Random Reflections on Creativity

I am in the middle of a book called The Creating Brain: The Neuroscience of Genius.  It was suggested to me by a neuropsychologist whom I met recently through a colleague.  Although I wouldn't necessarily recommend the book, a few ideas came to mind as I read it that I thought were interesting:

1)  The ability to recognize and reconsider relationships is at the core of all creativity.  (I am reminded of Hofstadter's (1995) comments about the critical role that variations on a theme play in creativity.)

2)  Novel approaches to perception, observation, interpretation, and representation are essential components of creative production.

Perception - What falls within the scope of our awareness?  What do we notice?  I believe this to be heavily influenced by our openness to new experience, and by the depth and breadth of our prior knowledge and experience.

Observation - How deeply do we immerse ourselves in both our internal and external worlds?  To which features of those worlds do we attend?  How many layers do we consider?  To what extent are we attuned to the relationships between those layers, or to the dynamic interactions between them?

Interpretation - On which resources do we draw as we seek to understand our experiences?  Do we consider what we have observed from multiple perspectives using a wide variety of heuristics?  Do we look at both individual and systemic factors?  Do we consider sociocultural contexts?  Are our interpretations non-linear, dynamic, flexible, and fluid enough to accommodate change?

Representation - How do we attempt to represent our experiences, our questions about them, and our conclusions?  Do our representations acknowledge that they are necessarily incomplete?

3)  Much research on creativity has highlighted the important role that unstructured down time plays in creativity.  However, that may be because it facilitates unstructured thought.  Andreasen (2005) phrases the idea in this intriguing way: "I would hypothesize that during the creative process the brain begins by disorganizing, making links between shadowy forms of objects or symbols or words or remembered experiences that have not previously been linked" (p. 78).  This might explain why children seem to "lose" their creativity as they progress through school.  Perhaps the highly structured nature of schooling (and the type of thinking it reinforces and rewards) precludes engagement in the types of cognition responsible for creativity.

4)  Creativity is linked to the development of linguistic proficiency.  Language teachers and their students are quick to assume that a large vocabulary is a prerequisite condition for any sort of creative composition in another language.  A quick look at the ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines 2012 seems to support that. Yet consider the implications of this statement: "It is likely that one factor contributing to literary creativity is having a lexicon not only large in quantity of words but also rich in associated meanings for each word" (Andreasen, 2005, p. 67).  How frequently do we explicitly engage students in developing associative networks of MEANING around the lists of vocabulary words we insist that they memorize?  It is not uncommon in older textbooks to see words categorized by parts of speech (such as nouns, adjectives, etc.).  At best, we may categorize the words topically (i.e., foods) with a few subcategories thrown in (fruits, vegetables, beverages).  However, textbook drills seldom connect the words to meaningful contexts, much less engage students in exploring layers of meaning associated with the words.  As a result, we severely limit students' ability to create with the language they are learning.

Andreasen, Nancy C.  (2005).  The Creating Brain:  The Neuroscience of Genius.  NY:  Dana Press.  ISBN 1-932594-07-8.

Exploring Giftedness

Context:

• Conversations with gifted adults 
• Discussions with friends about the problems of their highly sensitive children
• Personal interest in creativity, improvisation, innovation, and productivity
• Questions about the differences between "bright" and "gifted"
• Questions from gifted students about how to manage professional and social interactions
• Questions from student teachers and mentor teachers about how to motivate gifted students (especially underachievers and “fast finishers”)

Framing:

The quotes that follow highlight some of the issues that impact people who are gifted, along with some of the tensions they encounter as they try to make sense of their lives within the social and cultural contexts in which they find themselves embedded.

Talents ~ Time

“Although they try to cram 27 hours worth of living into a 24-hour day, there simply isn't enough time to develop all of the talents and interests that they may have" (Webb, 2009, p. 9).

Intensity ~ Isolation ~ Intimacy

"Gifted adults commonly have the experience of being 'out of sync' with others but not understanding why or how they are different.  Jacobsen (2000) describes how people came to her in her clinical practice with a vague sense that they were different; others had told them repeatedly that they were 'too-too'--that is, too serious, too intense, too complex, too emotional, etc." (Webb, 2009, p. 19).
 
"From the moment she arrived, it seemed that none of her co-workers was interested in making her acquaintance.  Conversations never included her; in-jokes left her completely in the dark; people fell silent when she came near a table in the lunchroom or a fountain in the halls.  At first--and still--she tried to believe that it was because she was young, she was frail, she did not make friends easily.  But actually, right from the start, she knew it was because she was an ambitious woman with remarkable scores from the best school on the planet; because she was curious and wanted to learn and wanted to be excellent, which would threaten all of them, make them all look bad (Card, 1978/1987, p. 207).


"But without a real friend, it was only a pretense, and I never could let my playmates know anything about me.  I studied them and wrote stories about them and it was all of them, but it was only a tiny part of me” (Shiras, 1953, p. 29).

". . . it is a Soul-devastating experience to sacrifice one's authenticity in order to belong" (Silverman, 1988).

“It’s wonderful to be able to talk to another person my own age and have them get everything I say, snap!  Just like that!  No matter what I talk about . . . . She doesn’t know exactly the same things I do, of course, but she understands everything” (Shiras, 1953, p. 56).

Complexity ~ Creativity ~ Contradictions ~ Constraints

"For gifted children, nothing is as simple as it seems.  They see clearly that the answer depends on the context--they see endless shades of grey" (Gifted & Talented Services of Australia, 2007).

"Sensitivity . . . without a developmental outlet turns into irritability” (Mika, 2002).

“The external structure that they are steeped with becomes contradictory or meaningless when confronted with articulate, conscious individual experience” (Webb, 2009, p. 11). 

“They may also find themselves feeling angry because they feel powerless to make the changes that they see as needed” (Webb, 2009, p. 16). 

Depth ~ Defense Mechanisms ~ Dedication

“Control kept him from showing any emotion at all, though he longed to cry out with the agony that tore at him inside.  My walls are deep, but can they hold this? he wondered . . .” (Card, 1978/1987, p. 180).

“‘Ansset, what is your song?’  He looked at her blankly.  Waited.  Apparently he did not understand.  ‘Ansset, you keep singing our songs back to us.  You keep taking what people feel and intensifying it and shattering us with it, but child, what song is yours?’ . . . . The object of Control was not to remove the singer from all human contact, but to keep that contact clear and clean.  Instead of a channel, Ansset was using Control as an impenetrable, insurmountable wall.  I will get over your walls, Ansset, she promised him silently.  You will sing a song of yourself to me.  But his blank, meaningless face said only, You will fail” (Card, 1978/1987, pp. 48-49).

“‘Oh you sound so sweet.  I can see where Ansset learned it.  A machine teaching a machine.’  ‘You misunderstand,’ said Esste.  ‘It is pain teaching pain.  What do you think the Control is for?’” (Card, 1978/1987, p. 42).

Development ~ Disintegration ~ Depression

“One must first disintegrate before one can reintegrate at a higher level, . . . .” (Webb, 2009, p. 14).

“However, this new mental schema may be only partially successful; these individuals may find themselves aware of inconsistencies and pretenses within their new way of thinking, though they may try desperately to convince themselves otherwise. They experience, then, only the dissolving part of the process—without reintegration at a higher level—leaving them with negative disintegration and the accompanying conflicts and negative emotions. Worse, they are unable to return to their previous unthinking way of being (“the rung bell”)” (Webb, 2009, p. 12).

Experiences:

The following video clips, webpages, essays, and books highlight some of the challenges and experiences associated with giftedness.

• Apple (posted by PeterGreen125).  (2006, April 26).  Think different.  YouTube.  Retrieved from https://youtu.be/cpzvwkR1RYU

• Matilda.  Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B7o7vCczhE (Also available in Spanish)

• Genius.  (n.d.).  Estimated IQs of famous geniuses.  Genius.  Retrieved from http://www.cse.emory.edu/sciencenet/mismeasure/genius/research04.html

• Onodera, Shun.  (2008, April 4).  Gifted.  Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkQiI09zlPQ

• Orion Pictures Corporation.  (1991).  Little man tate 2.  Little Man Tate.  Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2ky7M8RfNk

• Shiras, Wilmar.  (1953). Children of the Atom.  Garden City, NY:  Nelson Doubleday, Inc.  

• Sony Pictures UK.  (2010).  Cloudy with a chance of meatballs - Dock scene.  Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3RM5hHfvFA

• Sony Pictures.  (2010).  Cloudy with a chance of meatballs - Jello scene.  Retrieved September 20, 2012, from http://youtu.be/aXv4i3Hz2GQ

• Tolan, Stephanie.  (1996).  Is it a cheetah?  Retrieved June 24, 2009, from http://www.stephanietolan.com/is_it_a_cheetah.htm

• Tolan, Stephanie S.  (2000).  Welcome to the Ark.  HarperTeen.  

Interpretations:

• Some studies indicate that the brains of gifted individuals may function more efficiently as a result of differences in structure and organization.  For example, more dense gray matter in the prefrontal cortex and more white matter tracts may facilitate attentional control, critical thinking, decision-making, working memory, and other executive functions (Navas-Sanchez, et al., 2014; Nestor, et al., 2015; Sousa, 2009; Tetreault, Haase, & Duncan, 2016). A thicker corpus callosum (Barbara & Kerr, 2009) may enable a more efficient use of cognitive resources and more integrated cognitive processing across the two hemispheres of the brain (Jaušovec, 2000; Jin, et al., 2006), while thicker myelin sheaths around individual neurons and more synaptic connections may facilitate faster cognitive processing.

• Some research suggests that people who have been classified as "gifted" may be especially sensitive to certain kinds of stimulation.  These sensitivities have been classified into five major domains:

• Emotional (often displayed as deep emotional attachment, extremes, or intensity)

• Imaginational (frequently expressed as a penchant for fantasy, imaginative play, inventiveness, and visual forms of cognition such as imagery or metaphor)

• Intellectual (regularly exhibited as high levels of concentration, intense inquisitiveness, metacognition, and abstract thinking that focuses on analysis, synthesis, or theory-building)

• Psychomotor (typically manifested as excess energy and enthusiasm, impulsivity, rapid speech, and physical expression of emotional tension through competitiveness, compulsiveness, nervous habits, or workaholism

• Sensual (often visible in attention to aesthetics, the derivation of pleasure from sensory input, and overindulgence during periods of stress) (Fielder, 1998; Webb, 2009)

• These "heightened levels of awareness, energy, and emotional response" are a NORMAL part of the developmental trajectory for "gifted" individuals (Azpeitia & Rocamora, 1994; Tolan, 1996; Webb, 2009). However, the feedback that many gifted individuals receive while living life on a daily basis tends to send the message that much of what is at the core of who they are and what they care about is completely abnormal (Tolan, 1994).

• This message is reinforced by the fact that the development of "gifted" individuals often occurs asynchronously, with intellectual development typically preceding social and emotional development.  Thus, these individuals are frequently "out of sync" with the rest of the world in general, and their same-age peers in particular.  Although most gifted individuals are very aware of this fact, many blame this lack of synchronicity on personal deficiencies or idiosyncracies rather than recognizing that it is a very "normal" part of giftedness (Clark, 2002; Fielder, 1998; King, 2009; Tolan, 1994; Webb, 2009).

• Educators also frequently fail to recognize the psychosocial tensions that such asynchronous development produces.  Teachers typically focus on qualitative differences between the knowledge and skills of gifted individuals and those of their peers, failing to realize that they are physical manifestations of less visible phenomena, such as marked differences in the focus of their interest and attention, in their energy and concentration levels, in the rationales underlying their goals and motivations, in their thoughts and interpretations regarding the world, and in the way they represent their understandings (Shavinina, 2008; Tolan, 1994).  Educators who do not recognize these qualitative differences between gifted individuals and the other students in their classes may adopt approaches to managing gifted students that require them to do more difficult work, in larger quantities, at a faster pace or of higher quality that that required of their peers.  The needs and behaviors of gifted individuals are also frequently misinterpreted for similar reasons, and both teachers and employers may find such individuals difficult to engage, difficult to manage, and difficult to understand.

• The personal challenges associated with the heightened sensitivities that many gifted individuals experience include managing intense emotional reactions to daily events, finding outlets for an overabundance of creativity and/or energy, inadequate intellectual or sensory stimulation, insufficient emotional intimacy, intense perfectionism and self-criticism, and setting appropriate boundaries for self and others (Azpeitia & Rocamora, 1994; Perrone, et. al, 2007; Rinn & Bishop, 2015; Streznewski, 1999; Tolan, 1994; Webb, 2009).

• Major life events or stresses frequently catalyze displays of hypersensitivities in most people, but such displays tend to occur more frequently, last longer, and manifest more intensely in gifted individuals.  This often intensifies the aforementioned difficulties with interpersonal relationships among family, friends, teachers, and employers, and may even lead uninformed health care professionals to misdiagnose these individuals with attention deficit disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, neuroses, or other psychological problems (Azpeitia & Rocamora, 1994; Mika, 2002; Streznewski, 1999; Tolan, 1996).  

• A number of studies have noted a strong correlation between giftedness and perfectionism.  Gifted individuals frequently set goals for themselves based on their intellectual capacity rather than on what may be developmentally appropriate or realistic given their chronological age.  They may also evaluate their performance in comparison with that of their associates (who often tend to be older or more accomplished than they are), irrespective of the criteria that would be considered realistic given their lack of experience with the particular field they are exploring.  They may also become so accustomed to success at an early age due to their well-developed cognitive skills that they question their own intelligence when confronted with failure--a phenomenon known as "the impostor syndrome" (Perrone, et. al, 2007).  However, when the “positive energy” of perfectionistic tendencies is harnessed in productive ways, such tendencies can become great resources for personal development.  Some research suggests that the ability of gifted individuals to accomplish this is tied to whether or not they adopt a resilient approach to failure (King, 2009; Perrone, et. al, 2007; Silverman, 2007).   

• The hypersensitivities that typically accompany giftedness are especially problematic for females, many of whom are keenly aware of the gap between who they are and what society expects them to be.  The message that their "appearance and sociability" are the primary source of their value to society pervades historical traditions, permeates the media, and is perpetuated by textbooks in which well-known male "experts" blatantly characterize women as inferior.  Gifted girls are socialized to believe that they are less capable than men, and many begin to lose confidence in both their abilities and in the validity of their perceptions as they reach puberty.  Such perspectives are often further reinforced as high-achieving women interact with competitive men in male-dominated fields and workplaces.  Gifted women also lack widely-recognized, high achieving female role models to counter that message, and those who are courageous enough to ignore the message face strong social sanctions when their interests and behaviors deviate from traditional roles and expectations for females (King, 2009; Perrone, et. al, 2007; Silverman, 2005; Tolan, 1994).  Thus, gifted females are often faced with a continual choice between intellectual fulfillment and social acceptance.

• Finally, it should be noted that although the characteristics of giftedness persist throughout the lifespan, the lives of many gifted adults do not necessarily manifest those characteristics (in terms of career accomplishments, eminence, salary, or personal achievements) (Rinn & Bishop, 2015; Streznewski, 1999).

• In summary, gifted individuals frequently experience the world in qualitatively different ways from their same-aged peers. Their extreme sensitivity to their environment, their capacity to handle conceptual complexity, and their resultant skill in a variety of domains enables them to absorb vast quantities of intellectual, emotional, and sensory input.  As a result, they require adequate challenge and stimulation in order to avoid boredom and frustration.  Additionally, the sensitivities of gifted individuals kindle a variety of interests, fuel a passionate commitment to pursuits they value, and spark intense reactions to life’s events.  On the other hand, such sensitivities (in conjunction with the perfectionism that tends to be highly correlated with giftedness) position gifted individuals to be acutely aware of incongruity between their own beliefs and actions, as well as injustice in the world at large.  When their vision for the future or themselves exceeds their existing ability to implement it, they may become discouraged or even clinically depressed.  Furthermore, because few others are likely to share their passions and intensities, gifted individuals (especially females) may feel forced to sacrifice who they are in pursuit of emotional intimacy or social relationships.

 References/Further Reading:

• Azpeitia, Lynne, & Mary Rocamora.   (1994, November).  Misdiagnosis of the gifted.  Mensa Bulletin.  Retrieved January 24, 2010, from http://www.talentdevelop.com/articles/Page10.html 

• Bainbridge, Carol.  (2010).  Dabrowski’s overexcitabilities or supersensitivities in gifted children.  About.com.  Retrieved January 24, 2010, from http://giftedkids.about.com/od/gifted101/a/overexcite.htm   

• Barbara, A., & Kerr, B. A. (2009).  Encyclopedia of giftedness, creativity, and talent.  Sage Publications, Inc.

• Bronson, Po. (2007, Feb. 11). How not to talk to your kids: The inverse power of praise. New York Magazine. Retrieved March 17, 2010, from http://nymag.com/news/features/27840/

• Clark, B. (2002). Growing up gifted: Developing the potential of children at home and at school. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

• Daniels, S. & Piechowski, M. M. (Eds.).  (2009).  Living with intensity: Understanding the sensitivity, excitability, and emotional development of gifted children, adolescents, and adults.  Great Potential Press, Inc.

• Fiedler, Ellen.  (1998, Spring).  Foundations for understanding the social-emotional needs of the highly gifted, The Hollingworth Center, 12(1), 3-5. Retrieved November 25, 2009, from http://www.hoagiesgifted.org/dabrowskis_theory_existential_depression_feb09.pdf   

• Jacobsen, Mary-Elaine.  (1999).  The gifted adule:  A revolutionary guide for liberating everyday genius.  The Random House Publishing Group.

• Jaušovec, N. (2000). Differences in cognitive processes between gifted, intelligent, creative, and average individuals while solving complex problems: An EEG study.  Intelligence, 28(3), 213-237.  Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289600000374

• Jin, S. H., Kwon, Y. J., Jeong, J. S., Kwon, S. W., & Shin, D. H. (2006). Differences in brain information transmission between gifted and normal children during scientific hypothesis generation.  Brain and Cognition, 62(3), 191-197.  Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262606000984

• King, Lance G. (2009). The importance of failing well: An exploration of the relationship between resilience and academic achievement. The University of Waikato. Retrieved March 28, 2010, from http://waikato.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10289/2807

• Kuipers, W. (2011).  Enjoying the gift of being uncommon:  Extra intelligent, intense, and effective.  Voorburg, The Netherlands:  Kuipers & Van Kempen.

• Kuipers, W. (2007).  How to charm gifted adults into admitting giftedness:  Their own and somebody else's.  Advanced Development Journal, 11, 1-25.  Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://www.xi2.nl/bronnen/Resources/How%20to%20charm%20gifted%20adults.pdf 

• Maisel, E.  (2013).  Why smart people hurt:  A guide for the bright, the sensitive, and the creative.  Conari Press.

• Mika, Elizabeth. (2002). Dabrowski’s theory of positive disintegration.  Retrieved January 24, 2010, from http://www.talentdevelop.com/articles/DTOPD.html

• Navas-Sánchez, F. J., Alemán-Gómez, Y., Sánchez-Gonzalez, J., Guzmán, De-Villoria, J.A., Franco, C., Robles, O., ...Desco, M.  (2014).  White matter microstructure correlates of mathematical giftedness and intelligence quotient. Human Brain Mapping, 35(6), 2619–2631.  Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1002/hbm.22355/full

• Nestor, P.G., Nakamura, M., Niznikiewicz, M., Levitt, J.J., Newell, D.T., Shenton, M. E., & McCarley, R. W. (2015). Attentional control and intelligence: MRI orbital frontal gray matter and neuropsychological correlates. Behavioural Neurology, 2015, e354186. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/354186  

• Perrone, Kristin M., Philip A. Perrone, Tracy M. Ksiazak, Stephen L. Wright, & Z. Vance Jackson.  (2007).  Self-perception of gifts and talents among adults in a longitudinal study of academically talented high-school graduates.  Roeper Review, 29(4), 259-264.  Retrieved March 28, 2010, from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Self-perception+of+gifts+and+talents+among+adults+in+a+longitudinal...-a0166696356

• Prober, P.  (2016).  Your rainforest mind:  A guide to the well-being of gifted adults and youth.  Olympia, WA:  GHF Press.

• Rinn, A.N., & Bishop, J.  (2015).  Gifted adults:  A systematic review and analysis of the literature. Gifted Child Quarterly, 59(4), 213–235.

• Shavinina, Levinia V.  (2008).  A unique type of representation is the essence of giftedness:  Towards a cognitive-developmental theory.  The International Handbook on Giftedness.  Dordrecht, the Netherlands:  Springer Science & Business Media.

• Silverman, L. K. (1988). Different worlds at the extremes. Colorado: Gifted Development Center. Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jwosbor2/otherfiles/PSY304/Different%20Worlds.pdf

• Silverman, L. K. (2007). Perfectionism: The crucible of giftedness. Gifted Education International, 23(3), 233. Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://nmgifted.org/GAC%20Resources/Perfectionism%20The%20Crucible%20of%20Giftedness-SILVERMAN.pdf  

• Silverman, L. K. (2005). Who cares if i’m smart, am I thin enough? The Hague, The Netherlands: European Council of International Schools & The Institute for the Study of Advanced Development.  Retrieved February 14, 2010, from http://www.gifteddevelopment.com/PDF_files/Who%20Cares%20if%20I%27m%20Smart.pdf 

• Sousa, D. A. (Ed.). (2009).  How the gifted brain learns.  Corwin Press.

• Streznewski, M.K.  (1999).  Gifted grown-ups:  The mixed blessings of extraordinary potential.  John Wiley & Sons.  

• Tetreault, N., Haase, J., & Duncan, S.  (2016).  The gifted brain.  Retrieved from http://www.gro-gifted.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/GRO-article-Phase-1-a-final-3_24_16.pdf

• Tolan, S. (1994). Discovering the gifted ex-child. Roeper Review, Supporting Emotional Needs of the Gifted Website, 17(2), 134-38. Retrieved from http://www.novosite.nl/editor/assets/amstelwijzer/Tolan_DiscoveringTheGiftedExChild.pdf  

• Treffinger, Donald J.  (2004).  Creativity and giftedness.  Corwin Press.

• Webb, James T.  (2009).  Dabrowski's theory and existential depression in gifted children and adults.  Paper presented August 7, 2008 at the 8th International Congress of the Institute for Positive Disintegration, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Other References

• Card, Orson Scott.  (1978/1987).  Songmaster.  NY:  Tom Doherty Associates.

What happened to the hoops?

So I had a conversation with a friend today that caused me to look for some more information on Dabrowski's overexcitabilities. I came across this site on the "metagifted" in the process. The site seems a little bit "out there," and I can't really attest to its value because I didn't make it beyond the first article, where I was captured by these 2 sentences. They describe my present circumstances perfectly:

"My projects were always started the night before they were due, and finished sometime around noon the next day. Nobody really knew what to say, think, or do in response; I took an assignment, said "nah, this is boring" and did something totally different. And nobody knew, at the time, how to handle exceptions."

For much of my life, I've started my projects the night before they are due (I actually work on them for weeks, but don't get much "real" work done on them before the night before they are due). Contrary to what you might think, this is not because I'm lazy, but because I have SO many ideas for them that narrowing down to a single selection is difficult. I also have such grand visions of what the final products will look like that the projects sometimes feel overwhelming and are difficult to start.

Nonetheless, it was so validating to hear someone else say that they take assignments that are "boring" and do something totally different instead! I've spent the last 3 years in graduate school doing just that (much to the dismay of my professors). However, as I think back to my high school projects, I suddenly realize that I did the same thing in high school. I don't know that I consciously judged the assignments as being boring at that time. I think they were just springboards to opportunity for me.

I saw "other" possibilities in them that I don't think my teachers necessarily intended [such as the day we were supposed to deliver a commercial for an imaginary product in speech class and I invented a product that was completely abstract (as opposed to the latest household cleaner or something) and then performed a jingle I wrote myself based on a song I had learned as a child in church, or the day we were supposed to give a book report on a biography we had read, and I performed what I now know to be a dramatic interpretation where I took on the roles of multiple characters at once and used voices, positioning, and audience participation to make it all work.]

I just thought that the reason the assignments I turned in were different from everyone else's was because I was inherently "creative." I didn't realize at the time that actually, I was probably just bored. It would be a relief not to realize it now. However, in my present circumstances, I've been painfully aware of that fact for a long time, and that awareness has severely impeded the very creativity that has always sustained me.

Over the last 3 years, I have also become well-acquainted with the phenomenon of people who really don't know what to say, think, or do in response to such "products." Silence is generally the reaction. It can be pretty disconcerting and after awhile, you start to wonder if you are completely crazy--what it is that everyone else gets that you clearly don't?!

That isn't as bad, though, as the condescending tone most experts assume when explaining something to me because they presume that I couldn't possibly understand the answer to the question I have just asked about an engineering design, a mathematical theory, a scientific phenomenon, or a philosophical argument. They respond as adults often do to children who ask seemingly simple questions with highly complex answers. That isn't nearly as bad, though, as being nonverbally (and verbally) dismissed by people who will not engage in a conversation because I am female and/or because they assume that I couldn't possibly know anything (much less have anything of interest to say) regarding a "technical" topic.

It is a strange place to be--different enough that most people aren't interested in talking about the things you care about, but not different "enough" that those who CAN talk about the things you care about will allow you to participate in the conversation.

So it was quite refreshing to talk with several people today about such topics and to realize that for once, I hadn't felt as though I had to overcome large quantities of resistance--attempting to "convince" those involved in the conversation that I could manage it. The conversation just flowed and I didn't really even notice the lack of resistance until I reflected on it later. It was very odd. I wonder what happened to the hoops today? Why WEREN'T they present? Or were they present and I just didn't notice them?

Of Giftedness, Intensity, Sensitivity, & Idiosyncracy

In my experience, giftedness tends to be framed in terms of intelligence and achievement. That frame not only leaves many things about it invisible and unexplained, but makes many other characteristics common across gifted children appear to be incongruent with their giftedness. Such interpretations position gifted individuals to be bewildered by why they are the only people among their peers who seem to respond to their circumstances so intensely.  Such interpretations position those who spend time with them to wonder why people who are "so smart" or "so talented" can't figure out how to just relax and go with the flow. The "obvious" explanation is that it must be the result of a lack of maturity or self-control. This "obvious" answer causes the gifted to question why they can't seem to change successfully, even when they really want to do so. That, in turn, evokes deep doubts about the veracity of the labels that have been attached to them, which destabilizes their faith in themselves to the point that it can impede their ability to accomplish even the simplest of tasks.
 

Thus, after reading this summary of Dabrowski's ideas on the subject (be sure to explore the related links to specific sensitivities once you read through the bulleted lists), I was almost sad—wondering how it could be possible that I’ve lived my whole life without understanding some of these things, wondering how it could be possible that in spite of my many experiences with giftedness--friends, my teacher training, the 13 years I spent as a teacher who had many gifted students in her classes--that I never put it all together quite like this before!

Other websites contributed useful pieces to my understanding as well. Although Parenting Emotionally Intense Gifted Children focuses primarily on the emotional dimension of the sensitivities described on the page above, I find it interesting that the sensitivity is, in part, attributed to physical roots. “ Emotionally intense gifted children exhibit a super sensitivity of the nervous system that makes them acutely perceptive and sensitive, more discriminating of external stimuli and more analytical and critical of themselves and others.” It is easy to see how such sensitivity would affect every aspect of one’s existence. I liked the microscope analogy from the section entitled Differences on the Helping Your Highly Gifted Child web page, and appreciated the concept of Multiple Ages as a way of explaining some of the paradoxes of giftedness. This asynchronous development is reinforced in the paragraph titled Gifted Child Development Center and helps to explain (for me, at least) the ways that common characteristics of giftedness “clash” with one another in ways that produce problems. The entire paragraph on School is useful, particularly the first sentence, the elephant analogy, and the idea that sometimes the highly gifted may look “less capable” instead of more capable than their peers. Finally, the paragraph on Lack of Fit seems to summarize many of the key issues inherent in giftedness.

In short, the idea that “intensity” is often the result of profound “sensitivities” to certain aspects of experience not only illuminated my own experiences with gifted children, students, and adults, but also helped me to understand the idiosyncracies of people in general in important new ways. After all, the scriptures teach us that everyone has at least one gift or talent. What if instead of viewing idiosyncracies as problems, we approached them with the perspective that they might be clues that would help us to identify the gifts of those around us?

I May Not Be Gifted, But I'm Definitely a Cheetah!

So, I'm a doctoral student. For those of you who have been spared the "pleasure" of that experience, let me clarify that this means I read hundreds of pages filled with multisyllabic words and -isms from academic articles, books, and journals every week, am supposed to produce scholarly "commentary" about them, and am presumably pursuing "my own work/research" in addition to whatever else I must do (in terms of assistantships or jobs) to support myself. I realize that I am privileged to have the opportunity, and, like many humans who find themselves in privileged circumstances, often take that blessing for granted.

This week, the "appetizer" was the assignment to read a chapter from one book. It was followed by a large salad--the assignment to consume the last 250 pages of a 500-page book. The main course involved ingesting another 250-page book in its entirety, and the "meal" concluded with one additional article for dessert. Lest you think me too whiny and ungrateful, let me give you just a little taste of the dessert, "In sum, Baudrillardian apocalypse, Foucauldian limit-attitude, Deleuzean nomadology, Lyotardian language games, Lacanian Imaginaries, Derridean 'play' and excessiveness--all of these are intersecting with feminist commitments to praxis in ways that position Jamesonian nostalgia and despair and Habermasian concerns about irrationalism as panic discourses that mark the displacement of Enlightenment hegemony over cultural theory" (Lather, 1997, pp. 235-236).

As I re-read that, I do gain a bit of insight into how quantum physics might suddenly seem like a treat! Granted, the above paragraph was probably the dessert on the menu most reflective of culinary experimentation, so in fairness, let's try one more that I found a bit more suited to my personal tastebuds, "In a methodology of the imaginary, metaphysical images are transmuted into dialectical images in a postsubjective, socially eneaged form of thinking and writing, a 'grammatopraxis' poised at the frontier of the sayable and the unsayable . . ." (Lather, 1997, p. 238). Before proceeding, I should also admit that I quite liked the work of this author. I found the research that she and her co-author attempted to be meaningful and rather daring in both content and form. The majority of issues they chose to engage seemed worthwhile, and the manner in which they chose to represent their understanding was quite innovative, thought-provoking, and satisfying.

Nonetheless, my intent here is to create a sharp contrast against which the reader will be able to more clearly see why the following few paragraphs from Stephanie Tolan's delightful essay, Is It a Cheetah?, impacted me so profoundly:

"However, schools are to extraordinarily intelligent children what zoos are to cheetahs. Many schools provide a 10 x 12 foot cage, giving the unusual mind no room to get up to speed. Many highly gifted children sit in the classroom the way big cats sit in their cages, dull-eyed and silent. Some, unable to resist the urge from inside even though they can't exercise it, pace the bars, snarl and lash out at their keepers, or throw themselves against the bars until they do themselves damage."

So, although I may not be gifted, for today at least, I sure can empathize with that cheetah! I think my "keepers" would admit that they've seen the snarling and the lashing, and my "bruises" have made me wish for more padded bars on more than one occasion. According to Tolan, "If a cheetah has only 20 mph rabbits to chase for food, it won't run 70 mph while hunting. If it did, it would flash past its prey and go hungry! Though it might well run on its own for exercise, recreation, fulfillment of its internal drive, when given only rabbits to eat the hunting cheetah will run only fast enough to catch a rabbit." So what is yet to be determined is whether I'm really a cheetah (if I weren't in this cage, would I really be capable of running 70 mph?), whether I'm truly in a cage (after all, life is all about perception, right?), and if both of those do prove to be true, will I go hungry if I ever manage to escape?!

Lather, P. (1997). In W. C. Tierney & Y.S. Lincoln, Representation and the text: Re-framing the narrative voice. Albany: State University of New York Press.