Abstract
Research on creativity is generally at the level of the individual, but scholars are beginning to offer conceptual frameworks at higher analytical levels: careers, social network s and institutional field s. This work approaches creativity as emerging from biographical transposition and relational flows across social network s. Ambiguity and heterogeneity are the raw materials of creativity, unfolding through mechanisms of spillover , transposition and recombination . The chapter reviews work in the macro-level tradition and discusses the existing gap between micro and macro levels in creativity research. Bridging this gap involves a dual process: showing how structural processes create idea-conducive conditions and how personality and identity make it possible to harness the conditions. To that end, a cross-level method is proposed, encompassing identity , network s and the field . It is applied to two cases: Laclos’ novel Les Liaisons Dangereuses and Diaghilev’s Les Ballets Russes. If generally believed that creativity is facilitated by openness, it can also be helped by blockage, when blocked mobility inverses career paths and transposes ideas and practices across social domains. As shown, unexpected career shifts introduce contradictions, force improvisation and promote emotional ambivalence—factors associated with the capacity to forge new connections. People do not always make new combinations: these are sometimes made for them.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The graph is available online at the following HTML address: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=intrigue%2C+liaison&year_start=1700&year_end=1900&corpus=7&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cintrigue%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cliaison%3B%2Cc0.
- 2.
“Germany Divided’—Duerckheim collection at the British Museum” by Jackie Wullschlager, The Financial Times, published online on 31/01/2014. Retrieved on 04/05/2014.
References
Allan, D. (2012). Les Liaisons Dangereuses through the eyes of André Malraux. Journal of European Studies, 42(2), 123–139.
Arthur, B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. New York, NY: Free Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burt, R. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.
Cattani, G., & Ferriani, S. (2008). A core/periphery perspective on individual creative performance: social networks and cinematic achievements in the hollywood film industry. Organization Science, 19(6), 824–844.
Collins, R. (1998). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Harvard, MA: Belknap Press.
Coser, L. (1965). Men of ideas: A sociologist’s view. New York, NY: Free Press.
Crépin, A. (2004). Choderlos de Laclos l’auteur des Liaisons dangereuses. Annales historiques de la Révolution française, 338, 157–158.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York NY: Harper Perennial.
Emirbayer, M., & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology, 99(6), 1411–1454.
Engel, M. (1967). Frank Lloyd Wright and Cubism: A study in ambiguity. American Quarterly, 19(1), 24–38.
Eysenck, H. (1993). Creativity and personality: Suggestions for a theory. Psychological Inquiry, 4(3), 147–178.
George, J., & Zhou, J. (2001). When openness to experience and conscientiousness are related to creative behavior: An interactional approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 513–524.
Goldstone, J. (1993). Revolution and rebellion in the early modern world. Berkeley CA: UC Press.
Grigoriev, S. (1953). The Diaghilev Ballet 1909–1929. London: Constable.
Hargadon A, Sutton R (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 716–749.
Hodson, M. (1987). Nijinsky’s choreographic method: Visual sources from Roerich for “Le Sacre du printemps”. Dance Research Journal, 18(2), 7–15.
Ibarra, H., Martin, K., & Wenpin, T. (2005). Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science, 16(4), 359–371.
Lachmann, R. (2000). Capitalists in spite of themselves. New York NY: Oxford University Press.
Lifar, S. (1969). The Russian ballet in Russia and in the West. Russian Review, 28(4), 396–402.
Lingo, E., & O’Mahony, S. (2010). Nexus work: Brokerage on creative projects. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1), 47–81.
Malraux, A. (1970). Le Triangle noir Laclos Goya. Saint-Just. Paris: Gallimard.
Macdonald, N. (1975). Diaghilev observed by critics in England and the United States, 1911–1929. New York, NY: Dance Horizons.
Merton, R. (1972). Insiders and outsiders: A chapter in the sociology of knowledge. American Journal of Sociology, 78(1), 9–47.
Meyerson D, Scully M (1995) Tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change. Organization Science, 6(5), 585–600.
Padgett, J., & Ansell, C. (1993). Robust action and the rise of the Medici, 1400–1434. American Journal of Sociology, 98(6), 1259–1319.
Padgett, J., & McLean, P. (2006). Organizational invention and elite transformation: The birth of partnership systems in Renaissance Florence. American Journal of Sociology, 111(5), 1463–1568.
Padgett, J., & Powell, W. (2012). The emergence of organizations and markets. New Jersey, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Phillips, D. (2011). Jazz and the disconnected: City structural disconnectedness and the emergence of a jazz canon, 1897–1933. American Journal of Sociology, 117(2), 420–483.
Pritchard, J. (2011). Les Ballets Russes de Diaghilev—quand l’art danse avec la musique. Paris: Hayot.
Jones, S. (2013). Literature, modernism, and dance. Oxford UK: Oxford University Press.
Rand, P. (2009). Introduction. In A. Purvis, R. Peter, & W. Anna (Eds.), The Ballets Russes and the Art of Design. New York, NY: Monacelli Press.
Semenova, O. (2010). The dialogue of cultures and the culture of dialogue. Saint Petersburg, Russia: Saint Petersburg State University Publishing House.
Simonton, D. (2004). Creativity in science: Chance, logic, genius, and zeitgeist. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sgourev, S. V. (2013). How Paris gave rise to Cubism (and Picasso): Ambiguity and fragmentation in radical innovation. Organization Science, 24(6), 1601–1617.
Sgourev, S. V. (2015). Brokerage as catalysis: How Diaghilev’s Ballets Russes escalated Modernism. Organization Studies, 36(3), 343–361.
Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
Vailland, R. (1963). Le Regard froid: Réflexions, esquisses, libelles, 1945–1962. Paris: Bernard Grasset.
Vosburg, S. (1998). The effects of positive and negative mood on divergent-thinking performance. Creativity Research Journal, 11(2), 165–172.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sgourev, S.V. (2016). Dangerous Liaisons: Bridging Micro and Macro Levels in Creativity Research. In: Corazza, G., Agnoli, S. (eds) Multidisciplinary Contributions to the Science of Creative Thinking. Creativity in the Twenty First Century. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-618-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-618-8_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-617-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-618-8
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)