The novelty myth as a normative model of creativity: a critical study of design practice
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2026.27323Abstract
This article examines how creativity is understood within contemporary graphic design practice, arguing that it is increasingly reduced to the continuous production of novelty. While creativity research generally treats novelty alone as insufficient to constitute creativity (Amabile, 1996; Boden, 2004; Runco & Jaeger, 2012), contemporary design environments often equate creativity with visible differentiation and constant renewal. Drawing on sociological and systems-based approaches to creativity, Barthes’ concept of myth and Reckwitz’s creativity dispositif, the article introduces the novelty myth to describe how “the new” operates as a normative expectation. Through practice-based artistic inquiry, combining autoethnographic reflection with parafictional design experiments developed within Unagency, the study examines how procedural forms of novelty become visible when familiar operations of design practice are isolated and exaggerated. It contributes to critical creativity studies by bringing sociological theories of creativity into dialogue with situated artistic inquiry, using graphic design practice as a diagnostic site for examining continuous novelty.
Keywords:
creativity, novelty, design practice, practice-based research, critical creativity studies, creativity dispositif, iteration, transformational creativityHow to Cite
Share
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Adorno, T. W., & Horkheimer, M. (1997). Dialectic of enlightenment. Verso.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press.
Barthes, R. (1991). Mythologies. Noonday Press.
Bödeker, T. (2023). On the concept of knowledge in artistic research: Summary. w/k – Between Science & Art Journal. https://doi.org/10.55597/e8744
Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203508527
Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, È. (2005). The new spirit of capitalism. Verso. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10767-006-9006-9
Borgdorff, H. (2011). The production of knowledge in artistic research. In M. Biggs & H. Karlsson (Eds.), The Routledge companion to research in the arts (pp. 44–63). Routledge.
Borgdorff, H. (2026). Artistic research and the lingering gaze of thought. Journal for Artistic Research. https://doi.org/10.22501/jarnet.0095
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1999). Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807916.018
Černevičiūtė, J., & Liebutė, I. (2022). Cultural probes method in design research: Creativity in sketches. Creativity Studies, 15(1), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2022.15473
Černevičiūtė, J., Strazdas, R., Jančoras, Ž., Kregždaitė, R., & Morkevičius, V. (2015). Kūrybinių industrijų plėtojimo kompleksiniai veiksniai: Kolektyvinio kūrybingumo ugdymas. Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative everything: Design, fiction, and social dreaming. MIT Press.
Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 36(4/138), 273–290.
Flores Heymann, B., & Briedis, M. (2025). Challenging human creativity: An exercise of co-creation with generative artificial intelligence. Creativity Studies, 18(2), 570–583. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2025.21139
Godart, F., Seong, S., & Phillips, D. J. (2020). The sociology of creativity: Elements, structures, and audiences. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 489–510. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054833
Han, B.-C. (2015). The burnout society. Stanford University Press.
Kiriya, I., Kompatsiaris, P., & Mylonas, Y. (Eds.). (2020). The industrialization of creativity and its limits. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53164-5
Lambert-Beatty, C. (2009). Make-believe: Parafiction and plausibility. October, 129, 51–84. https://doi.org/10.1162/octo.2009.129.1.51
Lijster, T. (2018). The future of the new. Valiz.
Mattern, S. (2018). Maintenance and care. Places Journal. https://doi.org/10.22269/181120
North, M. (2013). Novelty: A history of the new. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226077901.001.0001
Reckwitz, A. (2017). The invention of creativity: Modern society and the culture of the new. Polity Press.
Rosa, H. (2013). Social acceleration: A new theory of modernity. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/rosa14834
Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Russell, A. L., & Vinsel, L. (2018). After innovation, turn to maintenance. Technology and Culture, 59(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2018.0004
Sullivan, G. (2010). Art practice as research: Inquiry in visual arts (2nd ed.). Sage.
Vanni, I., & Crosby, A. (2023). Place-based methodologies for design research: An ethnographic approach. Design Studies, 85, Article 101168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2023.101168
Verganti, R., Dell’Era, C., & Swan, K. S. (2021). Design thinking: Critical analysis and future evolution. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(6), 603–622. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12610
View article in other formats
CrossMark check
Published
Issue
Section
Copyright
Copyright (c) 2026 The Author(s). Published by Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.