How do we judge if a piece of creative work is good? Conventions say we can count the number of awards it wins, the ROI it generates, the cult-following it produces, the noise it makes in media, the razor sharp edge by which it cuts down all its competitors or the longevity of its idea which builds brand equity. And the list goes on. However, I argue that one cannot truly see the value of a piece of creative work until he touches the soul of the work and weigh for himself, the goodness of it.
{ via Art for Social Change Toolkit }
Yes, there is a social conscience in a piece of creative work. For creativity – apart from self-gratifying endeavours – is a social activity. You create so someone can see it, engage with it and learn from it. It follows that when we, the trained professionals "create", our work possess an innate ability to probe into minds and hearts of others. We artfully select a point of view while omitting others. And for those of us equipped with acute sensitivities and immaculate style, our points are capable of focusing in like laser beams, bearing into one's soul to create not merely knee jerk reactions but paradigm shifts of seismic proportions. Wow, that's a lot of power. And lot of responsibility too. JR's art (above) is able to speak humility and honesty into a problem perhaps more complicated than nuclear physics.
So I do propose that we, the trained creative professionals, when faced with a wall full of ideas, begin to see our ideas as morally biased creatures, powerful to raise up and equally powerful to condemn. There are many things that are smart, even genius, but definitely not good. Can we, the creatives, pledge to be socially responsible citizens of our society, pursuing first the bigger good before the petty adoration (below : campaign by Ogilvy Japan for Ogilvy Creative School)?
{ via Ads of The World }
Borrowing Solomon's words, "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion." Notice also, there's no mention here about the quality of execution.