Why Reader Inspiration Is Key to Unlocking Your Legacy

In today's culture, if we're not thinking about legacy in a purposeful way, then there's a threat of inactivity, of stagnation. As the saying goes: "If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got."

When you're clear about what drives you, you're more likely to create work that is both authentic and inspiring to others.

Creativity and legacy go hand-in-hand. You can’t simply leave it to chance. You have to create a legacy, deliberately, meaningfully, purposefully, if it’s going to be worth leaving.

But there’s a bit of a hiccup with that. Here’s why.

Creativity is in decline. Sounds grim, doesn’t it? Or even if not grim, is it believable? With the internet, the rise of global sharing, the dawn of all kinds of augmented and virtual reality tech, you might argue that we’re able to be more creative than ever before.

You might be right – but that doesn’t mean that theory and practice are the same thing.

If you want a stunning dive on the creativity crisis and its impact, do yourself a favour and check out Joel Stein’s fantastic piece: Is Human Creativity Fading Away?

Follow that up with Alex Murrell’s brilliant “The Age of Average”, and things start to feel bleak.

Both Stein and Murrell’s articles note an alarming trend: our cities, homes, coffee shops, cars, and even people (from the average individual to our hallowed celebrities) are beginning to look eerily similar. It’s not just an architectural or interior design or ergonomic issues, though.

Consider the current cinema lineup. Coraline (remastered). Inside Out 2. Despicable Me 4. Twisters (remake). Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (sequel).

Almost everything on the big screen is a remake, a sequel, and or a derivative work. Why do you think the Multiverse was such a massive concept for the Avengers franchise?

It gives them ‘creative’ license to churn the same characters out, over and over again, and make a fortune doing so.

I sound crotchety, yes, but the same old schlock seems to dominate the box office. Big media companies are milking ideas for all they're worth and they’re leaving little room for originality.

This lack of creativity isn't just a superficial problem. It's symptomatic of a deeper issue. We're taking fewer risks, and it might have something to do with the way we think.

Psychologists have posited that there are two different approaches to engaging with world at large: spotlight thinking and lantern thinking.

Spotlight thinking, which we often adopt as adults, focuses narrowly on specific tasks and blocks out potentially interesting information. While efficient, it can lead us into the sea of sameness, prioritising predictable profitability over originality.

Lantern thinking, on the other hand, is what children do naturally. It involves shining a gentle light on everything around us, absorbing information without preconceived notions of importance.

This approach opens us up to new possibilities and connections: it fuels creativity. We spot links between seemingly disparate ideas. We are more divergent in our approach to problem solving. We’re much more open to inspiration, to being inspired.

Psychologist and researcher Alison Gopnik argues that because, as babies, we naturally take a lantern approach to the world around us. No one’s told us what should be worthy of our attention, so everything is fascinating.

A leaf, the rain, a blade of grass. Gopnik argues that this lantern-lit path to creativity is an innate human ability that we unlearn as we grow older.

If you’re a spotlight thinker, you might argue that lantern thinking runs the risk of being risky. It’s a loss of time, of focus, of effort, to look at everything beyond the task at hand. Time is money, they might say. Eat more frogs! Be more productive! De-risk the future!

But as noted, research shows a strong correlation between risk-taking and creativity. The willingness to try new ideas, engage with the potential for failure, and step outside our comfort zones is essential for creative growth and escape from the sea of sameness.

So what’s the solution? If being the same doesn’t work, and neither does being different, how can we tap back into our innate creativity?

The thing that the sea of sameness and hypercategorisation have in common is that they’re both risk-averse approaches.

The sea of sameness emerges from what’s popular and profitable, and
hypercategories persist because they fundamentally can’t risk changing themselves.

Here’s the thing. There’s a clear correlation between risk-taking and creativity.

What does any of this have to do with magazines? Magazines invite us into a space outside of time. They allow us to immerse ourselves in stories, images, and ideas without the constant distractions of the digital world. The tactile experience of holding a magazine, feeling the weight and texture of the paper – it all creates a deeper connection with the content.

Studies have shown that we retain information better when reading from print rather than digital sources. This makes magazines an ideal medium for delivering inspiring, thought-provoking content that stays with readers long after they've finished the last page.

In our digital age, the printed magazine holds a special place in the realm of inspiration. While we often "consume" online content, we "enjoy" magazines.

1. Consume: From Latin "consumere," meaning "to take up completely."
When we consume digital content, we often absorb it quickly and without deep reflection.

2. Enjoy: From Old French "enjoier," meaning "to give joy to" or "enjoïr," meaning "to enjoy," both based on Latin "gaudere," meaning "to rejoice."

This distinction is more than semantic; it reflects a fundamentally different engagement with the medium of printed words. Isn’t this how we truly interact with magazines – with anticipation, quiet joy, a deeper degree of engagement? It’s my belief that magazines make us more creative, by virtue of what they are and how they facilitate our inspiration.

Other studies have gone one step further, and rather than qualify the link between risk and creativity, they’ve quantified it.

These researchers found that creative individuals are much more likely to take social risks compared to other risk ’domains’ (Ethical, Financial, Health/Safety, Recreational, and Social).

Depending on the creativity tests used, the study found that the correlation between creativity and social risk-taking can be anywhere between 38% and 135% stronger than other risk categories.

It seems that being willing to look a little silly, or vulnerably sharing your creative work in the court of public opinion, or even simply risking rejection – are all vital to creative growth and capacity.

So if increased creativity can only come with increased social risk-taking, how in the heck do we take more risks? We’re all naturally risk-averse.

It’s a survival trait, for goodness’ sake – but if we want to avoid the sea of sameness or stagnant hypercategories – we have to be willing to get out of our comfort zone.

The only way to take more risks is to be motivated to do so, and there are two kinds of motivation. Push and pull. Fear and desire. Need and greed. Personally, I doubt many of the folks reading this are scared of the sea of sameness. But I do think we deeply desire more creative, inspired lives.

So, with that in mind, taking a ‘desire’ based approach to motivation is the way forward. And that desire works best when it’s at the level of passion. Passion is the spark that ignites creativity, making us courageous enough to take risks and push boundaries.

How do you discover that passion, then? You get clear (maybe even for the first time) on your values.

Here’s another thing. They’re probably not what you think they are at first pass. You’ve got to ask the right questions to get the right answers.

Below I’ve compiled a list of the questions that, when properly considered, have uncovered truly differentiating value combinations for my clients over the last five years.

1. Why do you show up to work every day?
2. What motivates you in your work?
3. What are your core personal values?
4. Who do you not want to work with, and why?
5. How would you like to be described by clients and peers?
6. What legacy do you want to leave through your work?
7. What work feels most necessary and satisfying to you?
8. What's the most common positive feedback you receive?
9. What communication qualities do you admire most in others?

As I said before: when you're clear about what drives you, you're more likely to create work that is both authentic and inspiring to others.

It doesn’t have to be binary. It’s not either/or. You don’t have to settle for the sea of sameness or constrict yourself in a hypercategory – you get to find a balance between familiarity, and difference.

Your legacy is a product of your values. As Elvis Presley once said, "Values are like fingerprints. Nobody's are the same, but you leave them all over everything you do."