Anxious Creativity

Front matter

CRITICAL INTERVENTIONS SERIES = m &

ANXIOUS CREATIVITY

WHEN IMAGINATION FAILS r Pa F

Contents

PART | Creative Subjects

1 Anxious Moments: Anticipation Meets Uncertainty 2 Creative You: Self-Help to the Rescue

3 The Neoliberal Imagination: When More Is Not Enough

Introduction

Imagination in Crisis

Most Americans will tell you they live in the world’s most creative country. But when pushed, they'll admit they don’t feel creative themselves. These findings come from the largest survey of creativity to date, conducted by the Adobe Corporation and backed by previous research." It’s no big surprise Americans perceive creative abundance, given the nation’s expansive media and consumer culture. More shocking is the disconnect with people’s actual lives. Many see a country brimming with expressive opportunity, much like the American Dream itself. But when reality sets in, they find themselves disregarded, uninspired, and unable to imagine a way out. Often, they turn on each other, their leaders, or even themselves—never realizing that larger factors may be in play.

You really can’t blame Americans—immersed as they are in creative reminders, with everyone posting selfies, streaming movies, or shopping online. On one hand, the creative impulse is something everybody loves and wants to support. People see artistry as a public good and a road to personal growth, while increasingly recognizing the economic utility of the nation’s “creative industries.” Buoyed by slogans like “America First,” they hold the highest views of their nation’s creativity—ahead of countries like Britain, France, Germany, and Japan. Americans envision a land where anything is possible with enough energy and drive. But as most soon discover, not everyone wins in the creativity game. Among national populations, Americans report the lowest views of personal creativity, as an astonishing 84 percent say they can’t reach their potentials. Most blame job pressures or ratcheting competition, with 72 percent saying workplace “risk aversion stifles creativity” and that “creativity is discouraged by the education system.””

Over a decade ago, innovation guru Richard Florida began warning of “America’s Looming Creativity Crisis’—writing in the pages of the Harvard Business Review that “the land of opportunity and innovation—is on the verge of losing its competitive edge.”? The problem didn’t come from external coercion or any natural advantage of other countries, according to Florida. Instead, the U.S. was losing a far more important capacity. “America’s growth miracle turns on one key factor: its openness to new ideas, which has allowed it

DOI: 10.4324/9780429296437-1 This chapter has been made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.

to mobilize and harness the creative energies of its people.” Not only was business losing its taste for novelty, but the country was closing its doors to talented newcomers. Within a few years, Newsweek joined the fray with a cover about “The Creativity Crisis.”* This time the blame lay in too much media watching and failing schools. “All around us are matters of national and international importance calling out for creative solutions,” Newsweek said. But rather than acquiring such problem-solving skills, “kids spend hours in front of the TV and playing videogames,” with schools “overwhelmed by curriculum standards leaving no room in the day for a creativity class.”

Anxious Creativity: When Imagination Fails examines America’s desperate hunger for inspiration, as millions fret about a nation in decline. Once a beacon of prosperity and freedom, the U.S. today seems lacking—while other nations seem to be gaining economic and moral high ground. Insecurity now looms as both cause and effect of a creeping neoliberalism, in which wealth is the measure of all things and failure a matter of personal shame. Many experts speak of failing ideas, both the loss of old ones and the lack of anything new, with a sense of apprehension now haunting American society. Of course, there’s nothing wrong about a little anxiety to get a person going. What psychologists call “positive stress” can be a motivator in being productive or facing a challenge—sometimes giving a person just the right nudge. And philosophers long have argued that existential anxiety is what drives creativity.

But as most people know, too much anxiety can have the opposite effect— paralyzing the fretful creator with writer’s block or stage fright. Something similar is happening in America today. News reports abound about rampant “economic anxiety,” “racial anxiety,” “election anxiety,” and, of course, “Trump anxiety.” This is setting aside the fact that one in five Americans suffer diagnosable anxiety disorders and the country spends over $2 billion on anti-anxiety drugs.° The New York Times has run a series of articles about “Anxious Americans” and “America’s New Anxiety Disorder,” with the New York Post dubbing Millennials the “Anxious Generation.”’ Many people have that nagging feeling that something might go wrong, often unable to name a clear reason or cause. The feeling blossoms when anticipation meets uncertainty.

In all of this, one often hears that with a bit more “creativity” things might turn around, whether this means novel thinking or more open attitudes. And who can argue with that? As both an “old” and “new” idea, creativity long has taken many faces—from imagination and the spirit of invention to enchantment and the genesis of life itself—as societies have projected creativity onto their deepest desires. But what happens when this magical substance becomes an object of public policy, corporate agenda, or consumer desire? This book argues that creativity is a mixed bag at best, now both symptom and cause of the anxiety coursing through America. To examine these matters, Anxious Creativity divides into four sections, examining individuals, groups, institutions, and societies through creativity’s lens.

35 66 29 66

Part I, “Creative Subjects,” looks at how people engage creativity and why they get frustrated. America’s fierce individualism certainly doesn’t help. Premised as the cornerstone of liberty itself, individualism has gotten out of hand in the new millennium. Creativity plays right into this through the myth of the “solitary artist’—an image so ingrained that seven in ten Americans today say they must be alone to find inspiration.® Cultural obsessions with Silicon Valley “creative entrepreneurs” as lone geniuses only underscore such beliefs. In more general terms, marketing also reinforces the “self” with laser-like appeals to personal likes and preferences. Advertising always has done this in promising to make “you” more appealing, interesting, or happy. But matters have intensified in a “Think Different” era when no one can be creative enough. This consumer atomization has occurred as more people live alone than ever, and distrust of collective entities has reached all-time highs—whether this means a corporation, news outlet, or government office.

Part II, “Creative Differences,” asks whether all people can be creative and what can be done to nurture and support this—as is done with intelligence and other attributes. Much as one might think otherwise, creativity rarely flourishes without encouragement. Famous prodigies such as Mozart and Picasso were heavily tutored and drilled as youngsters, and both had accomplished artistic parents. And if creativity is unevenly distributed, what are the best ways of proceeding in a society that places a value on human difference and equity? Even in an internet age suggesting “We’re All Artists Now,” creative fields remain deeply divided along socio-economic lines.” Factors like age, ethnicity, and geography also play huge roles in this, not to mention inequalities in education itself. Along with myths of unaided natural ability, the stereotype of the “crazy artist” perpetuates further misunderstandings. It romanticizes mental illness as a prerequisite for prodigious accomplishment, while casting creative people as inherently unstable and willingly poor. This marginalizes artists while minimizing an often deadly disease.

Part II, “Creative Industries,” begins by examining why companies are reluctant to try out new ideas and how anxiety impedes innovation. Experiment requires risk, after all—and this is the opposite of what shareholders want these days. As a result, customers see more of the same, or modest updates on what they already buy. This tendency is nowhere more evident than in “creative industries” like movies and TV, where risk-avoidant studios pump out endless sequels, remakes, or adaptations of already successful books or comics. Government and foundation funding for basic research has been dropping as well. At the same time, creative education in America’s schools and universities has been decimated in recent decades, both though direct funding cuts and the privileging of science, engineering, and business. Even though 90 percent of families say they want art education in K-12 schools, such offerings are at their lowest levels in 50 years.'° Earlier and earlier, anxieties start about a youngster’s career prospects or college aspirations, as teachers themselves get evaluated by standardized metrics. This puts pressure on everyone involved to concentrate on what can be reduced to data and statistics—usually to the detriment of experiment and creativity.

Part IV, “Creative Societies,” addresses the role of policy and government in furthering creativity. Even as the U.S. languishes in anxious creativity, so-called “creative economies” are blossoming throughout the globe in nations such as Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Singapore, and Sweden. In one way or another, creativity serves as an inspiration for nationalist ambitions everywhere, whether in the form of “new” enterprises (media, culture, and tourism) or ever-expanding markets (enabled via globalization, networks, and emerging technologies). In all of this there is a glimmer of good news, however. Owing partly to national agendas, a quiet revolution is beginning to take form— upending longstanding beliefs about how innovation and creativity come about. Individualism is giving way to a new spirit of collaboration and teamwork. Competition is softening in a new atmosphere of shared research and mutual support. This revolution is not coming from political ideologues or philosophical discontents. Leading economists, scientists, and creative professionals are making the case based on simple pragmatics—as well as an eternal truism: that throughout the ages societies have moved forward when people work together.'' While individuals always will have their own ideas and should be rewarded suitably, it takes collective effort to get meaningful things done.

Growing from creativity’s anxious status, a series of questions will be explored throughout this book. Central among these is whether creativity has an inherent virtue, as commonly is assumed, or whether creative value is always a matter of perspective. This throws into relief the question of whether creativity is a singular quality, an aspect of social interaction, or a multivariate “complex adaptive system.”!* Another question asks whether creativity is a ubiquitous quality possessed by everyone, or is something distributed variously by different means and measures. In either case, the overriding role of neoliberal capitalism comes into play in promoting creativity as both rationale for downward mobility and a possible way out of it. This begs the question of whether it is possible to maintain creativity as a social good, while also embracing its disruptive (and sometimes destructive) aspects. Put in straightforward political and ethical terms, Anxious Creativity poses several recurring questions. How is society made, more or less, by virtue of how we conceptualize creativity and the creative process? What critical relationship does “creativity” have to the market or possessive individualism? How might creativity contribute to social change? What are the key impediments to a progressive orientation to creativity and what can be done to challenge them?

Answering these questions will mean rethinking some common assumptions. Most people see creativity as a quintessential expression of a person’s “self.” While neuroscientists now say that certain brain structures indeed do make creativity more likely in some people, comparable talent often goes undeveloped in many others. This has led to a view of creativity more as an “effect” of the surrounding culture than a substance magically springing from an individual. Recent research into human cognition also shows how much people rely on others for their ideas. Not just opinions or beliefs, but also such simple things as driving directions or remembering to buy groceries. As social creatures, people draw heavily upon “distributed intelligence” stored in each other’s minds, not to mention their extensions in books, maps, and, especially, these online sources. 1? Keep in mind as well that artists and inventors emerge from histories of previous efforts and cultures in which others often worked on the same topics.

Obviously, these conclusions won’t sit well with everyone. On many levels, anxious creativity links to contradictions deeply embedded in American culture: tensions between individual and community, competition and cooperation, and the relationships between the private and public sectors. As this book will explore, creativity debates now resonate in education, economics, and public policy, as well as such arcane matters as technology distribution and arts funding. The stakes get even higher if one considers creativity a key ingredient in scientific research and successful entrepreneurship. Particularly in an American context, anxious creativity is rooted in foundational conflicts over growth, progress, and change as they play out in the often volatile atmosphere of democratic capitalism. All of which is to say that the question of Anxious Creativity has never been more urgent—as both philosophical ideal and a point of practicality.

Simply put, Anxious Creativity argues that the innovation crisis derives from systemic fractures in American society—subject to all manner of amplification and manipulation—especially in these stressful times. This matters because creativity and anxiety are so directly tied to how people imagine the future, whether this means hoping for the best or expecting the worst. With some estimating that as many as 30 percent of Americans now work in creative industries or related fields, it certainly can be said that everyone consumes or practices some form of creative something every day.'* So how did America get it so wrong? Ultimately, the answers lie in facing up to the nation’s anxious demeanor, recognizing that help is needed, and being open to something different. Maybe something a little creative? Clearly, digging into business-as-usual is worsening matters. As a book, Anxious Creativity will walk readers through widely accepted explanations for the nation’s innovation woes, while pointing out that solutions are not really that hard to find. They lie in resources Americans can find in each other.

1 State of Create Study: Global Benchmark Study on Attitudes and Beliefs about Creativity at Work, School, and Home, Adobe Corp. (2016) www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/p ressroom/pdfs/Adobe_State_of_Create_Global_Benchmark_Study.pdf (accessed Jan. 26, 2019).

WN

All statistics in this section from State of Create.

Richard Florida, “America’s Looming Creativity Crisis,” Harvard Business Review (Oct. 2004) https://hbr.org/2004/10/americas-looming-creativity-crisis (accessed Aug. 18, 2018).

Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, “The Creativity Crisis,” Newsweek (Jul. 10, 2010) www.newsweek.com/creativity-crisis-74665 (accessed Jan. 26, 2019). K.H. Kim, “The Creativity Crisis: It’s Getting Worse,” Idea to Value (Apr. 2017) www.ideatovalue.com/crea/khkim/2017/04/creativity-crisis-getting-worse (acces sed Jan. 26, 2019).

Nitsuh Abebe, “America’s New ‘Anxiety’ Disorder,” New York Times (Apr. 18, 2017) www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/magazine/americas-new-anxiety-disorder. html?mcubz=0 (accessed Aug. 18, 2018).

T.M. Luhrmann, “The Anxious Americans,” New York Times (Jul. 18, 2015) www. nytimes.com/2015/07/19/opinion/sunday/the-anxious-americans.html?mcubz=0 (accessed Aug. 18, 2018); Karol Markowitz, “They Can’t Even: Why Millennials are the ‘Anxious Generation,” New York Post (Mar. 20, 2016) http://nypost.com/ 2016/03/20/they-cant-even-why-millennials-are-the-anxious-generation (accessed Feb. 18, 2019).

State of Create Study: Global Benchmark Study on Attitudes and Beliefs about Creativity at Work, School, and Home, Adobe Corp. (2012) www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/p ressroom/pdfs/Adobe_State_of_Create_Global_Benchmark_Study.pdf (accessed Jan. 26, 2019).

Laura M. Holson, “We're All Artists Now,” New York Times (Sep. 4, 2015) www. nytimes.com/2015/09/06/opinion/were-all-artists-now.html (accessed Jan. 1, 2019). Randy I. Cohen, “American Public Says YES to Arts Education,” Americans for the Arts (Mar. 5, 2016) http://blog.americansforthearts.org/2016/03/05/the-am erican-public-says-yes-to-arts-education (accessed Aug. 21, 2018).

John Hartley, Wen Wen, and Henry Siling Li, Creative Economy and Culture: Challenges, Changes and Futures for the Creative Industries (New York: Sage, 2015); Giuseppe Cocco and Barbara Szaniecki, eds., Creative Capitalism, Multitudinous Creativity: Radicalities and Alterities (New York: Lexington, 2015).

Murray Gell-Mann, “What is Complexity?” Complexity 1, no. 1 (1995) http:// complexity.martinsewell.com/Gell95.pdf (accessed Aug. 7, 2018).

Steven Sloman and Philip Fernbach, The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone (New York: Riverhead, 2017).

Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It’s Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Everyday Life (New York: Basic Books, 2002) p. 74.

Part |

This section introduces Anxious Creativity by looking at how individuals perceive their own creativity (or lack thereof)—as well as ways advertising and self-help encourage consumers to “create” better versions of themselves. To many, creativity means making something from nothing—as in sagas of the “creation of the universe” or the birth of the species. With roots in Greek mythology, this ex nihilo (“out of nothing”) principle deeply influenced the Western mind, especially as seen in Christian faith and American-style capitalism. In cultures worldwide, creation stories provide explanations for civilization’s most vexing questions: the origins and purpose of life, the meaning of individual existence, mysteries of the cosmos and the unknown. And, of course, in today’s world the concept implies a host of enviable abilities. Saying someone exhibits a “creative personality” or finds “creative solutions” imbues the person with a knack for invention or helpfulness, but of a sort that can’t quite be identified. The ineffability of creativity is part of what gives it its celebrated “magic.”

But anxious times bring changes in temperament. In an America proud of its inventiveness and “can-do” spirit, more and more people worry they can’t measure up. Creativity has joined qualities like beauty and fitness as things everybody wants but nobody has in sufficient measure. The resulting insecurity feeds broader anxieties, as economic worries make people more cautious in their thinking and less generous to others. Creativity suffers as companies spend less on research, people give less to arts institutions, government funding gets cut, and creative education dwindles in schools. The crisis isn’t just in creative fields. Economists now speak of a sweeping innovation crisis in science and technology, as the U.S. shows signs of falling behind other nations. Heightened competition and social isolation only seem to make things worse.

The book begins by looking at an America plagued by writer’s block, along with other anxieties over money, politics, and cultural controversies. Chapter 1, “Anxious Moments: Anticipation Meets Uncertainty,” examines anxious creativity through the writings of Brené Brown, Martin Heidegger, Soren Kierkegaard, Jacques Lacan, Joseph LeDoux, and Rollo May. Among other questions, discussion examines how and why manageable anxiety can

DOT: 10.4324/9780429296437-2 This chapter has been made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.

become a destructive force. While creativity can accompany mild forms of worry and sometimes alleviate stress, its advocates overstate their case in pushing it as a universal cure-all. In his canonical 1964 work The Anxious Object, art critic Harold Rosenberg wrote of the difficulties that result when definitions of art lose coherence and societies become confused about aesthetic meaning.” Might today’s advocacy of the “creative industries” be doing the same thing? Drawing on recent studies of working artists, this chapter points out that not everyone in the “creative class” is faring well in today’s ebullient embrace of artistry.

Worry over America’s declining innovation is bringing creativity into the public spotlight as never before. Chapter 2, “Creative You: Self-Help to the Rescue,” looks at how the resulting “crisis” talk (and its reality) makes creative qualities all the more desired, even as they grow more elusive and rare. In personal terms, most people feel creativity is missing in their lives—evidenced in a rising self-help industry catering to one’s “inner artist” or forgotten childhood. Amazon.com currently lists over 57,000 books devoted to creativity, representing a 30 percent increase in the past year alone. Analyzing this in her book Self-Help, Inc., sociologist Micki McGee explained the growing demand for self-improvement as a symptom of widespread worry over money and jobs.* Such insecurities underlie the anxious “self?” obsession infecting the U.S. today, much as Christopher Lasch described the malady decades ago in The Culture of Narcissism. > Further symptoms now appear in new evidence-based programs in wellness and arts therapy from entities such as the National Endowment for the Arts. These issues are examined through the thinking of Wendy Hui Kyong Chun, Hillary Davidson, Melanie Klein, Christian Smith, and Slavoj Zizek.

Donald Trump’s infamous antics as “Performance Artist in Chief” open Chapter 3, “The Neoliberal Imagination: When More Is Not Enough.” While initially startling, the President’s slash-and-burn agenda of upending Washington soon was revealed as a corporatist scam. Economist Joseph Schumpeter coined the expression “Creative Destruction” in 1942 to describe the aggressive upending of liberal orthodoxies in favor of market-friendly agendas. Indeed, critics of neoliberalism now note the doctrine’s frequent use of crisis and confusion to get its way, not unlike the tactics of fascist regimes. Schumpeter said that “the creative impulse incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one,” concluding that “the process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism.”° Drawing on thinking by Michel Foucault, David Harvey, Naomi Klein, and C. Wright Mills, this chapter links creative destruction to the heightened emphasis of the creative industries on privatization and individual competition, as well as the structural precarity the industries generate in workers’ lives.

Alfred North Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas (New York: Free Press, 1933) p. 179.

2 Harold Rosenberg, The Anxious Object: Art Today and Its Audience (New York: Horizon, 1964).

3 Laura M. Holson, “Were All Artists Now,” New York Times (Sept. 4, 2015) www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/opinion/were-all-artists-now.html?_r=0 (accessed Mar. 26, 2019).

4 Micki McGee, Self Help, Inc.: Makeover Culture in American Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007).

5 Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing

Expectations (New York: Norton, 1979).

Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (London: Routledge,

=

(oN

Chapter |

Anxious Moments Anticipation Meets Uncertainty

Imagination may be one of humanity’s greatest gifts. But the toll it takes is anxiety. Philosophers long have argued that the ability to see beyond the present is the engine of artistry, innovation, and even freedom itself. Yet this capacity for abstraction also is a window to what might go wrong, especially when the future seems uncertain. Anxiety is one of those feelings that people accept in the right doses, but know is toxic when out of hand— as when healthy caution devolves into paranoia. Stress can prompt an author to start typing, but also paralyze with writer’s block. This chapter is about the widespread jitteriness now palpable in American culture, the damage it inflicts on creativity, and what can be done to fix things.

It’s become cliché to speak of an “anxious America,” overcome with worries about a sluggish economy, terrorist threats, and, in many people’s minds, a generalized loss of hope. Nervous about the future, individuals retreat into worlds of familiarity and self-interest. Business seems to follow similar patterns, with short-term thinking now inducing a mood of risk-avoidance. None of this is good for innovation, as firms lean toward predictability and certainty. “Politicians like to say the U.S. is the most innovative country in the world. But our economy may be too risky for many entrepreneurs,” a recent report stated." Worse still, economists now say novelty is suffering on the “demand” side of the equation, as consumers seemingly prefer more of the same over anything new. Experts have been warning of a U.S. “innovation crisis” for over a decade—as other nations seem to be pulling ahead. American companies won’t gamble on new ideas, government research is dwindling, and school arts programs continue to decline.

“Creativity” has become a new buzzword in this panic over innovation— manifest in policy summits, think-tank meetings, TED talks, and news accounts. At research universities, disciplines like science, engineering, and medicine are clamoring for creativity to spur fresh thinking. Following the success of Richard Florida’s bestselling book The Rise of the Creative Class, so-called “creative industries” also have garnered attention as their own economic force, prompting a projection of creativity into many non-artistic field-—along with quasi-creative ones like entertainment and advertising.”

DOI: 10.4324/9780429296437-3 This chapter has been made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license.

Advocates for the arts have joined a movement claiming that America’s expanding “creative economy” accounts for over $800 billion and exceeds many conventional sectors. Along the way, the hype boosts a self-help industry asserting that one’s inner creativity can calm a fretful mind.

Keep in mind that artists never have been especially well paid. Aside from a handful of gallery superstars, most artists can’t make a living from their professional work. They piece together part-time jobs or compete for adjunct gigs at universities. The creative industries have perpetuated such fractional or temporary hiring, while promoting the benefits of “flexible” employment. And indeed, surveys show that many young people seem willing to sacrifice good pay and benefits for the personalized rewards of “meaningful” work. This takes a toll on creatives, and not just in monetary terms. One of the little-discussed consequences of poverty is stress—and the worries of late bills or looking for work. This makes artists vulnerable to clinical strains of anxiety and depression, which together affect one in four Americans.”

Is it possible to reconcile these anxious conditions with the promises of the creative economy? In many ways this question is as old as American capitalism itself—and the inherent tensions it generates. The challenge of the new creativity lies in finding answers without succumbing to extremism. Dualisms tend to generate oppositions, which easily fall prey to ideological suasion. Certainly no political party can own an idea as large as creativity—a premise attaching over time to comforting pleasures, radical disturbances, and everything in between. Trying times breed anxiety, suspicion, and, as recent history has shown, often new forms of contention and inequity. In such a moment it remains all the more important to remain wary of familiar-sounding solutions to complicated problems.

This chapter highlights the contradictions of anxious creativity. While America’s economic worries seem to call for new ideas and better products, these impulses often are pushed aside by the certainties of tried-and-true formulas and goods. The much-publicized creative industries get promoted as an economic panacea, but they tend to see artistry only in commercial terms. Meanwhile, citizens are encouraged to “think creatively” or develop the resilience of artists, even as real-life working artists and other creatives remain poorly paid and often marginally employed. Rather than emphasizing the nurturing values that give artistry its emotional appeal, the “new” creativity seems more driven by individual competition and profit than humanistic impulse.

The Anxious Moment

Let’s talk about the pervasive jitteriness in America—and how it affects creativity. Common wisdom holds that anxiety helps to motivate people and that artists in particular are driven (sometimes “tortured”) by such negative feelings. The truth is that anxiety is a mixed bag, helpful in certain amounts but damaging when excessive. Contrary to popular stereotypes, studies of artists show they produce little when in the throes of clinical mood disorders such as anxiety and depression, often unable to conjure new ideas or do much of anything. Famously “mad” artists like Byron or Van Gogh only were productive when their conditions were under control. The same can be said about American business these days. Panicked by earnings worries, many companies are losing their abilities to innovate. They run to the safety of familiarity and predictability rather than investing in novelty and experiment. Clearly a sense of balance needs to return.

Despite a rising economy and the lowest crime rates in decades, polling shows most people believing matters are worsening. Gallup reports, “Pessimism has increased despite a strong stock market, rising consumer confidence, and a persistent low unemployment rate.”* The same is true with crime, which has declined at a constant rate for 25 years, according to FBI statistics.” Episodically evident in electoral volatility, this jitteriness now pervades a population brimming with worry, frustration, and even anger. “Occasional anxiety is a normal part of life,” says the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), as when one takes a school test or faces a challenge at work.° Defined as a “Feeling of worry, nervousness, or unease, typically about an imminent event or something with an uncertain outcome,” anxiety can change how people and groups behave.’ It can make them cautious, apprehensive, and mistrustful—especially when well-being might be at stake. This becomes a disorder when the anxiety persists or intensifies.” As the NIMH put it, “Anxiety disorders involve more than temporary worry or fear. For a person with an anxiety disorder, the anxiety does not go away and can get worse over time.”

Innovation once was America’s national brand. Long credited with the country’s global preeminence, the term “Yankee ingenuity” was coined shortly after independence, referring to colonial abilities to improvise with few resources. The same “can-do” spirit attached to later waves of immigration, as newcomers brought fresh ideas and gritty determination in pursuing the American Dream.'° In the 19th and early 20th centuries, independent Edisontype inventor-entrepreneurs brought new energy to the industrial revolution, later spurred further by scientists and engineers working in federally sponsored labs. Herbert Hoover’s Depression Era “Up-By-Your-Bootstraps” slogan typified the ex nihilo (out of nothing) approach to innovation later mythologized in Silicon Valley’s geeky garages. But eventually things would change, as small companies grew into huge corporations—and shareholder returns began driving priorities. In an age of multinational giants, an emphasis on quality products slowly gave way to the abstraction of the “fimancialized” balance sheet. Finally, the recessionary climate of the 2000s made people reluctant to launch small businesses in the face of giants like Amazon and Walmart. Innovative risk-taking began to shrink at exactly the time consumers were getting more cautious with their spending.

All of this has made anxiety famous in the business world, where pressures to innovate affect everyone. Cutting-edge companies such as Apple and Google have introduced exercise and mindfulness to reduce worker stress and stimulate creativity. But among most CEOs and boards of directors, it seems worry is blocking invention. Recent financial press headlines tell the story, with the Economist asking, “Has the Ideas Machine Broken Down?” and the Wall Street Journal adding, “Is the Engine of Innovation in Danger of Stalling?” Forbes Magazine replied with “Why U.S. Firms Are Dying: Failure to Innovate,” stating that the “failure” came from declining investment in new ideas.'! Forbes cited reports showing that only 5 percent of workers felt motivated to innovate and less than 19 percent said they lacked resources to even try. The “why” came from shifting management priorities “that focused attention on stock prices and short-term performance” rather than basic research.'* To economist Robert J. Gordon, this has led to a fixation on balance sheets over the quality of products or their benefits to consumers. In his book The Rise and Fall of American Growth, Gordon argued that “some inventions are more important than others,” but the distinction gets lost when reduced to mere sales figures.'* A final reason for the innovation decline lies in the nature of companies themselves. In “America’s Innovation Crisis,” Daniel Vinik wrote that “[f]ewer startups are opening their doors” as older firms increasingly dominate the landscape: “The U.S. economy is filled with aging behemoths—less creative destruction and more old stagnation.” "4