stopped, shut down my Analyst and took the scene in while my Artist came to the forefront.

I walked away from this experience re-finding the value of not getting lost in the technical aspect of the process. I know the technical aspects of photography, so I need to let go of the Analyst in me more often. I need to allow my Artist to do the job an artist does best. In the end, I know how to use the tools and I know the rules, so my Artist knows how to use the tools and knows the rules. More importantly my Artist knows when to break the rules. I need to trust that more moving forward because when I do, my Artist truly shines.


How about you? When do you struggle between your Analyst and your Artist. Who usually wins? How do you overcome your Analyst? Share in the comment below.

Be that something interesting

If you were given a camera would you know how to create with it? Could you be Adams or Leibovitz? What about a guitar; could you be Vaughn or Clapton? What about a pencil; could you be Da Vinci or Dali? What about a stone block; could you be Houser, Remington or DuBuffet? The answer is probably not. Why not? The answer to that is complicated, yet very simple. Let’s go for the complex answer first.

First, let’s ask “Why would you want to be like or create like someone else?” If every woman in the world looked like Jodie Foster or Milla Jovovich how boring would the world be. What if everybody could own a red Porsche; how boring would traffic on the road be? What if every photograph looked like Adams or Arias; would we have the unique works of Leibovitz’s John Lennon and Yoko Ono or Capa’s Omaha Beach? If Eddie Adams shot like or even shot the same subjects as Arias, would we have been exposed to “Murder of a Vietcong by Saigon Police Chief”? Most definitely not; I am sure.

If you’re not getting my point yet, let me put in terms of food, one of my favorite subject to work with and consume. What if all ice cream was chocolate? What if all cheeseburgers came without bacon (oh the humanity)? What if all vegetables tasted like cauliflower? Our dining life would be pretty plain; a little vanilla and lacking a certain zest and spice. It is the variety in our life that makes things interesting and keeps us coming back for more.

Art is the exact same thing. We do what we do and how we do it because of our need of variety. Stop trying to be someone you aren’t; someone you will never be. At least this is part of the reason.

While you can mimic your favorite artists’ styles, your own style should shine through otherwise there is nothing of you in your art. One of the worst comments I could ever receive is, “This image reminds me of Dorethea Lange” or “This short story reminds me of Stephen King”. Now, please don’t get me wrong, I am not in any way comparing myself to those two fantastic artists; my ego is completely in check. What I am saying is that my greatest fear is that I might be told that my work resembles them more than me. If that were to happen, then I would write myself off as a failure and walk away from that piece forever. I don’t want to mimic their work, even if I could.

Here’s a little secret about me. I am still an old school paper-bound-book buyer. In the age of digital, holding a smart phone or a digital book reader feels all too sterile for me. The smell of the ink burned into the pages and the tactile feel of the coarse paper should be part of the experience of reading the book. There you go…. a previously little known secret about me. One more is that I find it completely disrespectful to dog-ear the pages; nope not even magazines.

Oops. That was a tangent. There was purpose of talking about books. Before I buy a book, I read the reviews on the back and inside covers. I have a great deal of respect when other authors comment about how great the book of this particular author is or how it may have moved or inspired them. But a review that compares the book to another more popular book or one author to a more successful author, I put the book down and will never buy, read it or think about it again. If I want to read Stephen King, I will buy Stephen King. If I want to read Erma Bombeck I will buy Erma Bombeck.

I hold other art forms in the same regards. Movies, music, drawings, painting, sculpting, photography and poetry all have to be original and compelling. If I want to listen to Johnny Cash I am not going to buy vinyl from an artist that sounds like Johnny Cash. I will simply buy Johnny Cash. There is only one band that sounds like Metallica. There is only one voice like Fiona Apple. There is only one Mozart, one Etta James, one MC5. This is probably why I don’t watch, follow or even care about sports. I know that this drives many of my friends, particularly of the male persuasion, absolutely nuts. Sports are repetition. Sport is a huge bore for me because of the repetition. In golf, there is the tee off, the drive, the green. Rinse and repeat. In football there is the kick off, the drive, the touchdown or turnover. Rinse and repeat. Nascar, there is the start, the laps mixed in with an accident or two, then the finish. Rinse and repeat.

In the end, there is only one you. There may others that are like you, but you are unique. Make your voice/vision be heard and seen. Be original because that is what moves people and this is what should come naturally to you. Be yourself in your art simply because you are unique.

And the final reason I have that you can’t be like anyone else; you did not have the pleasure, or displeasure, of walking in their shoes. You had your own shoes and you walked your own miles in this life and therefore have had different experiences influence your development. I could get all scientific and say that when you experienced a certain pain or joy in your life, you experienced it differently at age nine than you would have at age 12 due to different active regions of brain and different tools for managing processing and reaction. But that is boring. So let me bring something a little more meaningful into this explanation, at least from my point of view.

There are two men in a fox hole.  Both are armed with the same military issued rifles and armors. Both are equipped with the same military training. Both are equipped with same strategic plan, to hold the hill. Why is it when the action reaches their doorstep they react differently? After an artillery round lands ten feet away one of the men may panic and flee or simply take cover and begin prayer while the other charges or begin screaming at the top of his lungs while firing wildly in hopes of getting lucky. Why don’t they react the same? It is because they are not the same. Their history has shaped who they are.  

Much in the same way, you are not Ansel Adams. He is a different person that you. He saw the world through a completely different set of synaptic responses than you did. In many cases he had many different experiences than you did. So even if you were standing by his side with your camera in hand snapping a shot of Half Dome, your images would have been completely different, even straight out of camera.

To be honest, I have seen much better photographs of Half Dome than Adams ever produced. But if those individuals had tried to be like Adams, their work would have never caught my attention. Their work would have simply been vanilla. Adams set the bar, I will not argue that. But our goal should never be to reach the bar; our goal needs to be to surpass it. Each and every one of us are capable of surpassing  that bar regardless of how high we feel it might be.

I don’t care if someone likes or dislikes my work. I care if they experience it. If my work looks like everything else they have seen, then they will bypass it. They will move on to something else, something new. Something interesting. So why not be that something interesting. Be you.

Genesis - The Importance of Light



Light is Good

 Genesis 1:3-4 says, “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness.”


The point of photography is light; Photo-Graphy = Light-Writing or Light-Drawing. So many people seem to have forgotten that basic yet important principle. So many people are focused on post processing, subject matter and composition and thanks to High ISO, Aperture, Shutter and Auto modes seem to be leaving light as an afterthought. Light is life. Don’t ever forget that.

We are human. As humans we are drawn to light, much like an insect. Light compels us. Light attracts us. Light draws us in. Light makes us say, “Awe…” So why is it that we tend to put Light behind the rule of thirds, the golden ratio, gorgeous subjects and noise vs. grain? I don’t know the answer to that question myself, it is more of a hypothetical question for you to answer for yourself. So let me ask it that way; why do you focus on Light last; as an afterthought?

The Bible starts with Genesis 1:1 by stating; “In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep….

So what was God’s second action of choice; second only to creating the heavens and the earth? Anyone? Anyone? I’ll give you a hint; it is the opening quote of this post.



Light is my subject

 That’s right, He said, “Let there be light: and there was light.” According to the bible, God created light before he separated the land from the water. Light was so important that God created light before the creation of the sky (heavens), vegetation, plants, seas and even before creating those little beings that would be meant to worship him; man and woman. Light was so important that God’s fourth action after creating light and separating it from darkness was to add more light in the heavens to shine through the darkness, that’s right stars. Light was more important to him than creating beings to worship him. Light; second only to the heavens and earth.

So as a Light Writer where should my priority be focused? Should my priority be on form? Should my priority be on composition? The bible closes the all of his creations with the words; “God saw that it was good.” Form and composition are good, but without light is void. And a void is empty. A void is dead. You can have the world’s most beautiful subject in front of your lens, but without light the subject is dead. We are not creating the heavens and the earth so light should be our first priority.

Light became my priority over a fluke of purchase I made. I have been blessed and cursed with a camera I purchased several years ago. It is a Canon Digital Rebel DSLR. I believe that it was one of Canon’s first DSLR models. I purchased this as a second body that I was going to convert to an IR camera. I paid $75 for it and Canon EF USM 50mm F/1.4 lens. I call this camera a blessing and a curse because it has been both in the time I have had it.



Light is not an afterthought

 The Curse: When I first purchased it I learned that the camera over exposes by nearly four stops natively and it doesn’t shoot raw. When I place the camera in Aperture or Shutter Priority, ISO 100, I get images of pure white, even indoors. I have tried everything short of sending to Canon to fix the camera. I was never too worried because my other DLSR body functioned fine and the Canon proved to be my low-light-go-to body. The catch was I always had to shoot in manual mode, even when the subject being shot was not the best subject for that mode. I missed hundreds of shots because of this camera. In the beginning, it was a curse.

The Blessing: In the last six months, I have started shooting more and more with this cursed camera. These days, this camera is the camera that goes with me everywhere. Over the last six months I have learned more about light and controlling light than I have with any other experience in my years of interest in photography. This camera has made me a better photographer because it made me learn more about light. It forced me to learn how light works and interacts with the sensor. This learning has spawned a new sense of understanding and interest in light.

I've got light, yes I do! I've got light! how bout you?

If there would be one project I would encourage you to try it would be this: Place your camera in manual mode for thirty days. On the first day, take as many photographs as it requires to get the light right. Keep that number in your head as the next thirty days go by. For the remaining days shoot at least 3 different scenes a day, shooting as many images as it takes to get the light right. On the last day of the project, count how many images it took to get the light right. Was it two or three? Was it half of the number from the first day? Less than half? Regardless, if you improve a little or a lot, improvement mean you have understanding. Understanding means control. Control in photography means results.

With the six months I have been shooting with my over-exposing canon, I can get the light right in 2 frames or less. That is; first adjustment, then first shot, then second adjustment if needed (and the second adjustment is needed less than 30% of the time) then second shot. It is almost second nature for me now. I am not always perfect; by I am definitely tenfold better than I was six months ago.

Where is light in your list of photographic priorities?

The Global Castration of Creativity – Part 2: What Kills Creativity:

My Original Sketch

What kills creativity? In two words; everyday life. That is my answer. The things we encounter every day, from the moment we are born to the day we die, interact with our creativity. From day one we are told what to like and what not to like. We are educated about what is acceptable and what isn’t acceptable. We are bombarded with ads about good things, bad things and all things in between. And while some of the things we are taught are good teachings, such as “Murder is bad”, many of the teaching, especially around creativity are horrible teachings based on personal biases of the teacher and strictly matters of personal opinion. Coloring outside the lines is bad. Making macaroni patterns in our dinner plate is bad. One of the first lessons a child is taught is that not following the rules is bad and following the rules is not bad, therefore good.


Parents have the ability to nurture creativity in their children, but so many parents do the exact opposite of that. Parents generally want their kids to live fulfilling and successful lives. But based on the programming they received, to do that you have to get good grades, go to college, get married, have kids, have a demanding career and blah, blah, blah, blah. There is such a stigma associated with creative people’s lives; they are poor, unfulfilled, starving artist that become alcoholic, drug-using-mentally unstable individuals. This is not always the case, but it seems that this is the perception.



Childhood

 Parents are preprogramming their kids with the notion that they only way to have a good life is to following those rules, their rules. Parents believe this because those rules worked for them. And they learned those rules from their parents, who learned from their parents and so on and so forth. For the few parents that do guide or sometimes even push their child for creative success, it ends more times than not with the parents pushing the creative talent to a competitive level. The sad part of the creative competitiveness is that it takes only one competitive failure to start building the fear that encompasses so many lives.

Why do you think there are so few “successful” writers? Sure, there is Stephen King, Sue Grafton, and the lady who wrote the Harry Potter series. But for each and every “successful” writer there are dozens of unpublished writers who have talent and have a story worth telling, but live in fear and therefore never get published. Fear of the rejection letter, fear of being told they suck, fear of being publically humiliated; fear.

Fear is a powerful and real emotion. But it is our reaction to fear that separates the men from the boys. It is our reaction to fear that sends us down a one of two paths; Fight or Flight or as I like to phrase it, Try or Fail.



“Well, I guess we can see that creative writing and drawing is
not for you.” - My Fourth Grade Teacher

 I hate labels and avoid them like the plague generally. “Successful”, “unsuccessful”, “failure”… these are labels that do not fit in a successful creative person’s vocabulary. There are only two ways to fail as a creative person; don’t try and don’t learn. If you don’t try, you aren’t going to learn from the attempt. If you try, but don’t learn from the experience, what was the point of trying?

But my definition of creative success and failure isn’t what we are taught. The education system is all about grading all forms of work; they are the judge, jury and most times the executioner. Yup, I just said it; Educators, not all, but for the most part are creative executioners. While their type of grading mentality may work on a fact based subjects like a social studies, mathematics and Spanish subjects, when judging a creative result, there should be no grading outside of try and learn or didn’t try; pass or fail. Creativity is strictly objective, based not on facts, but on style, taste and preference. But the education system feels that testing is the only solution for the entire system. Can the student draw a straight line? Pass or Fail? Is the subject of the student’s photograph interesting and well composed? Pass or fail? Is the student’s story compelling? Pass or fail? Was the student’s music beautiful? Pass or fail? These are all subjective. Composition that works well for one person, doesn’t suit another. A written story no matter how compelling isn’t guaranteed to satisfy anyone, let alone everyone. A classical pianist is not going to be everyone’s cup of tea. So who are we to judge what is good and what is bad.



Handpainted Mural for my niece by me and my wife

 This judgmental-educational method/mentality is programmed early on. Penmanship is one of the first school related learning situations that is based on creativity and interpretation. No two people write in print or in cursive the same way, but the school system teaches kids that there is a right way and wrong way to make each and every letter in the alphabet. So when a child experiments with writing the letter S in their homework, their creativity is judged, graded and a letter is assigned to the final result. A, B, C, D or it is an F? How do they judge someone’s creative expression, whether it is their penmanship or their finger paintings or their poetry or their portfolio? Who are they, other than the pompous arrogance produced by the educational system, to say pass or fail? If anything, the system is the failure.

Another tactic used by schools is the red pen for grading. Students are required to use blue or black ink or gray pencil (good ole reliable #2) on their assignments. When the graded paper is returned it comes back with red marks and scribbles all over it indicating where the failures happened. The red ink stands out, no, the red ink jumps off the page screaming “Failure!” Public schools, for the most part, and their teaching staff, again for most part, are the guillotine of creativity.

Finding "Sex" in Junior Mints - It's there

This continues through college for most kids. Professors place rules around school work. I once had a math teacher that started his class out with this phrase; “50% of your grade will be based on the punctuation, spelling and grammar of the papers you turn in.” I was utterly baffled. A math class where half of my grade was based on an aspect of school not even math related. I deduced rather quickly that if I were to get only 30% of the math problems right and get 100% on spelling and grammar then I could still pull a C. That means I don’t have to focus as hard on learning the math and focus more on grammar aspect of my math homework. That is too bad because I am going to need as much math as I can get to prepare for my Engineering Degree.

Entertainment is a great killer of creativity as well. Television shows, movies, music, the internet and even literature are true killers of creativity in not only adults, but our young as well. In the era of the www.this and www.that, people are becoming complacent with instant gratification. Look at the housing market collapse. People were buying house they couldn’t afford simply because they wanted it and wanted it now. If you want a song, you can download it. If you want learn something, you can browse for it. Your phone, most likely, allows you to get directions without asking directions.

Entertainment today is about technology and technology is reducing human connections to 140 characters or less. Creativity is based on human connections. Every word written in a book, every drop of paint added to canvas, every pixel captured in a photograph is there to connect to a person. But these days, it is not unusual for someone to send a lunch invite via email to someone sitting two feet away rather than actually turning and talking to them. People are not connecting with people any more. People are connecting with 0s and 1s. This is why I hate text messaging. While I have a texting plan on my phone, it is only because people in my life refuse to not text me. It drives me crazy, but what can I do… not respond? Hmm… I think I may have a new strategy.

The Joy of Fall

Now, I know that stating something like technology is killing creativity is a bold statement, but I am here to make that statement. Technology is killing creativity. Technology is deepening our need for instant gratification. Technology is deepening our dependence on it for entertainment. Creativity is not as important as the fun-factor is. How many video games been made in the last twenty years? Most of the video games are based on common themes and story arcs, yet they continue selling new version of the same crap year after year. In the last twenty years, how many new video games released have been sequels or even sequels of sequels? In an essence kids are being taught through entertainment that you don’t have to be original, you just have to be fun.

So why would a kid want to write short story for the simple purpose of being creative and expressing themselves when they can sit in front of the television and kill zombies all day. Why take the four hours to read the book when the movie only takes 90 minutes to watch. The kid wouldn’t write a short story because writing takes a long time to see results and killing zombies can happen in minutes. The kid wouldn’t read the book because they aren’t getting the visceral visuals and audio blasting at their senses. The movies and games don’t require the use of any imagination. And the downside to that is imagination is like a muscle. Exercise a muscle and it becomes strong, dependable and enables you to do more, but if you stop using the muscle it becomes flaccid, weak and eventually becomes useless. Please don’t’ get me wrong. I love entertainment and movies, video games and other forms of digital entertainment have their place in the world and definitely in my life, but considering the current consumption rates of these technologies, they are making people creatively impotent.

Parents are to blame for this. Parents are responsibly for teaching an important lesson in balance. But the lesson in balance usually falls behind in priority to convenience. Today, parents now have the simple task of keeping their kids entertained; by keeping the computer, console game or internet connections up lazy parents have a live-in babysitter. Never mind what that babysitter might be teaching their child, parents are free, thanks to the technology babysitter, to pursue anything that doesn’t involve being a parent.



Don't Kill Your T.V.

 In the end, the loss of creativity is the road to complacency, laziness and unfulfilled non-creative lives. It isn’t just kids either. Many adults these days don’t know how to be creative. They don’t know how to create. Why would they need to? If they want something, they can go buy it, and probably don’t even need to leave their house to do that.

I am not one of those bumper sticker types, but if I had one bumper sticker, it would say, “Unplug three days a week”. I am not a fanatic, like those “Kill Your Television” types, but I believe that there is a benefit to disconnecting several days a week. If you are unsure of what to do with the time unplug time try reading, hiking, talking with your family, meditating or volunteering. Better yet, take a pair of scissors and a folded piece of paper and make a snowflake and then share your snowflake with the world!

Read Part 1 Here
Coming soon... Part 3: The Birth of Courage