Week 1 - Competencies and Risk 

After reading the journal Creativity (A Handbook for Artists) here are some thoughts that I had:

• Don't be defeated at the first point of failure, use these moments as a spur of new creativity and a new turning point in the original project idea.
• The fear of failure is linked to the view artists have with risk - They stereotypically associate risk with failure and instead stay within the comfortable boundaries they know.
• 'Keep yourself off balance because the process allows for a certain amount of discovery' - Don't be rigid in your creative practice and let there be fluidity in methodology.
• Chance is deliberately used to disrupt the expected. Risk can be used at the beginning of the project to create new creative ideas. It to can also be introduced at any point within the projects remit.
• 'Value everything, especially things that are least acceptable' - After time has elapsed it can be the thing that turns into something new and unexpected.
• Being slow to judge and watchful are useful qualities to have both within the scope of this module and within my teaching practice.

Creativity

In context of Week 0's post - I feel I have already made a realisation. The point of 'valuing everything, especially things that are least acceptable' could be the reason why I felt that the arranging collaboration was more worthwhile than the maths project. Although there were some issues with tardiness, as a group we still valued the group member's opinions and as a result he still contributed greatly towards the final output and the culture was still positive. Meanwhile, other members of the maths group didn't really see value in the student's contribution (even if it was non-existant at times) and this could have been a contributing factor to a spiral of negativity in the culture between the group member and the group. The quote is referring to valuing creative ideas as opposed to the members in a group collaboration but it is always worth taking concepts from the writer's intended discipline and applying it to another context.

The biggest takeaway with the above example is that what I say or don't say and do or don't do will have an effect on the culture of the group. So doing nothing about a problem will have an equal or bigger effect than if it is resolved. 

Here is my comptetencies video and the 'seesaw of success' documentation:

Collaborative vs Complementary Collaboration

Thinking back to the maths group project - I would label that as an example of complementary collaboration. Very early on in the process, we divided up the various project tasks to members of the group. These smaller tasks were set deadlines using Microsoft Project and the members who wern't assigned certain tasks had no say or input into the development of those tasks. This resulted in our project becoming quite disjointed towards the end in terms of the final project because everyone had different opinions on how to approach their own tasks. This sort of collaboration could occur in pop culture where one person would write the lyrics and another would write the instrumentation. If collaborators came together too late in the process then the final product could risk having no sense of cohesion. In the context of this module, it's probably in my best interest to avoid this type of collaboration - which may potentially come naturally to a music project than a mathematical one. 

Meanwhile, the music project had elements of bonding and all tasks were only completed when everyone was together in the same room. This would lean more towards an integrative collaboration, even though the project lasted only 4-5 weeks. For a module that encourages new fusions and taking risk - this would be the preferred type of collaboration, in order to learn new concepts and create exciting music. However, the type of collaboration isn't a binary exericse. Having elements of complementary collaboration is important for two main reasons. The first is that it's easier to identify with that type of collaboration what people's inputs are whilst with integrative, it is harder to pinpoint exactly who is contributing what (making documentation ever more important). The second is that without the sense of structure, members are more likely to have a relaxed view on deadlines - which in the context of a degree is not entirely approrpriate and could lead to annoyed members. My prediction is that as the collaboration progresses, it will become more complementary... however I may be proved wrong!

Young Artists and Risk

One interesting point that John-Steiner (2000) raises, that has been apparent within recent musical cohorts and my own past experiences, is that young artists tend to avoid risky endeavours within their own work as they face the balance between gaining recognition within the field whilst testing their own sense of worth and promise. However, within a collaborative setting, partnerships can support the act of taking risk within creative endeavors and the risk is split between collaborators. I do enjoy taking risks within all aspects of my music making (composition, conducting and performance) but I'm hoping that my fellow peers, who may not be as daring with their work, will see this collaborative opportunity as a chance to step out of their comfort zone - without having the feeling of self-doubt as the risk is shared among more artists.

It will be interesting to hear other students videos and see which one's I would like to collaborate with. I am worried that this could be a long arduous process of constant messages between the module leader and students who are not in a group (from previous experiences) but as this is a Masters degree, I hope there will be sense of maturity between students this time around!

References