And another thing: more on social creativity

Miguel, Andy & Jack all come back with some good spins on the social nature of creativity.

In the spirit of improv let me start with a few "yes, and..."s

Miguel: I actually agree that "catalysts" are critically important. Your description of these catalysts reminds me of those that ran 18th century literary & artistic salons. Or the people that throw poetry slams here in Sydney without being poets themselves. In fact, catalyst is role I often find myself in as a knowledge manager - as I pointed out in this comments response to Annette.

There are also authors, contributors, commentators and just plain consumers. And they do play different roles. However it's also important to note that those occupying these roles don't stay the same. As Jack noted a couple of months ago we tend to shift between roles depending on the specifics of the situation. Some people are happier being catalysts as opposed to authors, etc but we are dynamic - aren't we?

Jack: "we shift back and forth between solo work and collaborative work" - we do indeed. And also depends on the nature of the work itself which brings me to...

Andy: Like Andy, I indulge in creative writing - and that can be a deeply private activity. And I listen to others perform & I also read their work (reading is a paradoxically private and social activity). As Linda Hartley notes in your comments, there are different kinds of creative acts. However"artistic" creative acts may be social (acting or music being 2 examples) as well as individual. Theatre writers often engage in a complex mix of solitary writing, discussions with directors & workshopping with actors to end up with a finished script for a play.

I do not want to proclaim the death of the author in the manner of Barthes or Foucualt. But I want us to understand these ecologies better...