Creativity as neoliberal self-governance
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to analyze the problem of non-professional creativity in contemporary self-help literature. Creativity, an element of work organization in the post-Fordist era, has been the subject of many critical analyses. I focus on creativity as it appears in everyday life, with the support of an examination of self-help handbooks that refer to far-east traditions, at the same time being critical of the Western lifestyle. Self-help literature is viewed here as a tool aiding the neoliberal governmentality of society. I am most of all interested in how contemporary discourse on non-professional creativity promotes technologies of autonomy aimed at the production of responsible and self-sufficient individuals. I argue that creativity is today a key mechanism of governance. It is not limited to the professional sphere but is playing an increasing role in our private lives. It is used to produce more elusive and flexible forms of self-governance than more openly repressive forms of power (based on top-down order and control).
Keyword : creativity, governmentality, neoliberalism, post-Fordism, self-help literature
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, E. (2005). The new spirit of Capitalism. Verso. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-006-9006-9
Carroll, R. (2018). The bullet journal method: Track the past, order the present, design the future. Portfolio/Penguin.
Erjavec, K., & Volčič, Z. (2009). Management through Spiritual Self-Help Discourse in Post-Socialist Slovenia. Discourse and Communication, 3(2), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481309102449
Fernández-Herrería, A., & Martínez-Rodríguez, F. M. (2016). Deconstructing the Neoliberal “Entrepreneurial Self ”: A critical perspective derived from a global “Biophilic Consciousness”. Policy Futures in Education, 14(3), 314–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210316631709
Foucault, M. (2010). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the College de France, 1978–1979. Picador.
Getz, I., & Robinson, A. G. (2003). Innovate or die: Is that a fact? Creativity and Innovation Management, 12(3), 130–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8691.00276
Hazleden, R. (2003). Love Yourself: The relationship of the self with itself in popular self-help texts. Journal of Sociology, 39(4), 413–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004869003394006
Kalin, N. M. (2016). We’re all creatives now: Democratized creativity and education. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 13(2), 32–44.
Kondo, M. (2014). The life-changing magic of tidying: A simple, effective way to banish clutter forever. Vermilion.
Loreau, D. (2018). L’art de la Liste: Simplify, organise, enrich your life. Trapeze.
Matza, T. (2012). Moscow’s echo: Technologies of the self, publics, and politics on the Russian talk show. Cultural Anthropology, 24(3), 489–522. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1360.2009.01038.x
Mogi, K. (2018). Awakening Your Ikigai: How the Japanese wake up to joy and purpose every day. The Experiment.
Mould, O. (2018). Against creativity. Verso.
Navarro, T. (2019). Kintsugi: The Japanese art of embracing the imperfect and loving your flaws. Sounds True.
Prichard, C. (2002). Creative selves? Critically reading “Creativity” in management discourse. Creativity and Innovation Management, 11(4), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8691.00258
Rimke, H. M. (2000). Governing citizens through self-help literature. Cultural Studies, 14(1), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/095023800334986
Rose, N. (1999). Governing the soul: The shaping of the private self. Free Association Books.
Tie, W. (2004). The psychic life of governmentality. Culture, Theory and Critique, 45(2), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/1473578042000283844
Townley, B. (1995). “Know Thyself ”: Self-awareness, self-formation and managing. Organization, 2(2), 271–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/135050849522010
Yoon, S. J., Chae, Y. J., Yang, K., & Kim, H. (2019). Governing through creativity: Discursive formation and Neoliberal subjectivity in Korean firms. Organization, 26(2), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508418805286