How to be more creative
you are not a bad creator
you're just not being creative. here's the fix, in four steps, from someone voted most artistic in high school.
i hear a lot of people argue that "they just weren't born creative." which, respectfully, is wrong.
if you can think, you can create. i'm not saying that to be nice, i'm saying it because i've watched it happen with over a hundred creators who were convinced they were the exception. they weren't. they just never learned that creativity is a process, not a personality trait.
so here's how to actually become creative, in four steps you can start today.
how to use this guide
this isn't a "read it once and feel inspired" doc. it's about building a process, each step moves you forward from the one before it, so don't skip to step three because it sounds more fun. i built it in order for a reason.
each section has the core idea, the why behind it, and an exercise you can actually do this week. do the exercises. reading about creativity without practicing it is just a more sophisticated way of scrolling.
what this is:
a repeatable system for generating and shaping ideas
a way to build a taste profile that's actually yours
something you can run every single week
what this isn't:
a hack, a trick, or a life-changing morning routine
a personality test that tells you who you are forever
a substitute for actually doing the work
#1 Control your inputs
slop in, slop out. What you consume becomes the raw material your brain has to work with, so if you're only feeding it the same fifteen-second recycled ideas everyone else is watching, that's all you'll be able to make.
this is the part nobody wants to hear because it means changing a habit, not downloading an app. but it's also the highest-leverage move in this entire guide. you cannot out-technique a bad diet of inputs. i don't care how good your editing is.
Why this actually works
your brain doesn't generate ideas from nothing. it remixes what's already in there. if the only thing "in there" is an endless feed of other people's already-remixed content, you're not creating, you're photocopying a photocopy. the quality degrades a little more every time. you can feel this in your own work when an idea feels "off" but you can't say why. usually it's because you've seen a version of it forty times this month and your brain just handed it back to you as if it were new.
replace the feed with slower, denser inputs: research, movie watching, reading, museums, long walks with no headphones, conversations with people outside your industry. literally anything else. i promise, your taste will improve, and taste is the thing you're actually selling.
the swap
slop in: doom-scrolling, reaction content, anything designed to be forgotten in six seconds.
slop out: a book, a film with an actual director, a walk, a conversation, a museum, a long-form article you have to sit with.
what counts as "slop"
slop isn't a moral judgment, it's a description of how something was made and how it makes you feel after. a piece of content is slop if it was made to be consumed fast and forgotten faster, and if you can't remember a single detail about it twenty minutes later. by that definition, a lot of "educational" content is slop too. the format doesn't save it. the intention behind it does.
fast-forgotten content: anything you've already forgotten by the time the next video loads
reaction-to-a-reaction content: commentary on commentary, no original thought anywhere in the chain
algorithm-optimized filler: made to hit a retention curve, not to say anything
exercise: the 7-day input audit
for one week, write down every single thing you consume. every video, every book, every conversation, every scroll session. at the end of the week, sort the list into two columns: things that made you think, and things that made you numb.
track everything for 7 days, no editing yourself, be honest
sort into "made me think" vs "made me numb"
calculate the ratio. most people are shocked at how numb-heavy it is
pick one numb-category habit and replace it with a think-category one for week two
the takeaway: you don't need more inspiration. you need better inputs. control what goes in and the output takes care of itself.
#2 Sit with what you consumed
once your inputs are actually worth having, you have to do something with them. this is the step almost everyone skips, because sitting still and thinking feels unproductive compared to making something. it isn't. it's the most productive forty-five minutes in the entire process.
the 25/15 split
set a timer for 45 minutes. sit down and write. take the first 25 minutes and let your brain dump everything out, every idea, every half-formed thought, every thing you noticed while consuming your intentional inputs this week. don't filter, don't judge it, just get it out of your head and onto the page.
that last 15 minutes is where the actual work happens. this is when you'll have truly excellent ideas, because your brain has finally cleared out all the obvious, easy, first-thought garbage and is forced to reach for something better. most people quit at minute ten because the first ideas felt underwhelming. that's the point. push through the underwhelming part.
the first 25 minutes clears the junk drawer. the last 15 is where you find the good stuff.
build your taste profile
you need to understand why you like things, not just that you like them. "i liked that video" is not a taste profile, it's a shrug. "i liked that video because the pacing gave me time to actually process the idea before it moved on" is a taste profile.
this is also how you stop copying people. copying happens when you like something but don't understand why, so the only way to get that feeling again is to recreate the surface. understanding the "why" lets you take the underlying principle and apply it somewhere completely different, which is what actually original work looks like.
exercise: the 45-minute sit-down
do this once a week, same day if you can, so it becomes a rhythm instead of a one-off.
set a timer for 45 minutes, no phone, just a notebook or a blank doc
minutes 0–25: brain dump. every idea, reaction, and observation from your intentional inputs this week, unfiltered
minutes 25–45: go back through what you wrote and ask "why" of your three favorite entries. why did that stick with you. what belief of yours does it connect to
circle the one idea from the last 15 minutes that surprised you. that's usually the one worth building
the underlying belief
your taste isn't random. it's a reflection of what you actually believe, about art, about people, about what's worth paying attention to. develop your taste profile based on your beliefs as an individual, not based on what's performing this week.
#3 learn your creative archetype
most creators fall into one of two categories: fast or organized. neither one is better. but knowing which one you are means you stop fighting your own process, which is where most people burn out.
fast vs. organized
the fast archetype works in bursts. ideas show up loud and immediate, and the work is best when it's made close to the moment of inspiration, with minimal planning getting in the way. the organized archetype works in structure. ideas need a system, an outline, a whiteboard, before they're ready to become anything. one isn't more "real" than the other. they're just different engines.
fast / speedy:
ideas feel urgent, you want to start immediately
overthinking kills the idea faster than moving too soon
best work often comes from the first or second attempt
planning feels like a chore that delays the fun part
methodical / organized:
ideas need to be mapped out before they feel real
moving too fast feels sloppy and makes you anxious
best work comes after multiple structured passes
a whiteboard or outline is part of the process, not a delay
how to actually find out
don't take my word for which one you are, test it. to find out which archetype fits, select two of the ideas you came up with during your 45-minute sit-down. make one of them quickly, no planning, first instinct only. make the other one in a very methodical, mapped-out manner. then compare. not which one turned out better, but which process felt best while you were in it.
exercise: the two-idea test
pick two separate ideas from step two, ideally ones you're equally excited about
idea one: give yourself a hard time limit and make it fast, no outline, no planning
idea two: outline it fully before you touch a camera or a document, take your time
after both, write down which process felt natural and which felt like work
that feeling, not the finished product, is your answer
stick with whatever makes creation feel the best. that's not a cop-out, it's the actual strategy. a process that fights your natural wiring will burn you out long before it makes you good.
#4 cycle it into a feedback loop
creativity that doesn't get tested against reality just becomes a private hobby. the fourth step is what turns everything above into something that actually compounds instead of resetting to zero every week.
why content is the perfect testing ground
luckily, if you're a creator, you already have the perfect lab for this. content is fast, cheap, and honest. you can put an idea out and know within days, sometimes hours, whether it resonated. continue to curate your taste, listen to how your audience reacts to each concept, iterate, and improve. that's the entire loop. it's not complicated, it's just something most people stop doing after the first round because the feedback wasn't instantly flattering.
the goal isn't to chase every reaction and become a different creator every week. it's to notice patterns. did the idea that came from your 45-minute sit-down land because of the concept, or because of the execution. did your fast-archetype attempt actually outperform your methodical one, or did it just feel better to make. the loop only works if you're honestly comparing what you predicted against what happened.
an idea that never meets an audience is just a guess. the loop is what turns the guess into a skill.
how to run the loop without losing yourself in the data
this is the step where a lot of creators overcorrect and start making everything for the algorithm instead of from their own taste. don't do that. the feedback loop is meant to sharpen your taste, not replace it. if a piece flops but you still believe in the underlying idea, that's useful information too, maybe the execution was off, maybe it was ahead of where your audience currently is. not every miss means the idea was wrong.
exercise: the weekly loop review
at the end of each week, pull up whatever you published
for each piece, write one sentence on what you expected and one on what actually happened
look for the gap between the two. that gap is where the learning lives
carry one adjustment into next week's 45-minute sit-down. just one, not five
the full cycle, start to finish
control your inputs. sit with them for 45 minutes and build your taste profile. learn which archetype you are and create in a way that fits it. put the work out, listen to how it lands, and feed that back into your next round of inputs. then do it again.
you're now a creative!!
none of this works if you read it once and go back to your feed tonight. it works if you run it, weekly, for longer than feels comfortable. the first few cycles will feel slow. that's not a sign it's broken, that's a sign you're finally doing the actual work instead of the performance of the work.
art over algorithm.
we build brands that feel like art but move like businesses. if you're a founder trying to build something with real creative direction behind it, not just a content calendar, that's what Parasocial is for.
follow along: @byjacksonsword
now go make something worth sitting with for 45 minutes.