I started this essay considering the many different processes which I enjoy and admire, mainly to do with turning wood and different methods involving ceramics. All of them in agreement with Narinder Sagoo who is quoted in Will Jones’ book Architect’s Sketchbooks (2011) as saying “the process is often more fascinating than the end result.” I was stuck between all of these methods to decide which one to choose but then I had the slightly absurd idea of doing a non-physical process. I wanted to look at designer’s sketches and the spark of an idea. What I decided to do was look at part of the creative process, each part of which Jones (2011) describes as “one step in a long journey that began with a few lines in a notebook, and ends, potentially, with a structure of landscape-changing proportions.”

I have always admired the creative process, wondering what goes through people’s minds when they first get an idea in their head, when it starts to grow and blossom and sprout off into all kinds of different directions. It is a process which is used by everyone. I know, for myself, that my ideas start to run away with me and I find it hard to keep the magnitude of everything that’s trying to get out in an organised staccato. With this in mind I thought that this would be really interesting to explore the creative processes which others use, focussing especially on the initial spark and physical environment in which the idea is nestled to grow. My essay will therefore focus on what I regard as being the two core components to the creative process: psychology and physical context of the process.

I started off my research by informally talking to friends and family about what they thought the creative process was. This helped me to get to set in stone how I would approach this essay. I then contacted a lot of established designers (many of which didn’t even reply, a few who were on tight deadlines and a couple who thankfully could spend a little time answering some questions) at the same time I also did research in to the psychological aspect of the creative process and physical environments. In this sense I combined my primary and secondary research in a fluent way, one supporting the other. Once I had gathered my broader research I began drafting this essay and supplementing it with more focussed research. What I have ended up with is an essay which will explore the creative process taking into consideration the workspace and psychology associated with it.

Any process starts with creativity. For Gilkey (2008) there are four distinct parts to the creative process: “Preparation, Incubation, Illumination, Implementation.” I agree to the extent that the process should not be confused with creativity, which is always present. However, I believe that by categorising it a lot of freedom is taken out of the process. The creative process draws on creativity and uses it to solve a problem (Schultz 2003). Schultz (2003) describes the process as follows: “A popular misconception is that creativity happens in a flash of inspiration; just the opposite is true. It’s a way of thinking and approaching a problem. True creativity and originality is a time-consuming process. Imagination, a sense of curiosity, and analytical skills all play an integral part in it.” Again I only partially agree, because even though it describes the process as a more continuous medium I do not think that the original flash of inspiration should be disregarded as it is an integral part of the process. In addition to this I believe that  there are some people who do have to work very hard to achieve creative outcomes but others do not.

However, at the same time I agree with Gilkey (2008) who bemoans the fact that “people assume and reinforce the idea that some have creative potential and others don’t.” It is true that everyone has creative potential but he goes on to insinuate that everyone’s creative potential is the same only their intelligence different. I believe that the opposite is true and a pitfall in his argument. He states that “some really intelligent people are not very creative, and some creative people aren’t all that intelligent” (Gilkey2008). However, I believe that our creative potential determines our intelligence even if there are different types of creativity, such as scientific, artistic, managerial etc.

Intelligence is very organic; it’s the ability to understand something and to interpret it in a suitable way, however, this intelligence can grow with experience, for example. Creativity in contrast is a very fixed capacity which we are born with. We can develop our intelligence and therefore optimise the way we utilize our inherent pool of creativity but we cannot increase our creativity. As mentioned previously, the creative process comes into this where intelligence and creativity meet and are focused on solving a problem. The more creative and therefore intelligent a designer is, the more likely he is to be successful.

One of the most prolific designers of recent years, Jaime Hayon, “describes his own methodology as “adaptive and potentially organic”” (Monument 2007). A statement which is easily believed when one looks at his sketchbooks (see Images sketch 1 – sketch 7) and considers he comes from a background dominated by the skateboarding culture. The latter is an environment which is constantly changing as more forbidden public areas are often more attractive to skate than skateparks, a rebelliousness which is captured in his sketchbooks and designs. I think this notion is very well captured in Friedman’s (2007) comment that “Your workplace and the atmosphere surrounding you determine the way you work and explore your imagination. The more inspirational your workplace is, the easier it is to break the creativity block and discover new ideas.” However, it depends on the individual as to what is inspirational to them and therefore workspaces can vary greatly.

The initial spark of “inspiration comes from anywhere and everywhere” (Hainsworth 2010). His book strongly agrees with this initial notion as would Michael Hurley and Alison Lee who I contacted for my primary research in this essay. Alison Lee stated: “I also make a lot of collages in my sketchbooks for which I collect lots of different materials such as magazines, maps, texture, scraps of wood, anything that interests me” (Appendix p.1). She said that she is particularly “interested in architectural and industrial details, collages, archaeology and landscapes” (Appendix p.1). Whereas Michael Hurley began with a more business approach saying that there is always “some kind of client involved even if it is something for an exhibition, so initial approach would be to talk it through with the client” (appendix p.2). However, he also commented that he “often find[s] inspiration by looking at the task.  Sometimes I find a relationship between the project and an existing personal interest, I find this particularly rewarding as I feel the outcomes can seem very me somehow” (appendix p.2).

Whereas there are many different influences mentioned, what remains the same is the personal note which the designer includes in the creative process. This is why the creative process is such a broad term and everyone can interpret it for themselves. This is reflected in their studio space: The place where the magic happens. The way it looks can be a direct reflection of the way you work but also the complete opposite, a very personal place which is almost an extension of your personality and the way you view your work. As can be seen in the photos by Lifehacker there are two distinct types of creative workspaces (there are also ofcourse various shades in between). Those which are bare and tidy (see Steve Jobs and 37 Signals) or those which are an explosion of stuff (see Al Gore and Tina Fey).

Alison Lee represents the former group as she seems to have everything sorted: “At the moment I am in a shared studio, there is good light and I have my own area to work in. I have a wall space to display my work and lots of shelves to keep work which is drying.  [….] Around me I always have my materials, tools, a radio and reference material such as sketchbooks and photographs” (appendix p.1).  Michael Hurley seems to be the opposite in that his “private workspace has recently taken a turn for the worse inasmuch as I gave up my studio in February, I have a very small lathe which has made itself indispensible” (appendix p.2). Although so very different what all ideas need is a little space and creativity to feed them, the creative process can become both a physical or mental structure for support. So I asked myself, if there are so many different ways of being creative, is it best to explore and develop one or to build up a broad portfolio of processes. Here, finally, I found that my two correspondences began to correlate.

Alison Lee believed that “both is probably true.  At the moment I tend to do the former.  In doing this you learn how the clay responds and what it can and can’t do.  Also people come to recognise and know you for what you do. That said, to develop and evolve your work […] you need other skills and techniques at hand. Otherwise your work can become static” (appendix p.1). This idea of the continuous is something I pointed out before and would like to bring to the foreground again. She also mentioned that she believed that “Your work continually evolves and develops as you try new things such as a new glaze or surface.  I refer back to my sketchbooks and to previous tests and work that I have made” (Appendix p.1). This goes back to the point made earlier about continuous learning improving your experience and thereby increasing your intelligence. Michael Hurley says the same thing but in a slightly different way: “I think I probably have one main way of working but this allows for differing outcomes, so that I treat each project in a way that is suitable to it, I try to avoid what Alan Fletcher refered to as a vending machine approach, where you know what you are going to get before it is designed” (appendix p.2).

So what is the creative process? It is one which can be performed by anyone, but with differing degrees of success as it depends on their intelligence and creativity and how much they can draw on these. The process itself never begins but is initiated by a problem. Ideas are used to solve these problems and these ideas grow out of inspiration, creativity and research. When producing the outcome of this process the workspace can be as different as night is to day but it will always be the home to the three previously mentioned idea producing components.

However, the creative process is used daily and is not just something for designers. From opening a can of plum tomatoes to unlocking the door to solving a complex maths equation all need a creative process and the preferred personal workspace optimises this. The creative process is everything and nothing all at the same time.