Imagine: How Creativity Works [Hardcover]

Jonah Lehrer (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: 2012

This book was pulled from shelves when it came to light that the author fabricated many parts.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 279 pages
• Publisher: Houghton Mifflin; 1st edition (2012)
• Language: English
• ASIN: B007QRI1UQ
• Product Dimensions: 8.4 x 5.6 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (180 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #38,727 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Jonah Lehrer is a Contributing Editor at Wired and the author of How We Decide and Proust Was a Neuroscientist. He graduated from Columbia University and studied at Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar. He's written for The New Yorker, Nature, Seed, The Washington Post and The Boston Globe. He's also a Contributing Editor at Scientific American Mind and National Public Radio's Radio Lab.

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

661 of 706 people found the following review helpful

2.0 out of 5 stars Just Contradictory Anecdotes April 8, 2012

By Tintin

I'm intrigued by the subject matter, so having read several positive reviews and finding myself stuck in an airport, I paid list price for Jonah Lehrer's Imagine: How Creativity Works. I'd read Lehrer's How We Decide a couple of years ago, and enjoyed it. My anticipation, boosted by a recent NPR interview and one in The Economist, steadily disassembled as I read the book itself.

Lehrer does not cite the scientific literature well - there is no list of sources in the back and many claims have no clear references at all. He seems a little gullible (or sensational) in regard to some other studies. One showed that red backgrounds increase test-takers' accuracy and attention to detail, while blue backgrounds double their creativity. Were it so easy. And a neurologist can anticipate a puzzle solver's breakthrough 8 seconds in advance. And, he tells us that all the easy problems of the world have been solved, and that cultivation of athletes in the Unites States should be used as a model for cultivating creativity. Here's my favorite, from a footnote: "Urban areas and the human cortex rely on extremely similar structural patterns to maximize the flow of information and traffic through the system." (p183) There was no reference.

But my main criticism is that the book relies almost exclusively on anecdote. He trots out case after case of well-known successes (masking tape, Bob Dylan, 3M, Pixar, etc.), and some unknown ones (a surfer, a bartender) --always in retrospect -- and draws out what he presents as yet another insight into creativity. But many of these are contradictory. For example, does creativity come out of isolation (p 19) or from teamwork (p120); from breaking convention (p 20) or submitting to its constraints (p 23)? Does it help to be in a positive mood (p32) or a depressed one (p76) or an angry state (161) or a relaxed one (50); does caffeine and other stimulants make the epiphanies less likely (33) or more likely (57)? Should stealing others' ideas should be encouraged (247) or discouraged (244)? Does broadening one's set of skills and interests increase creativity (41) or should one concentrate on a single goal (95)? Does relaxation stimulate creativity (p 45) or does difficulty do it better (54)? Does creativity drive toward perfection (p 63) or is it a celebration of errors? (87). Does insight come in a flash (p 17) or is it revealed slowly, after great effort (56)? Must a good poem be "pulled out of us, like a splinter," (p 56) or is it best "vomited." (19)

All of these, apparently.

The book boils down in the end to four vague conclusions which he calls "meta-ideas."
1. Education is necessary
2. Human mixing stimulates creativity
3. Creativity requires willingness to take risks
4. Society must manage the rewards of innovation

For me, the best revelation is on p 159: Brainstorming sessions, in which "there are no bad ideas" do not often result in good ideas, because criticism is essential. This is the key to the growth of knowledge, good government, and much more -- and a theme that is developed thoroughly in David Deutsch's The Beginning of Infinity. That's a much more stimulating and challenging read, which explains creativity (and much else) far better than this one does.

298 of 326 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars Deserves a fuller examination of mental processes January 31, 2012

By Eric Robert Juggernaut VINE™ VOICE

Amazon Vine™ Review (What's this?)

`Imagine' is a light treatment on the creative process. Anyone familiar with Lehrer's previous work or that of other pop science writers will feel right at home with this book. Lehrer's writing is clear and his use of New Journalism to convey complex scientific ideas through stories makes what could be daunting material very accessible. As a result, the book spurs ideas on a number of levels--cognitive, artistic, and social. Of course, the style also means that the text is rather superficial and leaves the reader begging for a more penetrating study.

This is not due to the book's scope. It is aimed at explaining `how creativity works'--an awesome concept to be sure--but Lehrer does not provide a central thesis to this end. He surveys a number of fascinating aspects of the creative process--insight, novelty, hard work, team work, environment, and others--but seems to shuffle through them without truly grasping their essence. As a result, the various themes feel disparate and disconnected.

One example stands out: In the first chapter, Lehrer talks about the necessary condition one must be in for insight to arise and innovation to occur--a stress-free, relaxing environment. Then, in the third chapter, he talks about how this isn't necessary and how stimulants and other drugs help to narrow focus and thus lend to productivity. Some people are creative because they treat themselves to relaxation; some are creative because they plunge themselves into a stressful, energetic environment. As such, the reader has nothing to hold onto and so does not feel any closer to understanding.

This is reconciled to some degree in the fourth chapter when Lehrer explains how natural conditions such as mania and depression (and manic depressive syndrome) contribute to an organic push/pull of creativity. While it is certainly an interesting thought, the proof isn't quite complete.

More importantly, the theme deserves a more comprehensive foundation on the science of mental processes. While Lehrer does an admirable job of explaining psychological phenomena with physiological causes, the basics are left rather untouched. We know that the right hemisphere emits alpha waves to spark insight and that amphetamines increase the amount of dopamine transferred between neurons, but we don't know what a thought is, how we learn, and what is going on in the brain when we imagine something.

As an avid reader of popular neurology, I can say that most of this is far from being understood. But, if it is not understood, it would still help to acknowledge this fact and simply formulate the theory around that contingency. As it is, Lehrer makes it seem as though this foundation is irrelevant.

It must be said that this book is valuable for simply spurring these questions. It is clear that Lehrer has access to some of the best insight in popular science today. Read this book for that insight, and then use it to come up with your own theories on the creative process.

51 of 59 people found the following review helpful

2.0 out of 5 stars Very weak and unsupported conclusions April 14, 2012

By Lakers

This is basically just a series of anecdotes, from which the author tries to draw sweeping conclusions (which are logically flawed).

Example 1 - He says that people in urban areas are more creative. His only support for this claim is that he looked at a chart of where the most patent applications come from. For companies, patents are typically filed by lawyers, on behalf of the engineers and scientists that come up with them. The conclusion that lawyers live in cities is arguably valid, but the conclusion he draws is not.

Example 2 - Another sweeping statement is that "Every creative journey begins with a problem. It starts with a feeling of frustration, the dull ache of not being able to find the answer. We have worked hard, but we've hit the wall. We have no idea what to do next."
His support for the claim that every creative journey begins this way is a single anecdote about how Bob Dylan wrote his best music after being frustrated about performing music he wasn't happy with.

These are just two examples, but I often found myself thinking "How can you SAY that!?"

I gave it a second star for the book jacket, which was shiny enough to lure me into purchasing it. Kudos on that.