Cover photo
Nollind Whachell
Lives in Vancouver, BC
504 followers|531,897 views


Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
Understanding the Universality of Creativity

I previously discovered the Academia ( website as a great source of papers for my research, so I frequently get email digests of papers from them that might interest me. Today was one such day with the very top paper listed as being one on creativity. Much to my pleasure, after beginning to read it, I found it to be quite a profound one, as it mirrors and validates a lot of my own research findings.

Eureka! The Myths of Creativity
The origins and manifestations of creativity are viewed from a complexity-based evolutionary perspective. The development of complexity, myths of creativity, and the nature of organization are discussed, as is the nature of creative insight.
Gianluca Bocchi, Eloisa Cianci, Alfonso Montuori & Raffaella Trigona (2014)

Rather than try to cover all of the amazing insights within the paper in detail, I thought it best just to cover how universal creativity is and how it works at different scales. While this is something I've mentioned before, the quotes from this paper provide a different perspective that really elevate it to a while new level of articulation, thus making it much easier to understand than my own words in the past.

That said though, let me try to encapsulate where this connected deeply with me. Last year around this time, I tried to feebly articulate creativity as a whole (note that intuition, not articulation, is my strong point). One key thing that I think I did articulate well though was how my research on creativity emerged, as initially I didn't even know what I was researching, I couldn't give it a name (which even mirrors how creativity works itself).

At first this pattern began to emerge, that revealed a process, and it mirrored my own development and evolution. Over time, my research evolved and leaped from the Web, Communities, Culture, Permaculture, Systems Thinking, Social Business, the Future of Work, Social Innovation, and finally to Creativity itself. Creativity finally did reveal itself when I questioned my research being focused on just the Future of Work because it went beyond this and involved playing, learning, and working integrated harmoniously as a whole. Thus it affected all of society, not just the work world.

The final realization was when I turned around and looked back at the patterns of my evolution over time and tried to see what connected them all. In the footsteps of time I saw creativity. And not only did I see it in myself individually but I saw it progress backwards even beyond me, societally and even universally. In effect, creativity is the building block of life (and the universe) itself (as the final quote below notes as well).

The Creative Process

Learning is to be considered not so much the “memorization” of an isolated object, as the “comprehension” of the network of relations in which that object is found.

Creativity is, in this view, an intrinsic characteristic of Being, as well as being, rather than a rare event or quality. At the human level creativity is likewise a basic characteristic of being human, and this is shown in the emerging understanding of everyday creativity, and more broadly as “everyday, everyone, everywhere” human capacity and possibility.

Creativity is seen as a networked, systemic, ecological, contextual, historical and relational process rather than an isolated, atomistic phenomenon.

This means looking at creativity as a process embedded in a network of relationships, influences, and interactions, an evolving process that involves continuous exchanges with one’s environment.

Creativity is paradoxical/cybernetic; paradoxical in the sense that characteristics of the creative person, process, product, and environment defy convention and involve the conjunction of qualities that are not commonly “thought together.”

For instance, terms such as order and disorder, rigor and imagination, hard work and play, idea generation and idea selection, times of introspection and solitude and times of interaction and exchange are typically viewed as static, either/or oppositions, whereas in the context of creativity they are in an ongoing cybernetic process of “navigation.”

Paradox is a recurring characteristic of creativity at all levels of granularity. It can be found in research on creative individuals, creative groups and organizations, and in the creative process.

The creative process involves both divergence and convergence, idea-generation and idea-selection, being open and being critical. The ability to entertain what on the surface appear to be opposing thoughts or concepts seems central to creative thinking. In fact, many creative insights and breakthroughs in the arts and sciences have been attributed to this ability, what Rothenberg (1979) called “Janusian thinking.” The term for this form of paradoxical thinking is taken from the image of the Greek God, Janus, with two faces looking in opposite directions. It is charac- terized by the capacity to entertain two opposite or contradictory ideas, holding each to be valid or true simultaneously. Creative individuals utilize this form of cognition that transcends ordinary logic, resulting in resolutions to complex problems that are novel and original. Such formulations are often creative because of this capacity for embracing opposites; two conditions that appear initially to be mutually exclusive or antithetical can be held in tension, often leading to a major breakthrough in insight.

A static logic of either/or is replaced by a fluid process of ongoing navigation between two terms that are normally framed as contradictory. Paradoxical characteristics therefore reflect a cybernetic relationship that involves a both/and logic, whereby the terms can alternate at different times, as with introversion/extroversion, rebelliousness/conservatism, or divergence/convergence.

The Creative Individual

Research shows creative individuals are both healthier and more unstable, experiencing periods of instability but also having the ego-strength to rally from setbacks, and in the process experiencing a wider range of human possibilities.

Identities develop in the course of history, they transform and, therefore, there is no such thing as a static and non-temporal identity: it is a highly dynamic and evolutionary concept.

An individual is never a rigid potential, but becomes what her interactions make her become, so it is very important to understand that the wealth of proper stimulations that we give an individual, both when she is young and an adult, will be decisive for the creativity of the individual.

The most creative individual is the one who can create networks, who knows how to interpret his own experiences in the light of many other points of view.

Likewise, if we consider our identity as open, it becomes an identity that has continuous exchanges with the world, continuous interaction, constantly being generated by an alternation of equilibrium and non-equilibrium, but it has to retain a degree of closure in order to keep its integrity.

Highly creative individuals have paradoxical qualities. For instance, they can be both energetic and quiet, smart and naïve, playful and disciplined, extroverted and introverted, rebellious, and conservative, and they escape rigid gender stereotyping. Most dramatically, perhaps, it has been suggested that they are both “crazier” and “saner,” scoring higher on measures of psychopathology but also on measures of mental health.

One example originates in the finding that creative individuals do not conform to stereotyped, polarized definition of gender roles. Creative individuals have access to a wider range of experience, and are limited to ways of being, thinking, and feeling associated with traditional gender roles. This characteristic was viewed as paradoxical because it goes against traditional gender roles and assumptions.

The Creative Organization

It is of great interest to me that our understanding of leadership is changing in much the same way that creativity is changing.

We should be very clear on this point. If human organizations, whether states or companies, want to learn something from natural creativity, then these two variables of diversity and time must be considered as critical and indispensable. So, one of the rules for setting up a creative group is not just to choose individuals who are very different, both internally and externally, but also to give them sufficient time to create multiple relationships, using different languages.

Research on creative groups in R&D has indicated that successful researchers are both more autonomous and more collaborative, engage in both basic and applied research, are focused but also avoid narrow specialization.

The former view was strictly “top-down”: the flash of inspiration came from God down to humankind; the composer was at the top of the organizational chart of the symphony orchestra; the artist’s work is transmitted to a passive audience. Creativity is not interactive here. The emphasis today is increasingly on breaking down the old hierarchical binaries of artist/audience, composer/performer, top/down, with creativity an emergent property of interactions, and more and more ways and being sought to increase “audience participation.”

Traditional organizations, as we have seen, were not designed for creativity.

The central difference between machine organizations and innovative organizations is that the latter view creativity as central to their mission and identity.

The Creative Society

And this is the real paradox of our society, which seeks economic and technological innovation by constantly accelerating the rhythm. To this purpose, it even tries to curtail diversity, unaware that such behavior may in fact lead to sterility.

To summarize, I would like to outline the characteristics of a world that we are leaving behind us, a world seen as a system that is static, closed, deterministic, hierarchic and even polarising or disjointing, as Morin (2008) described it. In the place of this closed world, we do not want to substitute one that is open rather than closed, but rather one where there is an interaction between open and closed. This world reveals itself creatively, evolving between periods of stasis and periods of sudden change.

The question is not whether to be creative, but what are we doing with our creativity, how are we using it, and how good are we at manifesting and expressing it?

The Creative Universe

In the emerging view, creativity is the fundamental nature of the universe, the process of creation itself, rather than the spark of an occasional (C/c)reator in a machine, clockwork universe.

Image from Creative by Nature

Nollind Whachell's profile photo
Updated to include a key connection point with my own research. 
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
Review of Liminal Thinking (10/10) by Dave Gray

I cheated! So instead of reading the book Liminal Thinking by +Dave Gray slowly, savouring it bit by bit. I basically sped through it. Part of the reason was the easy format though. It's basically replicates the structure of the Six Principles and Nine Practices listed upon his book site, thus expanding each as a chapter in the book.

Reading the book, I'd say 95% of it relates to my own research on creativity. It's why when reading certain chapters, I skimmed the pages quickly because I was fully aware of what he was talking about already. Even more so, it wasn't a shock or surprise to me, as it might be to some people reading these things for the first time (as even Dave himself noted it could be uncomfortable for some to read and perform the practices). Most interesting of all were the stories he relayed in each chapter as they gave substance to what he was trying to explain.

All said and done, where Dave's previous book The Connected Company mirrored a lot of my thoughts on the Future of Work, Liminal Thinking mirrors a lot of my thoughts on Creativity and how it relates to Social Innovation through the construction and deconstruction of beliefs. It is, without a doubt, a foundational book to help people understand the emerging complexity of the world we're living within today, yet at the same time shows us how by letting go of outdated and limiting beliefs, we can step into a brighter future with more abundant possibilities and potential for everyone.

Most important of all though, relating to my own journey and research, I noticed something remarkable when finishing the book. I noticed that each of the chapters, particularly the practice ones, were elements of the creative process I had discovered myself, which I have combined together into this universal narrative. For example, the creative process is comprised of three stages: connecting, empowering, and inspiring. The Connect stage begins with setting aside time and space, asking questions which lead you on a quest, and beginning a conversation with yourself. This was mirrored remarkably by the practice chapter entitled “Ask Questions, Make Connections” and the principle chapter “Create Safe Space”.

And that relates to another difference I noticed. I've said before that this universal creative process is fractal in nature and happens at different scales: individually, organizationally, and societally. So just as an individual connects with, empowers, and inspires themselves by questioning, conversing, trusting, believing, and even finally loving themselves, so too is this process replicated organizationally. So individually, it begins an intrapersonal relationship with oneself, whereas organizationally and societally it begins more interpersonal relationships. In the book though, certain chapters like “Ask Questions, Make Connections” only provided an example of this from an interpersonal perspective, yet asking questions about everything in your own life is just as important. Hopefully to most people though, this will seem obvious.

Finally, the cornerstone chapter for me from the entire book was the practice chapter entitled “Triangulate and Validate” (which I equate with the third stage of the creative process: Inspiring). What stood out for me from this chapter was the following quote from a story which pretty much encapsulates the nature of creativity in a nutshell.

“By laying these maps over each other, suddenly things started to click. Now he understood why they were having success in some places and meeting resistance in others. Everything started to make more sense.”

“The insights in this case came not from one map or another, but through overlaying them. This is the practice of triangulation. Each map represented one theory of the world, one version of reality. It was only by viewing the situation through multiple perspectives—multiple theories—that he was able to gain insight and see the situation differently.”

Seriously, these words are so poignant to my own story, research, and development, it's unbelievable reading them from someone else. You see creative people are often described as a “multitude” because they can grasp multiple seemingly opposing perspectives at the same time and hold them in a safe space that can contain them both. This is also why I've had difficulty in describing creativity itself in the past because to truly understand creativity, you need to look at it from multiple perspectives at once as well. Thus each of the three stages of the creative process can only be truly understood by collectively understanding the multiple layers comprising each stage.
Nollind Whachell's profile photoDave Gray's profile photo
Thank you Nollind! Yes, it's been very gratifying to see all the wonderful

Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
“Liminal places can range from borders and frontiers to no man's lands and disputed territories, to crossroads to perhaps airports or hotels, which people pass through but do not live in: arguably indeed all 'romantic travel enacts the three stages that characterize liminality: separation, marginalization, and reaggregation'.”
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
The Journey Between Worlds

Over the last couple of years, as I've shared my research on creativity with others and explained how I'm trying to synthesize it all into a book or website, I've had a couple of people say to me it seems like I have all the information I need now but I just need to “write it out”. In effect, “What’s the problem? Just write it. Do the hard work and finish it off.”

Trust me. If I was writing a book on something like web design, it would have been completed long ago. Writing about something “well known” in the world is fairly easy (i.e. I've done technical and document writing in past jobs) because you have an entire context of understanding that you can work off of without having to describe that foundation explicitly. Writing about something seemingly unknown to people though is a completely different story, particularly something as paradoxical and ethereal as creativity. I've likened it to going into the future, coming back, and trying to explain what you've seen there.

That said though, I most definitely feel like I have most of the information I need to complete it. But that's just it. The information isn't enough. It's like writing the pages of a novel randomly and having them all completed before you in the random order you created them. You obvious just can't hand off the book to someone in this condition because it would be completely confusing for them to read in this random state. It's just a bunch of disconnected, disordered information that won't make much sense without some sort of relationship between it to create a sense of structure and flow.

Narratives: Making Stories Mythological

This is something I learnt long ago while reading John Thackara's book In The Bubble when he described our capacity to process massive amounts of information within our minds.

“Although information overload is frequently discussed in the media—which help cause it—our dilemma is not that we receive too much information. We don't receive anywhere near the quantity of data it takes to overload our neurons; our minds are capable of processing and analyzing many gigabits of data per second—a lot more data than any of today's supercomputers can process and act on in real time. We feel flooded because we're getting information unfiltered, unsorted, and unframed. We lack ways to select what's important. The design task is to make information digestible, not to keep it out.”

To put it another way, the trick is to structure or package the information in such a way that it can become easily absorbed. One time honoured way of doing this is by containing the information within a narrative which mirrors the Liminal Thinking “make sense with stories” practice that +Dave Gray mentions upon his book website. I say time honoured because it's been done since time began as people have used mythological stories throughout the ages to embed truths and realities about life within them, something which Joseph Campbell realized as a monomyth (aka The Hero's Journey) while researching the world's mythologies throughout his life.

Therefore, just relaying the information isn't enough. Without some sort of structural relationship to thread it all together, the cohesive whole identity of what you're trying to articulate to others often won't get across. I've noticed the same thing when relaying my research on creativity to others. If I relay points about one area without providing a foundational context in another area, the information can often go completely over the head of the person receiving it. Thus they often just look at me like I'm a nut job and I'm spouting gibberish.

For example, if I begin talking about traveling and transitioning to a New World, leaving our Old World behind us (aka crossing a liminal threshold), I might come across as some New Age evangelist or Alien Conspiracy theorist. But just like how mythologies work, I'm not literally talking about traveling and transitioning to a New World physically but instead explaining how the creative process of rebuilding our worldview within our minds is metaphorically represented by this experience to make it more understandable and relatable to others. Thus without the right context to explain the next step of the process, the following contextual step after it won't make much sense to people either. It's all connected.

The Neverending Narrative

So having said the above, the key narrative I'm trying to tweak right now to relay the information, relationship, and identity of creativity as a whole cohesive system is this one of “traversing and transitioning between worlds”. In effect, I want to explain how this seemly “new” narrative, which we need to use to step into the future, is actually an old one that has allowed humans to step repeatedly from the past into the present since time began. To put it another way, we are all immigrants (regardless of what some politicians may have you believe). We have always been and we will always will be, stepping between the spaces on this planet and eventually stepping off this planet into space to literally explore new worlds in the future.

Image from the game No Man's Sky

Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
How does one relay their education, when life is your teacher?
View original post
Grizwald Grim's profile photo
With the story of how you came to learn
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
Just as multiple lenses within a telescope extend our vision in one way, so too do multiple perspectives extend our vision in another.
View original post
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
“Everyone seemed to think that someone else was responsible for creating change.”

Simply phenomenal article. Could easily be encapsulated as The Manifesto of Stupidity, The State of Conventional Business Today. Brings fond memories of reading The Cluetrain Manifesto years ago.

That said thought. I think it relays the importance of understanding emergence whereby systems often take on a life of their own and build an immune system to protect themselves. Thus often times, as Buckminister Fuller is quoted as say, we need to let go of fighting to change these old systems and just focus on building new ones elsewhere.

ht +Stowe Boyd 
How organisations enshrine collective stupidity and employees are rewarded for checking their brains at the office door
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
Liminal Thinking: Change vs Transitioning

Now having the time to slow down and begin to reflect on the book Liminal Thinking by +Dave Gray after having read it, I'm beginning to notice things that are standing out now from this more encompassing view of the book as I compare it more leisurely to my own research on creativity.

One thing that I reflected upon and realized almost immediately is the emphasis on change within the book, so much so that it is within the subtitle, “Create the Change You Want by Changing the Way You Think”. But I think it is critically important to realize that the book, while yes about change, is more about transitioning. While this is emphasized within the Foreward of the book by an extremely insightful quote by Richard Saul Wurman. It really isn't emphasized again until the end of the book within the Appendix where Dave emphasizes this using some quotes by Bjorn Thomassen (with the first quote sounding exactly like a definition of creativity itself, as it touches upon creative destruction and construction).

“Liminal thinking is a kind of psychological agility that enables you to successfully navigate these times of transition.”
— Richard Saul Wurman

“The word liminal means a state, stage, or period of transition.”

“Moments or periods of transition during which the normal limits to thought, self-understanding and behavior are relaxed, opening the way to novelty and imagination, construction and destruction.”
— Bjorn Thomassen

“Any ‘betwixt and between’ situation or object, any in-between place or moment, a state of suspense, a moment of freedom between two structured world-views or institutional arrangements. It relates to change in a single personality as well as social change and transition in large-scale settings...[ it] opens the door to a world of contingency where events and meanings—indeed ‘reality itself’—can be moulded and carried in different directions.”
— Bjorn Thomassen

So again, while the two are most definitely related and entwined, what exactly does differentiate transitioning from change then? Basically transitioning is the process of “coming to terms” with change.

The best way to explain this in more detail is to let William Bridges, an expert on transitioning, explain it himself below. In an excerpt from his paper below, he starts off by explaining how most companies are completely oblivious to the importance of transitioning when undertaking change initiatives, thus they often get broadsided with problems in the liminal midst of this change.

This is why I think understanding the Six Principles and Nine Principles isn't enough without fully realizing that they overlap and create an entire narrative process themselves as a whole integrated system (i.e. Triangulate & Validate, Make Sense With Stories). Therefore while creating a safe space is essential, even more essential is giving yourself time for the transition, as part of it is like a grieving process, a letting go of the Old World and your old sense of Self within it. For example, I've been undergoing my transition for more than a decade and while I feel like I'm nearing my point of rebirth, it is still hampered by certain old conventional "governing" beliefs which I know are impeding my journey.

One last thing very important thing to note here though. As we "evolve", we begin to learn to move beyond just coping and coming to terms with change and begin to seek to embrace and create it instead. This is really the heart of what Liminal Thinking, as well Creativity, is all about. Eventually, individuals who reach the highest stages of human evolution (see Action Logics) become avatars of creativity and change itself, fluid and dynamic in their actions and limitless possibilities.

Getting Them Through The Wilderness
A Leader's Guide to Transition by William Bridges

The executive’s problem was not that he should have done more, but that he had made a basic mistake that has become increasingly costly in today’s constantly changing environment: he had planned the organization’s changes carefully and forgotten to deal with the people’s transitions. When I said that, he objected, “But we have a transition team.” Like most leaders, he confused “transition” with “change”—assuming that transition just meant gradual, extended, or unfinished change.

But transition is very different from change. Change is situational: the reduction in the work force, the shift in the strategy, and the switch in reporting relationships are all “changes.” Transition, on the other hand, is a three-phase psychological reorientation process that people go through when they are coming to terms with change. It begins with an ending—with people letting go of their old reality and their old identity. Unless people can make a real ending, they will be unable to make a successful beginning.

After the ending, people go into the second phase of transition, the neutral zone. This is a no-man’s land where people are (in Matthew Arnold’s graphic image) “Wandering between two worlds, one dead,/The other powerless to be born.” The neutral zone is a time and a state of being in which the old behaviors and attitudes die out, and people go dormant for a while as they prepare to move out in a new direction. It is a dangerous time for organizations, but it is also a time when innovations and experiments have an especially good chance of succeeding.

Only after going through each of these first two phases of transition can people deal successfully with the third phase: beginning over again, with new energy, a new sense of purpose, a new outlook, and a new image of themselves. And that is where the executive at NewTech missed the boat. He tried to get people to make a new beginning without seeing to it that they went through the other two phases of transition first.

Image via

Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
“Our periods of disintegration can serve as opportunities for both creative and personal growth.”

Creative people embrace complexity to creatively clarify and express themselves. Through a process of disintegration and reintegration, they are able to let go of the past and become more of who they are meant to be, their potential. A metaphor for this, that I've described before, is standing in the middle of a maelstrom or tornado. Around you is chaos, yet from that chaos emerges a clear and calm order at its heart. This symbolizes the many becoming one.
View original post
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
Bridging Creativity & Liminal Thinking

Prior to beginning to read Liminal Thinking by +Dave Gray , I decided to do a search on creativity and liminality to see if I could find a correlation between the two, as having read through Dave's website on his new book the other day there seemed me to be at initial glance a remarkable similarity between the two based upon my own research on creativity over the years.

Doing a quick search on Google today, a couple of the top hits for "creativity liminality" were the following, including some notable quotes from each that leaped out at me. The key thing I'm seeing here is that creativity and liminality are most definitely, deeply entwined. The best way I could describe it is using my own metaphors for the creative process.

It is a transformational process of moving from an old world to a new world by transitioning through a limbo world. The process doesn't just entail moving between these worlds (aka world views), where this limbo threshold liminal state resides but also the stages of leaving the old world and arriving in the new world (so all together a three stage creative process which I call Connect, Empower, and Inspire). Even more so, it's essential to realize the process isn't exactly sequential or linear in nature, as one often has to have one foot in each world, thus bridging them, to make the journey.

The Crises of Creativity: Liminality and The Creative Grown-Up

“The psychoanalyst Winnicott, for example, describes creativity as “returning to infant experience”, in that it offers a space where a person may (re)make their world.”

“In contemporary, Western culture, where once creativity may have been an integral part of everyday life and something in which all members of the community might participate, creativity has become increasingly removed from the commonplace and elevated into specialised, professional activity.”

“We suggest that the notion of a threshold, or liminal, experience may be a useful way of framing and explaining the commonalities between the creative process and the experience of crisis.”

He identified that ritual subjects are detached from their place in society and then, after a ‘threshold’ experience, they undergo re-integration which may involve a shift in social status or function.

“In many ways the liminal space can be seen as a metaphor for crisis.”

“Liminal space can, at the same time, be seen as a metaphor for the creative process.”

“In recognition of the potential danger of the liminal space, Schechner notes that careful framing is required in order to facilitate both movement into and out of it as well as holding an individual whilst they are within it.”

“Thus it is important to recognise that creativity is risky as well as rewarding and, in inviting people to enter into the liminal space of creativity, it is important to assure safety through holding structures.”

“People often arrive at creativity during crisis and perhaps use creativity as a means of reinvention, for exploration, for regaining direction and for transformation – in order to lead them to reintegration of some kind.”

“So what we are expecting when we ask people to be creative in the workplace is that they cross the threshold and enter liminal space, experience those states, time and time again.”

“Perhaps the starting point has to be awareness – a more deliberate use of liminal space and the crossing of thresholds in the hope that the individual can be empowered in the long term.”

“Perhaps we also have to think about the experience of reintegration once the individual has been through the transformative space, more specifically, what are the consequences? Positive reintegration might include acceptance and approval of the individual and their ideas from family, peers, friends, colleagues and a sense that the transformation was worthwhile and reaped benefits of some kind? A negative reintegration or even failure to reintegrate at all might stem from rejection or failure of those benefits to materialise.”

Creativity as Threshold: Learning and Teaching in a Liminal Space

“Creativity as threshold concept.”

“Threshold disposition – implies a perspective shift that changes world-view.”

“Before one can move to a new level of understanding the confidence and ability to make a leap of faith into a new zone of learning needs to be achieved.”

“Learners enter a liminal cognitive space of unknowing in order to pass through the threshold of ‘knowing’.”

“Liminal space - characteristic of creative thinking and creative activity, reflects the creative process.”

“Disequilibrium and uncertainty of the liminal space is an essential element of creative activity and transformation.”

“The stuck place - combination of uncertainty, possibility and constraint that characterises creative practice.”

“Emergence into ongoing liminality.”

“Reflected in the creative process itself, where the risk of embarking on an original idea, design or action is likely to provoke discomfort and insecurity during the transformation of existing ideas, understandings and products into new representations.”

“self as an endless becoming, ‘being’ as both creative and liminal: creative disposition as ‘becoming’.”

“life involves traversing, contesting and re-defining thresholds.”

“definition of creativity could be the ability to be imaginative and productive in this dynamic state.”

Image by yv

Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
At the heart of every question lies a quest.
View original post
Add a comment...

Nollind Whachell

Shared publicly  - 
The revolution isn't out on the streets rebelling against others and the existing system. The revolution is within you, rebelling against your societal conceived self and creating a new system of playing and learning that works for you.

Create your world the way you want to live it for yourself.

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
—Buckminster Fuller

“The first step — especially for young people with energy and drive and talent, but not money — the first step to controlling your world is to control your culture. To model and demonstrate the kind of world you demand to live in. To write the books. Make the music. Shoot the films. Paint the art.”
—Chuck Palahniuk

ht +John Hagel

2 comments on original post
Add a comment...
Collections Nollind is following
Map of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has livedMap of the places this user has lived
Vancouver, BC
Researching Creativity, Social Innovation, & The Future of Work
Basic Information
December 13