Creativity, as explained by Csikszentmihaly can show itself in many different forms. He states “ it happens very often…that some persons brimming with brilliance…never leave any…trace of their existence except, perhaps, in the memories of those who have known them.”1 I think that often people regard creativity as if it has levels of hierarchy – which isn’t necessarily true. As honored as the title of being a creative is, people forget that it often had its stigmas. One of the being that people of creative nature were/are reclusive and a mystery to society.
Furthermore, Csikszentmihaly’s opinion that “A person cannot be creative in a domain to which he or she is not exposed,” 2 isn’t something I completely agree with. I’ve always seen a creative as being someone who was groundbreaking in their field. Sometimes even being someone who introduced a new field – or brought something to the time period that hadn’t necessarily been there before. I feel in that sense he denotes the status of creativity which isn’t fair.
