So what do we do?

Eric, this is fascinating, and I just watched one of your presentations on WGBH. Thank you for that inspiring performance. I'm not surprised that some business people don't like the word "creativity", but you're the first to make that statement known to me, and it makes a lot of sense.

Dear Anonymous -- check out Eric's presentation:
http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=3588
It might be difficult to quantify the things that make "creativity" a glaze-over word. However, when you get to the part about the company retreat and the word game, you might get the sense that the root of the problem is not trying to understand the "word dance" but rather, getting people involved in the process. By that point, it doesn't matter what you call it because the process of engaging and caring and making something you can stand by elevates the field.

I think a fundamental issue underlies the misunderstanding between arts and commerce. I can be argued that the culture and the arts are fundamentally oppositional to capitalism by positing that some things are more valuable than money.

Jack Tchen carries this argument to the extent that culture, especially community based arts, provide the best means to counter global capitalism - http://www.communityarts.net/readingroom/archivefiles/2007/11/30_years_and_co.php

Yes, they claimed to be copping to what all business people feel--that creativity is just another vague, fog-sculpting word that fluffy artsy people use. They know creativity is important, but they are so very literal in their thinking, they feel it is a soft word, and they pride themselves on hard results. That is why they prefer "innovation" because that is what they want. They know something to do with creativity is the way they get those innovations, so they are willing to tolerate some of our soft stuff, but they want to see the clear definitions, the data that we can develop develop creative capacity that produces innovations. They think we are soft, and we usually are not able to communicate with them in ways that surprise that expectation.

Two thoughts: 1) it is "business men" who are starting to make a travesty of our schools (for a while it was the former generals), and I for one don't give a hoot what words they think are acceptable...business men think schools are there for their purposes and fodder, while most of think that schools are there to educate kids for a democracy and civil patience and service. and 2) Do I detect an element of fear in these rationales? it's almost as if a kind of self-(defeating?) censorship is at work some where?
As Goodlad says, "What Schools are For....it's about education, not business.

They don't like the word creativity? Hasn't every single invention, innovation, break out business model been because of a creative individual? For crying out loud.

I guess we have to get creative and speak their language. The arts inspires and creates a platform for real world skills: expression, communication, team building, self-confidence.

They don't like the word. Geesh.

What is it about this country that "creativity" is a word that makes people's eyes glaze over? Creativity? Really? For all our celebrations of "excellence" and the corporatization of the American rebel or, dare I say, maverick, we seem to have an innate distrust of the best even as we celebrate it. So Eric, what exactly is it about the arts or creativity that makes business people's eyes glaze over? I'd really like to understand. Any ideas?