Live data from Hacker News

Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

shwin.co

11–20 of 372 posts

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#11
"a flash of inspiration connecting internalized concepts"

Well, okay, but rote memorization is neither necessary nor sufficient to internalize concepts.

One of the reasons people make fun of the author's approach to creativity is that systematic memorization fundamentally can't teach taste—so the systematic approach reeks of awkward, try-hard, low-brow, tasteless art.

More broadly, memorization doesn't help much with any sort of tacit knowledge, not just taste. I just figure taste is especially important in creative endeavors. That's definitely the case for programming! Memorization in programming gives us architecture astronauts and design-pattern soup rather than elegant code.

For what it's worth, I do think that it is useful and important to have a good mental model of what expertise is and how you can develop it. Memorization might be a component of this, but it's going to be a small component at most. I expect that realistic practice with fast feedback and expert mentorship matters far more. (If you're curious, I found the book Sources of Power by Gary Klein gave me a good way to think about how expertise works.)

At the same time, memorization has a real cost: it takes time and it's frightfully dull. For me, at least, trying to memorize something without context is not just ineffective but also totally kills any intrinsic motivation I have for whatever I'm learning. Sometimes a bit of memorization is unavoidable, but I've found that to be relatively rare. Otherwise, my time is generally better spent on some sort of practice in context.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#12
I disagree with elements of this article, but enjoyed reading it. True creatives do not subvert norms consciously or with an acute awareness as part of this article suggests, I agree they need to be exposed to the norms to generate their own interpretation, but I don’t believe that true creativity is a conscious exercise.

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#14
You have to know things to be reasonably creative but there is a point where memorizing more stifles creativity. Memorization is often very passive and is fundamentally different from searching for new ways of doing things. It's hard to make sweeping statements like this because there are different modes of memory and different modes of creativity.

There is a lot of memory involved in being creative, but I think setting out to memorize things is a bad way to be creative. You have to practice being creative. In doing so, you will naturally remember a lot of stuff like what works, what doesn't, and most importantly which types of things you ought to memorize. For example if you're programming you will find it useful to remember the syntax of your languages. If you're writing you'll find it useful to remember styles and vocabulary. And so on...

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#15
post #11

"a flash of inspiration connecting internalized concepts" Well, okay, but rote memorization is neither necessary nor sufficient to internalize concepts. One of the reasons people make fun of the author's approach to creativity is that systematic memorization fundamentally can't teach taste —so the systematic approach reeks of awkward, try-hard, low-brow, tasteless art. More broadly, memorization doesn't help much wit…

Thanks for reading and the response!

One of the points I'm trying to make is that taste and elegance fundamentally stem from an internalized heuristic -- which at it's core is memorization.

I understand the connotation of "memorization" evokes an image of blindly memorizing without connecting, but isn't the tastefully developed expertise just memorization of a better heuristic?

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#16

I disagree with elements of this article, but enjoyed reading it. True creatives do not subvert norms consciously or with an acute awareness as part of this article suggests, I agree they need to be exposed to the norms to generate their own interpretation, but I don’t believe that true creativity is a conscious exercise.

Completely agree -- but isn't internalization of their art (i.e. memorization) needed to achieve this subconscious creativity?

That's the point I'm trying to make at least -- that unintentional creativity stems from learning, which at it's core is memorization

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#17
post #11

"a flash of inspiration connecting internalized concepts" Well, okay, but rote memorization is neither necessary nor sufficient to internalize concepts. One of the reasons people make fun of the author's approach to creativity is that systematic memorization fundamentally can't teach taste —so the systematic approach reeks of awkward, try-hard, low-brow, tasteless art. More broadly, memorization doesn't help much wit…

Interesting perspective. I do agree that there are people out there who develop a distinct "taste", but I can't tell if this refers to a "style", an emergent property of multiple "habits", etc? I've always wondered how one develops their "taste".

Also, would you consider a subconscious habit "memory"? What's the difference between the two?

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#18
post #13

It’s not memorizing, it’s actually knowing and understanding the utility of different concepts. When you learn of a problem in a new field, you go through your bucket of tools and modify one to fit the new problem.

Exactly. And "synthesis" is the better word than "creativity". I wrote an essay about this very topic some years ago: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tbMTpkPWkkN8_KH2KSpteFsb.... (if you can't open Google docs, an older draft is here: https://rogerwagner.com/creativity.html)

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#19
post #10

I think memorization gets a bad rep because you need to be acutely aware of what you're memorizing, like memorizing the sequence of an answer sheet instead of core concepts. But when done sufficiently rigorously, the foundations of memorization make room for higher-level critical thinking and reasoning. Practice is an oft suggested solution to developing mastery, but I did like how the article framed it: creating sub…

Couldn't have said it better, exactly -- the negative connotations of the word prevent us from recognizing what powers learning at its core

But imo acknowledging this unlocks greater speeds and gets us to the "fun part" quicker

Re: Creativity fundamentally comes from memorization?

#20

You have to know things to be reasonably creative but there is a point where memorizing more stifles creativity. Memorization is often very passive and is fundamentally different from searching for new ways of doing things. It's hard to make sweeping statements like this because there are different modes of memory and different modes of creativity. There is a lot of memory involved in being creative, but I think sett…

Agreed -- I'm not trying to suggest that memory is a replacement for creativity

I'm suggesting that it enables it, as it's hard to be creative when you're still trying to remember the basics of your art

But once things become autonomous -- you can focus on those higher-level explorations

Post reply on HN