I was thinking…
Intangible concepts like creativity often raise an interesting question: What exactly is creativity? As humans, we tend to view things in extremes. A simple example of this is how we think about creativity: something entirely new, unrecognizable from anything that has ever existed versus something new but with many characteristics of things that have existed before. This polarized view can be a limiting misconception, preventing us from exploring the full spectrum of creativity. It leads people to believe that they aren’t truly creative unless they come up with something entirely unheard of. However, this view is the most damaging. It can push people to create something new that, while innovative, is completely unrelatable to their audience.
What we truly want, I believe, is what I call “Informed Creativity.” You may have heard the phrase “Necessity is the mother of invention,” and this couldn’t be more true for creativity. The real need for creativity arises at the intersection of designing something novel and addressing an existing need or desire.
When people say that rock music isn’t what it used to be, or that there are no good bands anymore, it’s often because the bands fall into one of two categories:
A dull, derivative version of an already existing archetype (like Greta Van Fleet’s similarity to Led Zeppelin).
So far removed from what people loved about rock music (like Polyphia), that they fail to resonate with the audience.
That being said, I do think there’s a place for both of these kinds of bands, but I also think they serve as examples of “missing the mark.” The members of Polyphia are undeniably talented, and their musicianship is impressive, but the problem lies in their unrelatability.
Take a simple example: a love song. When you’re getting to know someone new, and you start feeling those warm, fuzzy emotions, you might put on a love song to enhance those feelings. But when would you ever feel compelled to put on a Polyphia track? When you’re doing math? You see where I’m going with this.
While their music is impressive, it isn’t necessarily creative in the sense that it’s relatable or emotionally connecting. It’s more about showcasing technical skill. For some, this can still be valid—it’s performance art. I’m sure there’s an audience that would love to see Polyphia live, just as there are people who enjoy watching someone juggle. But for me, I wouldn’t personally classify it as art or creativity.
True creativity is the ability to create something that feels fresh yet evokes emotion. It's difficult to stir emotions if your creation isn't relatable. Great art should always make the audience feel something. Your message fails to connect if you’re forcing the audience to see things solely from your perspective, without providing any reference for their own understanding. True creativity thrives in the balance between the artist and the audience—it cannot exist in isolation.
These opinions are strictly my own—don’t attribute them to the band members, as they’ll likely disagree with me. Feel free to shoot me an email; I’d love to hear your thoughts on this!
