A couple of months ago, I decided to start scheduling dinners with people in the creative industry.
The concept behind these dinners is to define our professional “negative space.” We do this by speaking frankly about what we struggle with and what we feel we need to improve as creative people.
For me, being honest about my shortcomings helps focus my thinking on my actual skill set. It also keeps me open to new suggestions and, ultimately, to improvement.
At the second dinner, I tried to be less of a moderator and more of an attendee. I wanted to see where the conversation would drift.
In attendance were:
- Michael Calleia
- Celeste Giampetro
- Yaron Schoen
We spoke about the value of a well-written creative brief, the need for a clearer distinction between design and creative direction, and the value of sometimes saying, “I disagree,” when an idea or concept is unclear.
Somewhere in there, we also made time to laugh about the new Gap logo and the overused ribbon technique showing up on so many “cutting-edge” websites.
It was a frank discussion. Debates happened. On the whole, most people who attended seemed to find it refreshing, honest, and fun.
But I do not recall anyone describing the dinner as constructive or helpful. For me, that is the only reason I want to continue holding these dinners: to grow professionally and, possibly, to help others grow too.
The third creative dinner was smaller, but a bit more organized. This time, I was joined by:
I made a conscious effort to explain why I thought these dinners were important and why they should always have a moderator.
The first thing I did was talk about my own struggles with writing. I enjoy editing other writers’ work, but I have many insecurities around writing my own stories, blog posts, and essays.
From there, the conversation opened up.
We discussed the practice of writing and spoke frankly about how hard it can be to define specifics of any kind. We talked about how day-to-day boundaries in project management can be elusive and draining.
Boundaries and communication seemed to be at the heart of this dinner.
Everyone at the table felt that in-person communication is essential to creative engagement. Skype and other IP-based communication tools can be useful, but they work best for highly structured projects and teams with seasoned meeting and project management habits.
We seemed to be touching on something the other two dinners had touched as well: when strategy, vision, and communication lack clarity, creative play begins to disappear.
The freedom to explore the dark corners of a concept in search of originality depends on clear boundaries. Childlike exploration requires spontaneity, humor, and a shared understanding of the rules.
In our early lives, we had bars around our playpens, walls around our sandboxes, and fences around our schoolyards. We knew where we could go and where we could not. Much of our play came from finding ways to test, challenge, and reinterpret those boundaries.
That same dynamic appears in creative work. Project stakeholders and clients often want us to challenge assumptions and question authority, even when they do not know how to ask for that directly.
As creatives of any kind, including designers, writers, strategists, and coders, articulating the unclear is why we are in business.
Thanks to Tarah, Celeste, and Yi Shun for input and guidance on this very post.