 This lecture is titled the creative state of mind, experience and knowledge, learning from knowledge systems. What we would try to do here is to draw your attention to words, more systematic studies that help us understand the positive connotations of the word creative. So far we have been exploring many ideas in an open ended fashion in order to enlarge our understanding of what it means to be creative. We have also looked at some of the more systematic definitions of the word creative. But now we would dip into systems of thought that have the status of scientific knowledge. So, we will start with psychology, where the term psyche refers to soul, self, mind and the word logic there, it is a combining form used in the names of sciences and bodies of knowledge. We will really not look at various intricacies of this scientific body of knowledge, but what we will do is to place two very different theoretical formulations before you in a fairly simple manner, so that you can begin to reflect on what these ideas mean or what and how especially how they can be used in your own understanding of various issues that we have already discussed. Before we present these two theoretical models before you, we will go back to Raymond Williams, who pointed out in key words that the term psychological, he was not referring to psychology per say in terms of the key word that he chose, instead he chose the word psychological, which of course does change the connotations slightly, but I think what he had to say there, we will place at the center of our deliberations. So, according to him, the now conventional separation between the psychological and the social is one of the most significant marks of this formation as a whole, so the separation conventional separation between the sense of the self, the inner world and the world that exists outside, so this is the conventional separation and he goes on to add, but there is there a separable or at least radically distinguishable inner world, so we leave that as a question mark, because how do we define this inner world, how this kind of contestation between what we consider as our inner world, which is not sometimes necessarily matched by the external world, what kind of contestations go on and in some ways these theories deal with these contestations, so therefore, we will look at this very famous paper that Freud wrote, it will not really be possible to claim that we have really been able to fully do justice to the complexities of Freudian thought, but we will certainly give you enough background, so that you can begin to reflect on these ideas in a meaningful manner. This particular paper is titled creative writers and daydreaming that Freud wrote in 1908, in which he referred to the fact that a piece of creative writing like a daydream is a continuation of and a substitute for what was once the play of childhood and that is a very complex interwoven idea, which dips into his own view of the psychic mechanism, but basically one should also remember that in this paper he was actually drawing attention to the relationship between an author and his or her work. The word her has been added by me deliberately and of course, it is also very important to take what one can from these theories and leave out what seems problematic, which is exactly what many of the thinkers have done in terms of Freudian interpretation and Freudian world view, which was highly patriarchal and therefore, a lot of women in particular, a lot of feminists, a lot of wide ranging feminists have reinterpreted Freudian world view. So, I have added the word her, but I have really not gone into the details of how one would have to reinterpret this psychic mechanism that Freud talks about, in which the role of the unconscious is the most dominant aspect of Freudian world view. So, then the psychic mechanism that Freud had in mind and again keep the perspective of what he said about writing process, because that is where we really want to place the discussion. So, in his formulation, the id represents the unconscious, the superego internalizes the social norms, feels the pressure of social norms and therefore, they raise contestation between the id and the superego and the id also is sort of highly influenced by infantile sexuality or memories of the past that are so deeply barred that they only manifest themselves in very complicated ways either through dreams or through various other forms of displacement. The ego according to Freudian framework represents the conscious sort of mind and it integrates the id and the superego. Now, if you come back to this statement that he made about writing and how creative writing is like a daydream and also like a play of childhood. Now, that play of childhood in Freudian framework is an extremely important element, because it is a repository of very vivid as well as unnamed experiences. You did not really have words for them when you were a child. You did not have words, you still do not have words for all our experiences. So, this is a very complex and mysterious realm and so it is like a play of childhood. Creative writing is like a play of childhood and this analogy between childhood games which also include an element of fantasy. I think this is the analogy between this element of fantasy and creation and that element of fantasy may be a result of wish fulfillment or it may be a result of repression. Daydreams again draw one's attention to the unconscious which is operative in fantasies and unfulfilled desires that lurk in the unconscious. So, basically what he is trying to draw one's attention to is the fact that a writer may have fairly conscious aims in writing or in creating a new original piece of writing. But there are whole lot of fairly unconscious and all you know aims and desires that actually also animate this process. So, this is a point of view which I think what we will do is to take this up again in the second module when we begin to talk about creative writing per se from the point of view of various writers and what they have said about the writing process in a much more systematic manner and how it has been institutionalized or what we can do to institutionalize it without letting it lose its vitality and this sense of mystery that is contained in this statement. So, keep this idea in mind and also think about it in an open ended fashion and see how you feel about it. Maybe in the last lecture of this module we will try and generate two or three small activities where some of the well known games that have been generated by surrealists and also by other practitioners of writing and painting we would be able to share with you. It is interesting to place this systematic world view and you know system of knowledge with an open ended statement by one of the great writers of our time Mark Pease who says that what really happened to me was that I realized that everything that had occurred in my childhood again childhood had a literary value that I was only now appreciating. If I had to give a young writer some advice I would say to write about something that has happened to him it is always easy to tell whether a writer is writing about something that has happened to him or something he has read or been told. So, again you know we sort of leave you with these thoughts but move to another very different theoretical formulation where you know instead of the compensatory outlook of the Freudian model we have a model which is totally focused on the here and now. We decided based on a lot of student requests to sort of provide them a model that they can practice for variety of activities and we have already done the three domain activity which actually prepared you for this theoretical formulation. This is an old book that Shikshant Mehi wrote title beyond boredom and anxiety the experience of play in work and games. What we have done in this session is to share some of the highlights of this study and also we want to explain to you why we chose this old study although now Shikshant Mehi's latest lectures are available on YouTube and also there are other very very valuable editions and modifications that are available in subsequent lectures that he gave on enjoyment, creativity, innovation etc. But we decided to choose it because the very title offers a paradigm that immediately speaks to young people and it also had systematic studies that the more people with more scientific bent of mind would dip into analyze which is what the students have done and these will be these responses will be offered to you. So what we did in this year's group you know this elective group devoted to creativity and creative writing we read the first chapter of this book titled enjoyment and intrinsic motivation. We read a theoretical model for enjoyment chapter 4 and also the ninth chapter flow patterns in everyday life and after you know analyzing this study from the point of view of student experience we also dipped into an essay titled flow the psychology of optimal experience. Now what are the highlights of this study? First of all we have to acknowledge that the terms that are used here such as play or games these have been theorized about right from Plato's time. We will dip into these later on and we keep saying this because actually what we are planning to do is to build on this knowledge base gradually. So that step by step we can move and we can also step by step build the complexity and also the greater possibilities when you are ready with the basic ideas. So the term play of course here refers to a sense of joyous freedom and games and work that he talks about these require regimentation rules and constraints no game can be played without any of these. So this kind of play of these two opposing tendencies which blend in any process of work or game this is what Sikshanthi Mihai has tried to actually pay attention to. So we thought it may be useful to share some of these statements in his own words. So his aim for example is to make everyday life more meaningful to understand enjoyment here and now not as compensation for past desires not as a preparation for future needs but as an ongoing process which provides rewarding experiences in the present. So then according to him that was the motivation and what he did is to devise a term based on pilot interviews that he conducted and I will report on the pilot interviews quickly but before that he devised a term called autotelic activity. He chose whole lot of activities which really did not have any functional value that is they were undertaken despite dangers and difficulties and a lot of energy was invested in these activities by the person who undertook these activities. So he described this autotelic activity as an activity which he says was assumed to be autotelic from the Greek auto which means self and telos which means goal purpose and so people chose this activity it was an act of volition there was no compulsion to undertake these activities but they were very very difficult activities. So poise between boredom and worry the autotelic experience is one of complete involvement of the actor with his or her activity. The activity presents constant challenges there is no time to get bored or worry about what may or may not happen. So this is the state of mind beyond boredom and anxiety. The pilot interviews which you know this book reports all the elaborate details these were conducted you know he chose sports persons and I am not reading the whole list you can have a look at the list. He chose scientists, he chose artists and he conducted pilot interviews questionnaires at various stages made it more and more sophisticated and then he came up with his findings. This is of course this visualization of autotelic model. Now the results of the interviews and questionnaires this is what we would quickly narrate and the reason I am sort of jumping towards this process is because our students would report their findings. So you will get a fuller picture of Shikshanthi Mihai and his desire and his success in enabling young people to understand their own impulses autotelic impulses as clearly as possible. So the agreement between these three different types of people creative people whom he interviewed one agreement was and let me read his words. He says perhaps the most striking agreement is about creative and problem solving dimensions which are marked high by all the groups. So pay attention to creative and problem solving dimensions. The second result of this very elaborate you know investigation was that open ended interaction was produced by autotelic activity and these activities were neither predictable as a routine job nor was it as unpredictable as reckless driving. So it was kind of activity which was open ended but not too predictable and not absolutely in the realm of the unknown. So there was preparation for it and that it was possible to prepare for it whether you are a sports person or a scientist or an artist you prepare for what you do. You do not just enter a vacuum so to say. The third result of the finding is that despite the realm of uncertainty so what that means is it is neither too predictable nor too unpredictable and at the same time there is a realm of uncertainty that is engaged with an element of improvisation you know unfolds in all these activities in different ways. So despite the realm of uncertainty in which it thrives the actor is potentially capable of controlling it. So there is this new sense of being able to deal with uncertainties at another level the starting point is something that you understand then you enter the realm of uncertainty but there is also this new sense of you know new control new sense of you know acquiring something a different state of mind. The term autotelic was replaced by the term flow by Shikshanth Mihai because he felt that autotelic became too demanding a term because it is sort of only halved of on inner motivation whereas in the world today there is always that great sense of external motivation also and the two need not be separated in a very sharp way. So the term flow was introduced and the notion of complex and simple flow this was also introduced complex was called macro flow and simple flow was described as micro flow. Many of the students will talk about that subsequently. So now the other idea that really was very striking about this study was the fact that he sort of tried to prove that the state of flow whether it is generated or not it is not an automatic process but it depends on the person's ability to restructure the environment. Even if the environment is hostile or the environment is not very congenial most of the creative people tend to restructure the environment. And he goes on to say that artists, poets, religious visionaries and scientists are among those who have learned to use cognitive techniques to order symbols so they can play with them anytime anywhere to a certain extent regardless of environmental conditions. So this is something that we I think can gain a lot from because many times it can happen that we do not feel any rapport with our environment but the creative task that we undertake can help us redefine the environment also. So it is a very transformatory idea very I think potent transformatory you know stand point. The other idea that perhaps we should share with you is that the steps for experiencing flow so it is not an automatic process but there are certain steps and stages through which this can occur and according to him these are the same they involve the process of delimiting reality. So you are focused on that task on that particular action completely second controlling some aspect of it and responding to the feedback with a concentration that excludes anything else as irrelevant. I think that is really this is one can learn quite a lot from this. So what we did is to you know study these chapters we talked a lot but we also had done the three domain activity without recourse to this theoretical formulation and then the theoretical formulations were placed before the students in a question paper and I will just quickly read the question that was posed to them so that you can hear their responses in the proper perspective. Now the test paper was a sequel to the open ended three domain activity undertaken in class students were asked to answer questions with clarity and a sense of purpose. So this is the question discuss the connection that sixth sense behind has maintained between autotelic activity or deep flow and everyday life. What is his rationale for examining the notion of enjoyment in various activities point out any issue that seems problematic in the application of his ideas to your search for creativity. So this was the question placed before them and there is a second question pertains to micro flow and let me read that second question also describe the micro flow patterns that sixth sense behind has worked out analyze your personal response to these modes of behavior in understanding your own day to day existence and the need for non instrumental activities. So this was the second question and now you will have the response from the students who as I said studied it for at least a month or so before they came up with their responses. So here are the responses now. The primary motivation for sheik sense mihi in studying autotelic or deep flow activities was to understand the internal mechanism which spurs the actors to indulge in such activities in the first two parts of his study sheik sense mihi takes such deep flow activities into consideration he analyzes what makes these activities intrinsically rewarding. For me creativity is about losing yourself to the surroundings there cannot be rules and regulations in a creative process as in it has to be free in order to allow the creator to indeed experience deep flow. My search for creativity is about searching for an activity in which there are no external interventions no bounds in which I can just lose myself to the activity. Hello all my name is Arvind Singh and I am here to talk about the concept of flow and enjoyment in the experience of word and games based on the writings of mihi sheik sense mihi. I shall be covering the concept of enjoyment in the purview of flow and games per se and then we shall move on to the issues that pertain to this concept. The notion of enjoyment needs to be examined minutely since it is a driving force in our lives it could give us an approach to define a motivational structure which is less invasive and comparative than the current one. Right now the carrot and stick approach has a zero sum of differential one individual success and appreciation is always at the behest of another's loss of status and rank. A more individual approach like flow eliminates competition and takes out the necessity for the rat race whose repercussions are very drastic on nature and environment plus the preconceived notion that a person is bound to hate his or her job since it's a chore by definition can be eliminated if we find our connection in the process of the job itself. The state of deep flow gives immense satisfaction to the individual involved. The problem is such movements are few and far between now we come to the issues that pertain to the concept of flow as defined by 6th mayhem. The major premise of the deep flow model is that we indulge in creative activities since it gives us a sense of calm and moments of clarity when everything clicks and makes sense. In many cases though for people like me for example the entire process of creating something is filled with self-doubt and extreme anxiety. When I start writing a piece the mind goes blank and worse desert me and for a few seconds I am incapable of putting pen to paper. Gradually though the words start coming in but the procedure is never easy and some very excruciating moments are spent fussing over the piece. It is only when I have finished the piece and read it again that some calm is restored. The sheer amount of self-doubt and contemplation never lets me have the confidence to enjoy the process as of now. It is only when the end result is there in front of my eyes that I actually believe it's done and I start appreciating the amount of work and effort it took to complete the piece. I can assume that for many people the end result itself and not the rewards that accompany it and not the process that goes with it is the source of motivation and in that case the concept of being in the zone doesn't apply. In that case the driving force for creative perceives is different and can vary from people to people. Many individuals do create stuff for public accolade or material benefits and it's their prerogative to do so. The reasons may vary but satisfaction some way or the other holds the key. Thank you. Now that you've heard the student response let me conclude this session with my own observations. First of all this year we had a peculiar mix of students from second year, third year, fourth year and fifth year levels and I want to mention that quite clearly because normally we have a much more homogeneous group of students. So those of you who are going to respond to the video course I think you can also take into consideration the fact that the students came from second year, third year, fourth year and fifth year levels that means varying degrees of maturity levels can be expected. However the results in terms of their comprehension of the ideas were startling because although for example Alankar is from second year but I felt that his grasp of Shiksanthami Hai's ideas was exceedingly sharp and it was also infused with sense of purpose. Although he came and talked to me later on by saying that he feels terribly handicapped by the fact that he doesn't have sufficient reading experience but at the same time that did not deter him from fairly well developed sharp sense of purpose also in terms of the desire to explore the concepts of creativity writing in a fairly sustained manner. So I thought you know I would mention one or two things broadly about each of the students and their sort of outlook and also then sum up in terms of certain stereotypes that I think they need to worry about. The second very interesting take from Arvin Singh I found very very powerful I would say because he was aware of the kind of struggle that writing involves. He talked about the fact that he himself always experienced a sharp sense of confusion about the quality of what he was writing and also the objective co-relatives to use a term from Eliot you know in terms of an emotion and then its corresponding word or term or expression and to me it seemed like a sign of great promise in terms of writing one he was already involved in the process and two he was aware that it's a demanding process which was quite a rare thing in terms of student awareness and share my observations about this later. So I had at that time felt that it would help Arvin the lot if he were to look at creative processes both in terms of individual processes and processes that require teamwork and indeed later on you'll see that he in fact played many many roles in the production of Chekhov that we attempted you know it was a kind of semi reading but slightly more advanced and merely reading. So the kind of transformations that he sought in his own understanding of characters I think he participated in both these activities with great degree of awareness. So this was very interesting I felt in terms of the students and their ability to understand the ideas these were coming from their already developed sense of what they wanted and these views and observations are being shared primarily to sort of have a general picture of different kinds of sensibilities that we respond to. But there is a kind of general observation that I am tempted to share with you I found that there was great degree of stereotyping of the artistic vocation. Time and again one found that the students associated artistic vocation with limitless freedom Alanka talks about it in his presentation and many others also seek artistic expression as a realm of either compensatory sort of sense of freedom and or you know limitless freedom. So you know evidently they have not looked at models and the biographies of writers or they have not been exposed to writing as a process. So maybe there are these general ideas and perceptions that they stay with. The reason it becomes problematic is because they do not seem to question anything pertaining to scientific disciplines at all and they also time and again have mentioned during this semester's course science as a reductionist activity. Not a single question has been articulated in terms of how they view scientific concepts and that surprises me even while talking about science fiction it's more about the fictional element than the scientific basis or the probabilities that scientific ideas provide for science fiction. So now these are stereotypes that I think the students have to overcome by looking at the passion and the process and the arduous nature of great art and great writing or great science. That is all I would like to share at this point and I would end this session with the work cited list where we have Shiksanthi Mahi's Beyond Boredom and Anxiety that we shared Freud's Creative Writers and Day Dreaming and Williams' Vocabulary of Culture and Society. Thank you. I hope you enjoyed this session.