The New Kingdom Requires Creators, Not “Creatives”

| By Sam Mahlstadt | Found in Creativity | 9 Comments

I have begun to distrust the identifier “creatives.” We, the Christian community, use the word to describe artists and those with an artistic bent, even though we claim that we are all created in the image of the Creator. The Creator of the heavens and the earth, who spoke life into being, breathed the cosmos, filled the land and sea with his word, and created us in His image. The disparity here is blatant.

Beyond disparity, the problem we introduce when we use the label of “creatives” is that it creates two classes. The creatives and the non-creatives. So what we are saying is that there are those who are wired to think creatively, but the rest of us are hamsters in wheels.

From a biblical perspective on creativity, as well as our reflective nature of the divine, this is unacceptable.

You don’t have to be an artist to be creative. By nature, we are all creative. We are reflections of the master creator. We have a divine breath of life in our lungs. We have a powerful life force coursing through our veins. It is innate and foundational to who we are.

You may say that I’m simply arguing semantics. But remember that semantics are what turn a good message into a great message, and what make an incorrect statement a damaging statement. Our words constantly create new shades of reality both for ourselves and others. When we speak of some as creative, we are creating a reality that keeps most of society at arm’s length from the creative nature of God. This happens because we all create, with our motives, words, actions, and lives.

You may claim that indeed, there are two classes of people. Some people just aren’t in touch with creativity. They aren’t artists, they don’t appreciate design, and they don’t recognize beauty. While this may properly describe some, I would argue that it is a result of decay and destruction both in their souls and in their environments, rather than a general state of being. Those who have witnessed and perpetuated destruction experience a gap in their lives when it comes to creation.

This is seen in Genesis when the man and the woman sin, and go from serving the garden to using the garden to serve themselves, sewing together leaves to hide their nakedness. There is a distance created in that moment, not only from God, but from the man and woman with their creative nature. By turning their back on the task of co-creation that was laid out before them, they abandoned an integral role in the unfolding story of creation. The man and woman’s mandate to nurture creation was rooted in their relationship with the Creator. As such, the joy found in their work was a direct result of their relationship with God.

The removal from the garden was a painful display of the distance created between the man, woman, their Creator, and their intended purpose as creative beings. But the story doesn’t end with the man and the woman standing on the East of the garden …

So we have a choice. We can buy into the myth that some are creative and others aren’t, or we can play a part in creating a new reality. A reality founded in the truth that we are all created to reflect the living God. A reality that our lives are bodies of work pointing to something larger than ourselves. A reality that this life is constantly pointing to a new reality that is yet to come, full of redemption and restoration.

We can usher in this new reality by choosing to act in love and extend grace to those who may be overlooked. We can lend our skills and attention to just and noble causes. In our words and actions, we can tell the compelling story of a God who is setting all things right. By faithfully following Christ, the triumphant experiences and the daily mundane tasks form a body of work that drips the gospel message, and invites others to join us.

You and I can point to the eternal kingdom that is breaking in. It starts with what we create.

 

Sam has worked with churches, building ministries to reach the 20-30 age group, as well as building web and live experiences. He has preached in churches that reach from 35 to 2,000 per weekend. He recently wrote his first book, Creative Theology, which explores the relationship between faith and creativity. You can read his blog at creativetheology.com

  • Zulusafari

    I’ll step out on a limb here and say I’m very much not in agreement. I think this an argument that could be applied to any identifier. Who is a Banker? If I’m not a banker, does that imply that I’m horrible with money and numbers? Aren’t we all bankers/accountants then if we at least manage our own personal finances? So then if we are all ‘bankers’ then suddenly being a banker no longer actually means anything. I sometimes call myself a ‘creative’ but my honest title is ‘missionary.’ In recent years, many churches/pastors have begun to call everyone ‘missionaries’ when in fact most of these non-occupational believers are evangelists, not missionaries. But now that everyone (at least in many western churches) are called missionaries, I’m no longer unique. Calling myself a missionary, no longer actually identifies the work that I do. If everyone is a missionary, it no longer carries any meaning and no one is a missionary.

    I think what you are saying is that we all have some kind of ability to be creative, just like all of us can do some math (banker), and all of us can sing and we can all evangelize, but not all of us do those well and and well enough to be ‘professionals’ or people who do it as an occupation. There is good reason for this and those differences should not be blurred!

    While I enjoy singing in church, I’m not about to call myself a ‘singer’ or ‘vocalist.’ It would be a great disservice and is likely offensive to those who are actually good at it, spend an incredible amount of time and effort practicing it and do it as an occupation. I believe the same is true if you call everyone a creative/creator or everyone a missionary.

  • http://twitter.com/GaryMo Gary Molander

    I think the banker and the singer illustrations aren’t what Sam is saying. With both the banker and the singer illustrations, you’re saying that some bankers are really good at it (i.e. professional), and some just have to manage their personal finances (non-professional). You’re saying the same thing about singers – some are really good, and some are novices.

    Sam is not differentiating between novice and professional. He’s differentiating between class terms that artists tend to lob onto people. There is no validity to anyone ever saying, “She’s more creative than I am.” That sentence doesn’t make sense. Her creativity looks different, and is perhaps expressed through painting, while my creativity is expressed in navigating a business through a recession.

    We all express our equal doses of creativity differently. A tiny group of people express their creativity through their artistic forms. Others teach 2nd graders how to read. Others run a sound board at church. Others preach and tell great stories. Others administrate plans and processes in beautiful ways.

    They are all creative.

    I completely affirm Sam’s contention that we stop using the word “Creatives” to identify those with artistic gifts. Is every artist creative? Yes. But is every Creative an artist? Absolutely not.

  • http://echohub.com/ Scott McClellan

    I’d simply add to Gary’s comment that inclusive/exclusive distinction like creative/non-creative can keep people from fully realizing who they were made to be. I’m glad you sing even though you’re not a “singer,” and I’m glad Gary maintains a handle on his personal finances even though he’s not a “banker.”

    I think what Sam is trying to say is that we shouldn’t let our terms discourage someone from being who they ought to be.

  • Zulusafari

    So is it really just semantics? Should we just rename ‘creatives’ to ‘artists?’ This all smells of being PC now. I think this SNL skit plays well into this conversation… Don’t think to critically, just for fun. http://www.hulu.com/watch/319318/saturday-night-live-you-can-do-anything

    In American English we currently use ‘creatives’ as a term of professional artist, usually in the digital realm. The individuals who still create traditional forms are still called artists.

    This just feels like we need to try and make non-professional artists feel good about their bad art. If the intention of the article is simply to get ‘creatives’ off their high horse, that’s fine, but I’m not okay with bringing everyone else up to the level of ‘good art’ when what they are creating, is not. God would not be honored, much less glorified, in this for two reasons. First we are not critiquing a brother honestly and truthfully. Secondly when God could be honored by an individual who is pushed to be better, instead we are okay with mediocre and God is not glorified in that.

    Please tell me if I’m just totally missing the point of the article. Where am I going wrong here?

  • http://sammahlstadt.com/ Sam Mahlstadt

    This may clarify…
    I don’t think everyone is an artist. Artist and creative are not synonymous.
    I don’t think creative means digital artist. Digital artists are…artists.

    I hate to say this (not really) but I make a more thorough distinction in the book, which you may enjoy reading ;)

    Truly, thanks for reading the post and thinking through these concepts. I think that the conversation is greatly important.

  • http://twitter.com/GaryMo Gary Molander

    I completely agree with you. I’m not sure we got off track, but we’re in complete agreement here.

  • http://twitter.com/noahsapprentice James Robinson

    Hi All,

    I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this in the last year. I echo a number of the previous comments around artists and creatives being different and would further Sam’s discussion by asking whether we can reclaim the term ‘creatives’ so it’s not just about artists?

    I’m working on gathering ‘creatives’ together to discuss : explore : share but I’m not talking about artists, anyone who considers themselves to be creative in any way what so ever will be welcome. I believe God created us in his image which makes us all creative in some respect.

    let’s reclaim the concept of being creative as ‘made in the image of God’

    http://www.anewloom.org
    http://www.noahsapprentice.wordpress.com
    http://www.rewiredchurch.wordpress.com

    thanks to @drbexl for the heads up on this post.

  • http://creativetheology.com/2012/02/02/creative-theology-around-the-web/ Creative Theology Around the Web | Creative Theology

    [...] You can read the entire post here. [...]

  • Smahlstadt

    YES!