FEATURED ARTICLE: The Creative Process in Picasso's Guernica Sketches: Monotonic Improvements versus Nonmonotonic Variants

A controversy has emerged over whether Picasso's sketches for Guernica illustrate a Darwinian process of blind-variation and selective-retention (i.e., nonmonotonic variants), rather than a more systematic, expertise-driven process (i.e., monotonic improvements). This issue is objectively addressed by having judges (1 pro-Darwinian, 2 anti-Darwinian, and 2 neutral) rank the figural components according to their perceived progress toward the final version of the painting. Besides strongly agreeing on the perceived order (composite progress score alpha = .85), the independent judges concurred that this order was conspicuously nonmonotonic, with minimal tendency to converge on the end result. These conclusions held not only for the sketches as a whole, but also for the sequence of sketches for the separate figural elements of the painting. Hence, Picasso's creative process is best described as producing blind nonmonotonic variants, rather than expert monotonic improvements. The general method used in this study can be extended to other documentary evidence—such as musical sketches, literary drafts, and laboratory notebooks—to determine the extent to which creativity operates in a Darwinian manner.

[1]  Picasso's Guernica;: The genesis of a painting , 1962 .

[2]  Gary A. Cziko,et al.  From Blind to Creative: In Defense of Donald Campbell's Selectionist Theory of Human Creativity , 1998 .

[3]  S. Mednick.  The associative basis of the creative process. , 1962, Psychological review.

[4]  Charlotte B. Winsor.  The Creative Process: A Symposium , 1976 .

[5]  Chi-yue Chiu,et al.  Effects of Novel Conceptual Combination on Creativity. , 2002 .

[6]  J. W. Getzels,et al.  The Creative Vision: A Longitudinal Study of Problem Finding in Art , 1976 .

[7]  C. Martindale.  Personality, situation, and creativity. , 1989 .

[8]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives. , 2003, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  William James.  Great Men, Great Thoughts, and the Environment , 2009 .

[10]  M. Boden.  The creative mind : myths & mechanisms , 1991 .

[11]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Scientific Genius: A Psychology of Science , 1988 .

[12]  R. Ochse.  A new look at primary process thinking and its relation to inspiration , 1989 .

[13]  R. McCrae.  Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. , 1987 .

[14]  F. Barron.  Creative person and creative process , 1969 .

[15]  Robert J. Sternberg,et al.  Cognitive Mechanisms in Human Creativity: Is Variation Blind or Sighted? , 1998 .

[16]  Aharon Kantorovich,et al.  Scientific discovery : logic and tinkering , 1993 .

[17]  K. Gallagher.  Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life , 1996 .

[18]  Jordan B. Peterson,et al.  PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Decreased Latent Inhibition Is Associated With Increased Creative Achievement in High-Functioning Individuals , 2003 .

[19]  A. Bain.  The senses and the intellect , 1998 .

[20]  D. Simonton.  Darwin as Straw Man: Dasgupta's (2004) Evaluation of Creativity as a Darwinian Process , 2005 .

[21]  D. Simonton.  Methodological and Theoretical Orientation and the Long-Term Disciplinary Impact of 54 Eminent Psychologists , 2000 .

[22]  J. Hayes.  Cognitive Processes in Creativity , 1989 .

[23]  John R. Koza.  Genetic Programming III - Darwinian Invention and Problem Solving , 1999, Evolutionary Computation.

[24]  P. Langley,et al.  Computational Models of Scientific Discovery and Theory Formation , 1990 .

[25]  Kamran Baig.  An act of creation , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[26]  R. Proctor.  Computer stimulated associations , 1993 .

[27]  D. Simonton.  Origins of genius : Darwinian perspectives on creativity , 1999 .

[28]  Robert W. Weisberg,et al.  On Structure in the Creative Process: A Quantitative Case-Study of the Creation of Picasso's Guernica , 2004 .

[29]  Ernst Mach,et al.  On the Part Played by Accident in Invention and Discovery. , 1896 .

[30]  W. Jevons,et al.  English Men of Science; their Nature and Nurture , 1874, Nature.

[31]  A. Rothenberg,et al.  Artistic creation as stimulated by superimposed versus combined-composite visual images. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  H. Eysenck.  Genius: The Natural History of Creativity , 1995 .

[33]  A. Rothenberg,et al.  Artistic creation as stimulated by superimposed versus separated visual images. , 1980, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[34]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Does Scientific Discovery Have a Logic , 1973 .

[35]  Howard E. Gruber,et al.  Darwin on man. A psychological study of scientific creativity, together with Darwin's early and unpublished notebooks , 1975, Medical History.

[36]  Timothy Thomason,et al.  Autobiographical Sketch , 1994, Perspectives in biology and medicine.

[37]  G. A. Mendelsohn,et al.  Associative and attentional processes in creative performance1 , 1976 .

[38]  H. Eysenck.  Creativity and Personality: Suggestions for a Theory , 1993 .

[39]  John Suler,et al.  Primary process thinking and creativity. , 1980 .

[40]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. , 1996 .

[41]  J. Tusell,et al.  Picasso's Guernica : history, transformations, meanings , 1988 .

[42]  Jordan B. Peterson,et al.  Latent Inhibition and Openness to Experience in a high-achieving student population , 2000 .

[43]  D. Simonton.  Creativity as Blind Variation and Selective Retention : Is the Creative Process Darwinian ? , 2022 .

[44]  Ryan D. Tweney,et al.  Psychology of science: A framework for the cognitive psychology of science , 1989 .

[45]  Robert S. Cohen,et al.  On Scientific Discovery , 1981 .

[46]  D. Campbell.  Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. , 1960, Psychological review.

[47]  John R. Koza,et al.  Genetic Programming III: Darwinian Invention & Problem Solving , 1999 .

[48]  Pamela I. Ansburg,et al.  Creative and analytic thinkers differ in their use of attentional resources , 2003 .

[49]  Steven M. Smith,et al.  Creative Cognition: Theory, Research, and Applications , 1996 .

[50]  D. Simonton.  Creativity in Science: Chance, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist , 2004 .

[51]  Subrata Dasgupta,et al.  Is creativity a Darwinian process? , 2004 .

[52]  H. Gardner.  Creating minds: an anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of freud , 1993 .

[53]  R. Weisberg.  Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius , 1993 .

[54]  J. Hadamard,et al.  The Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field. , 1945 .

[55]  Robert W. Weisberg,et al.  Case studies of creative thinking: Reproduction versus restructuring in the real world. , 1995 .

[56]  Dean Keith Simonton,et al.  Creativity as a Constrained Stochastic Process. , 2004 .

[57]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[58]  E. Gombrich.  ART AND ILLUSION: A STUDY IN THE PSYCHOLOGY OF PICTORIAL REPRESENTATION. , 1960 .

[59]  Howard Greisdorf,et al.  Exploring Science: The Cognition and Development of Discovery Processes , 2003, J. Documentation.

[60]  H. Gough.  Studying creativity by means of word association test. , 1976, The Journal of applied psychology.

[61]  L. Gabora.  Creative Thought as a nonDarwinian Evolutionary Process , 2004, nlin/0411057.