Is it game over already for ‘teaching creativity’ in Asia?

Found this article.

Singapore Management University’s Research Collection School of Social Sciences School of Social Sciences paper, 2004, ‘The paradox of promoting creativity in the Asian classroom: An empirical investigation’, by Aik Kwang Ng (Singapore Management University) and Ian Smith (University of Sydney).

‘Individualism–collectivism refers to the degree of emphasis on the individual in relation to the social group (Triandis, 1995). Highly individualistic soci-
eties (e.g., America and Australia) place a greater emphasis on the individual compared with the social group.’

This is not news.

‘In such societies, members are socialized from a young age to develop their uniqueness as a person, as well as to stand on their own feet. They are expected to pursue their own interests and passions in life, rather than complying with the social group. In contrast, highly collectivistic societies (e.g., China and Japan) place a greater emphasis on the social group compared with the individual (Ng, 2001a). In such societies, members are socialized from a young age to fit in with the social group. Conflict with other group members is strenuously avoided to maintain social order and harmony.’

 

Okay, same. But… here is where this gets interesting. Dogma. A thing you cannot be in Asia is a thing you have to be to be creative.

‘In an influential article, Markus and Kitayama (1991) argued that individualistic members are more likely to construe themselves in an independent manner, that is, they tend to view themselves as separate entities from the social group. In contrast, collectivistic members are more likely to construe themselves in an interdependent manner, that is, they tend to view themselves as being part and parcel of the social group. Markus and Kitayama reviewed various research indicating that these construals of self had a significant impact on the behavior of the individual.

‘Creativity researchers can adapt this line of investigation in their own research on creativity. For example, in a controversial book, Ng (2001a) argued that creators are dogmatic people. His argument is as follows: A creative act, by definition, involves the introduction of novel elements into an established domain, and as such it threatens the conventional manner of doing things; therefore, there will be much social resistance from the community. Instead of succumbing to this insidious pressure to conform, the creator must be ready for conflict and confrontation.

‘Put in a more succinct and pungent manner, to be an effective creator, one must be dogmatic. If one is not dogmatic—if one does not stubbornly cling to one’s radical idea—one will not be able to resist the insidious pressure from the community to conform..

‘Ng (2001a) argued that dogmatic creators are more likely to be found in an individualistic culture because its members are psychologically prepared for conflict and confrontation (i.e., they have a more “combative personality”). By contrast, dogmatic creators are less likely to be found in a collectivistic culture because its members are not psychologically prepared for conflict and confrontation (i.e., they have a less combative personality). According to Ng, individualistic members with combative personalities are examples of creative people who are not “nice,” whereas collectivistic members without combative personalities are examples of “nice” people who are not creative.’

Will reach out to the authors, to see if we can get to know more about what they’ve uncovered since… 2004.

Given this ambient climate of not wanting to take risks and try things, one whose very existence is about inviting people to converse, connect ,play, create, and hopeflly strike on insights that inspire better making and co-making from there, such as me, may ask oneself, ‘Why do I even live here, then?’

The answer lies in the statements here: Vietnam News Express wrote:

“I would rather be in a place where I don’t have to deal with or to hear about things that I do not like,” the South China Morning Post quoted Chau as saying… The Vietnamese mathematician will join the science faculty at the University of Hong Kong (HKU) as a chair professor in June, the university announced in early February. HKU ranks first in the QS Asia University Rankings 2026… In a recent interview at HKU, Chau, 54, said American universities have long been respected institutions where knowledge, discovery and scholarship are highly valued. “People are meant to be well-treated regardless of their race as long as they espouse this vision in scholarship and knowledge,” he said, noting that such ideals had shaped American academia for centuries.’

Kinda this, exactly.

I want to be in a place, in a small community, that is, where people come from many walks of life and who are… self-aware. Even in Seattle, my favorite city in the US that I got to live, it was obvious there was so little of that. Few people had passports. There was no subway. Insularity and overrelgiousness were making things hard in ways that not being open to trying new things is hard. They were different obstacles, sure. But they were there.

There were segregated communities. Asian Americans lump themselves into that category of blurring themselves into it: ‘Asian American’. What the? It’s so very, very different and quilted and diverse and the language, and culture of each and every part of Asia is so rich, and yet, when you go over there, the study abroad students from Asia kind of clump together. Maybe to shield themselves. Against the blatant, meanness of the racism over there. I so hated it. So even if it’s uncreative, out here, so they say, maybe we can change this a little bit at a time. We can still write blogs. We can  invite comment. I’m creative and I can help others be, too. It’s not rocket science. It starts with permission. To go out on a limb. To say what you want. Like I am doing now. If I can, you can. Inspiring you to try new things… That’s my goal, these days. That’s what I’m aiming to do. Reviews

What do you think? Is it game over for teaching creativity in Asia? Or not? Why or why not? Feel free to share in the comments, these are open for a while. Email is okay, too. Or Teelgram. Whatever works. All the links to our socials are at the bottom of this page.