The word "creative" is an adjective. Examples of the word "creative" used as an adjective are, "he is a creative person," or "those are creative accounting practices." In recent years, the word has been forced into becoming a noun. "He is a creative," for example.
This is gramatically incorrect, but that is not the reason artists should never call themselves "creatives."
Yes, language evolves, but the trend of language and thought toward political-correctness and doublespeak is not a natural evolution. This should be readily apparent, and is, to people with creative, independent minds.
The trend of postmodern society is DEVALUATION. Devaluation of life, of love, of art, of everything. The reason "music sucks today," for example, is that everybody thinks it's free (without value). The only people who can survive professionally in these circumstances are those who are artificially propped-up by corporations. Your "free music for everyone" attitude disempowers your local musicians, and gives greater control and power to the corporations to dictate the content of your sound files.
You want independent art? You want original thought? You want something new? You want songs with poetic lyrics instead of monosyllabic, drunken grunts? You want singing instead of autotuned warbling?
Do you want the possibility of a song to be offensive? Soul-wrenching? Eccentric, unusual, or brilliant?
You have to pay for it.
Or your artists will never leave their suffocating, claustrophobic little scenes. What if the Beatles had never been ABLE to leave Liverpool?
A tangent. One that the "art is free" crowd has been asking for, for decades. Anyway....
The reason artists shouldn't call themselves "creatives" is that the word "creatives" DEVALUES the work of the artist, and the validity of his or her individual vision.
When an accountant cooks the books of any given company, they aren't called "artistic accounting practices," they're called "creative accounting practices."
You can have a "creative" solution to a mechanical problem, or a math problem, or a welding problem, but you can't have an "artistic" solution to these kinds of problems.
Anybody can be creative in any given field, but NOT everybody is an artist.
By calling themselves "creatives," artists are allowing themselves to be devalued even further than they already are. Anyone can be creative, but not everyone can be an artist.
Most non-artists find the word "artist" pretentious, because they're not artists. Artists have been bullied into a corner far too long. If you're an artist, be one, alone, but don't let a bunch of fearful control freaks bully you into calling yourself something that anyone can be.
In like manner, I would strongly doubt the artistry of anyone who calls themselves a "creative." If they're using that title, they probably want to belong to a group. They're wearing it like a badge, usually. Artists shouldn't wear a title, not even "artist." The art is the title, shut up and let it speak. If you're titling yourself, especially with a generic word that can be applied to anyone, I think the chances are high that you're not any kind of artist.
I'm not talented with cars, or teaching, or carpentry. I don't presume to be better than anybody, because I have my God-given skill-set and they have theirs; why do they reverse this presumption and force me to deny myself by calling myself less than what I am?
Is it because they think I'm better than they are?
I'm not. So get over it, and start buying music again.
Or enjoy your corporate shills.
You get what you pay for.
