Author Study, The Creative Process

        Elizabeth Gilbert, author of Eat, Pray, Love, says in her TED presentation that creativity is not limited to a certain intellectual level, or a characteristic in a person, or a god-given creative mind. Rather, creativity is a “genius” that floats on the wind, visiting normal people, giving inspiration to make something really creative. According to her, it’s an outward force. The maddening that is sometimes associated with creative thinkers is simply the product of putting the emphasis on a singular person as the source of creativity rather than as a sort of conduit for creativity.

            While not a complete answer, I think that Gilbert is on to something, and she’s not alone. History is filled with muses, and inspiration from an external source. But, she’s not totally right, Jonah Lehrer, (2012) a sort of literary scientist, in Imagine says this about the mystery, “The sheer secrecy of creativity—the difficulty in understanding how it happens, even when it happens to us—means that we often associate breakthroughs with an external force.” (Introduction, 16) Lehrer goes on to say that he doesn’t agree with this premise but counters it with limited scientific research on the subject which says that creativity is the process of thought. In a similar vein, Dean Keith Simonton (2000) says that “evidence increasingly shows that to a certain extent, creativity demands a comparable level of systematic training.”

            I think that creativity is some combination of both the genius and the process. Some people are gifted naturally with the ability and drive to inhale all of life and it’s details. They absorb the world around them, whether that comes from nurture or nature, I don’t know.

            One of my favorite books is East of Eden by John Steinbeck. Born in the beautiful Salinas valley in California, Steinbeck “formed a deep appreciation of his environment.” (Shillinglaw) He also spent a lot of time working with migrant workers, developing a sensitivity and empathy towards the poor, the displaced, the people who were lower on the social scale of life. His experience, coupled with his early desire to write, made him the writer that he was, and informed the topics that he was going to write about.

            Creativity is for anyone, I believe. Anyone can write a meaningful piece of literature, but the problem is that no one can do it without  a lot of hard work, without training, even it’s self-training, and a deep observation of life. The main point is that there is no impenetrable boundary which prevents even the most doubtful person from being a writer. Creativity comes from work, and every once in a while, that muse that floats by, flows through you and onto paper.    

Works Consulted:

“Elizabeth Gilbert: Your elusive creative genius | Video on” TED: Ideas worth spreading. N.p., n.d. Web. 6 Sept. 2013. <

Lehrer, Jonah. Imagine: how creativity works. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2012. Print.

Shillinglaw, S. (n.d.). The Steinbeck Institute -About John Steinbeck. The Steinbeck Institute. Retrieved September 6, 2013, from

Simonton, D. K. (2000). Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects. American psychologist55(1), 151.


Writing Introduction

“Grammar [is] an indication of class and cultural background in the United States…there is a bias against people who do not use language ‘correctly’” – Linda Christensen, Reading, Writing, and Rising Up: Teaching About Social Justice and the Power of the Written Word

When I read this, I thought ‘yes,’ then ‘no, now I’m confused.’ As I discovered, after reading further, writing for the person who hasn’t been raised in the “language of power,” can be difficult because they stop and think about grammar. Their thoughts get stopped by the “grammar cop,” and their writing slows down, and becomes a laborious, dreadful thing. Always thinking about grammar and syntax and how to put words together as if it was a science project depletes and deflates the spirit and creativity of writing, or at least it can.

I grew up in a home that spoke the “language of power,” so my writing always was “acceptable” and academic. But, I hated writing, and struggled to get words on the page. Over the years my writing has improved, and I’ve gotten more confident in it, but even now I still doubt the veracity, or importance of my words. What has helped the most over the years hasn’t been grammar study (though it has helped), but rather the continuation of writing. Being in graduate school has forced me to write, then write some more. What used to be laborious isn’t as hard anymore, and based on the feedback from my professors, my writing has improved significantly.

As I finish up my studies at Arcadia, I understand more and more that writing is a tool for power and sharing your voice. For students of poverty, or students who are not of the dominant language group, writing can empower them, not only through raising awareness through their voice, but writing improves their overall literacy development. This development can’t be through learning how to write “correctly” first then write, but rather writing to improve writing. This is how it has been for me, and writing has become a tool for my voice, rather than a task to dread.

Why study English education? I think it’s because science is too boring (to me), and business is too meaningless (for me), history is too much (for me), but English is just right for me. Language means something, writing means something, and the importance of literacy has grown on me over the last couple of years.