Creativity is a constant buzzword found in job descriptions, government speeches, and is used to describe how our public institutions should work. In the book Against Creativity, Oli Mould tries to push past all the rhetoric of creativity to find out who is served by the creative juices that are supposed to be flowing.
Mould tackles four main areas in his look at creativity. First, who does creativity at work benefit? Second, how is creativity used to sell a specific view of success. The third and fifth chapters look at how governments push creativity and where do they assume any creative solution is something that will never work. The fourth chapter takes a look at how creativity in our technology is used, and where the benefits of that creativity go.
Capitalism and Creativity
A common theme throughout the book is how capitalism sells us creativity1 because we need to each have a unique selling proposition to even have a chance at work. Mould contends that the reality of this framing is more about getting people to work a bunch in their hours outside of traditional work to help feed the machine of capitalism. Work wants us to expand our skills on our own time, then reap the benefits of that skill gain without increasing pay or paying for the time spent to gain new skills.
Businesses use creativity to reduce budgets without a reduction in expectations for service levels, meaning you’re supposed to be “creative” to do everything with half the staff as before2. This means they want you to work extra hours without pay, while they reap the benefits of your creative work….which is really overwork.
Gig work sells us creativity in terms of a flexible schedule telling us that we can go for a run in the middle of the day, or go to a child’s Christmas concert because of the schedule we can set3. The reality of gig work for most is working far more hours for poverty wages so you still can go to your child’s Christmas concert because you have to work every possible job to barely afford the food on the table. This seems appealing to many because it’s set against standard work which assumes that the worker can devote all their time to work since there is a “nuclear” family around and one adult can devote themselves 100% to any work at home. It’s been decades since this was possible though which simply means many families have two adults working fulltime and then working a full second job at home to try and keep a house together.
Neither working option recognizes the humanity of the worker, either by excluding life outside of work, or making them work so many hours to get by with their temporary 0 hour contract that they don’t have the space to use any the freedom their schedule is supposed to afford them.
Government and Creativity
Governments use creativity to push austerity on its people4 as they sell off public assets, which were paid for by taxpayer dollars, to private companies because they’re more “creative” and should be able to run things better. Instead services are cut so private business can make a profit and then government is saddled with rebuilding public services, or dealing with the fallout from people that need help but can no longer find a place to be helped.
The most galling idea shown in the book was libraries renting out all desks to small businesses as some sort of co-working incubator so that no one from the public can come in and have a space to work quietly unless they have money5. This goes against the ethos that libraries were founded on, free information for all regardless of income. So instead of providing a quiet space for a kid to work that they can’t find at home, you’ve got a bunch of tech bros renting out public space where they’re trying to come up with the next big idea that will end up increasing disadvantages for everyone that’s not a tech bro.
A life run by algorithms instead of governments
Mould introduced me to the word algocracy6, which is the idea that our lives are far more controlled by the algorithms from technology companies than they are by the governments that are supposed to be in charge of populations. The ads we see are governed by algorithms from technology companies, as are many of the online interactions we partake in.
Does Facebook/Twitter/Google have more impact on your daily life or does the government of your country? When I really think about it I spend far more time with Google via YouTube governing what I see than interacting with the rules of my country that may modify my behaviour. With all the politics shit going on with Trump talking about invading my country (Canada) I watched a video or two talking about it, only to spend a month trying to tell the deific YouTube algorithm that I didn’t want to watch any more of that shit. It took a month of effort to dig myself out of a hole that YouTube was trying to push me towards.
So the question is, should we give corporations this immense power that can end up shaping the beliefs of entire populations, including our own?
Should You Read Against Creativity by Oli Mould?
Mould lays out a compelling case for how creativity is weaponized against us from how we’re served ads, to how our work steals time and resources from us in a quest to make us creative. The book is well written so yes if you’re interested in it I’d say it’s a good read.
- Purchase on Bookshop.org – support local bookstores
- Purchase on Amazon