In times of crisis, we need spaces for creativity

What actually constitutes a good idea?

Joana Cholin: For me, a good idea is, above all, a relevant idea: one that has a connecting quality that invites interdisciplinary thinking. It addresses different perspectives and motivates people to engage with it. Whereas the Collaborative Research Centre 1646 is focusing on linguistic creativity, in the PINC Focus Area, we want to go beyond that and examine and compare everyday creativity and creativity more generally in various social and cultural areas.

Ralf Vogel: Creativity research shows that good ideas do not come out of nowhere, but build on traditions and also respond to current needs. Therefore, an idea is only ever good in relation to specific historical situations, and its evaluation by others plays a crucial role. In science, for example, ideas are processed in fairly institutionalized channels through specialist journals, research institutions, and professional discourse. Ideas are constantly being evaluated there when we discuss research findings, want to publish, and submit or review funding applications. What counts as a creative achievement is rarely determined solely by the originator. That is why the way an idea is presented and communicated is also important.

Can you give an example from linguistics that illustrates how creativity manifests itself in concrete terms?

Vogel: A good example is the famous press conference given by football coach Giovanni Trapattoni in 1998. He ended the press conference with the grammatically incorrect ‘Ich habe fertig’ instead of ‘Ich bin fertig’ for ‘I’ve finished [my speech]’. The phrase was picked up, its meaning changed, and it is now a common expression. We also owe it to Trapattoni’s courage in holding an unstructured press conference despite his limited German skills, and to the sympathy he received for doing so. Neither can be taken for granted. Such phenomena show how language change works: someone dares to say something new, something that is actually incorrect, but others take it up positively and change it further for their own purposes. Some 26 years later, after the end of the Social Democratic (red), Liberal (yellow), and Green parliamentary coalition, the phrase became ‘Die Ampel hat fertig’ (The ‘traffic light’ coalition is finished, i.e., can no longer go on, has broken up). Younger people today use this phrase quite naturally, without knowing anything about its origins. This is how innovation arises in the common language— through concrete communication in everyday life.

And you want to explore processes like this with PINC?

Vogel: Exactly, our focus is on innovation and creativity: how humans, in the broadest sense, shape and change their life world. A total of nine faculties are involved in PINC. We are comparing creative processes from the perspective of very different disciplines: from linguistics over literature, art, music, philosophy, history, and economics to education, medicine, psychology, and computer science. Our common goal is to better understand how social or cultural renewal arises and unfolds. Cholin: What we find particularly exciting is what enables people to be creative in the first place. What cognitive resources do you need? What personality traits? And how do people influence each other? Creativity is never purely individual. It is always also a social, communicative phenomenon.

What can disciplines learn from each other when they reflect on creativity together?

Cholin: A great deal. The terminology alone is fascinating. Literary studies discuss the concept of genius, whereas educational science examines creative processes in schools. We come from a linguistic background and think a lot about everyday creativity in speech and communication. These different approaches enrich each other and open up new ways of thinking.

Vogel: We realize that creativity is a universal theme. However, it manifests itself differently in every field. That is precisely what makes it so appealing—and what makes PINC so valuable.

Let’s move on to the university’s Collaborative Research Centre 1646 ‘Linguistic Creativity in Communication’. Why does creativity sometimes fail?

Cholin: Precisely that is one of the central questions of our CRC. It is already becoming apparent that creativity depends strongly on contextual conditions. There are environments in which creativity hardly flourishes, such as very formal or highly regulated situations. Then there are situations, especially in interaction, in which creativity thrives. Here it is interesting to see where and how people venture beyond boundaries.

Vogel: At the same time, linguistics tells us that there are systematic boundaries. If I invent a completely new word, I have to work very hard to make it understandable. We usually only take small steps when deviating creatively from established language.

What are your long-term hopes for PINC, also when it comes to society?

Vogel: We want to understand the conditions under which people have good ideas and are able to express them. This is essential, especially in times of crisis. In such situations, there is no need for established routines, and these may well have triggered the crisis in the first place. On the contrary, what is needed are spaces that enable creativity, that encourage individuals to follow their instincts both freely and courageously, and to exchange ideas. Our research can help to identify and create such conditions—in academia, in education, and in society.