TED Talk 8

Charles Limb: Your brain on improv

Improvisation: the word everyone fears. Having to quickly think and create something on the spot. Although for some people it is very unnerving, for others it is fun and easy. Charles Limb discusses the theme of improvisation in his TED talk. More specifically, he talks about the research he has done about creativity and how brain activity varies depending on if the person is reciting or improvising. He and his coworkers based their research off of three musical experiments. For all three, they got very accomplished musicians, and tested them in an fMRI scanner, so that they could assess the brain activity during the tests. The first of the three involved having several different jazz musicians individually play both a memorized piece, and then an improvised one. They were put in the scanner laying down with a small keyboard resting on their legs. From this experiment, they learned that there was a big difference between memorizing and improvising. When the person was improvising, it seemed as if there was an odd interaction in the frontal lobe. One part had to turn on, and another huge part had to turn off, so as to not shut out or reject new ideas and impulses that come. After that, Limb and his coworkers realized that music is not always solo; most of the time it is communicative and interactive. The second test involved still putting the musicians in with the keyboard, but this time, they traded back and forth with Limb (who was in the control room) by improvising. They found several interesting results from this experiment. It was noticed that when the musicians were trading back and forth, the language area of their brain lit up. The experimenters realized that music can be seen as expressive communication, because of that trading back and forth. They called this "musical conversation." For the third experiment, they decided to test rappers, because rap now takes the social role that jazz used to. First the rapper had to memorize and recite a rap that had already been written, and then had to improvise after that. Every few seconds there would be a cue word that would keep them on track and guide them what to say next. The results of this test also showed the language area of the brain lit up, but also showed the visual portion lit up, which was interesting because the person had to improvise with their eyes closed. From the results of these three tests, Charles Limb and his fellow workers discovered some secrets of the brain and that it is possible to study creativity just like any other neurological process. He also made the comment that the study of innovativeness is still in its infancy. It will soon flourish, and there is so much that we do not know about our brains. He, and many others are few of the many that have started this study.

There were several quotes in this talk that I took away from this presentation. One was, "Artistic creativity is magical, but it is not magic." Although from an outsider's point of view, it may appear pre-planned or magic, it is not. Improvisation is simply a seemingly magical feat that requires much brainpower. Our bodies and brains are amazing and complex, but there is no "magic" involved. Another quote that I found interesting: "Artistic creativity is a neurological product." This is basically just assuring that creativity and improvisation are results of the brain and the nervous system. Connecting back to the first quote, it is not magic, but rather a fantastic ability of our body. Because of this, it is possible to study these processes. This was part of what intrigued Charles Limb to embark on this study. A third quote that Charles Limb himself said was, "It all goes down to the BRAIN." To me, this was intriguing. Once I started thinking about it, in literal terms, everything does go down to the brain. The brain controls all thoughts, speech, senses, heartbeat, and parts of the body. It knows when something is not right, and it knows how to subconsciously keep the body in sync and working so that we do not have to consciously think about such actions as breathing or digesting. In a metaphorical sense also, everything starts in the brain. Motivation comes from those passions and senses that are felt and known only in the brain. Small ideas originate in the brain and escalate into much bigger ideas. A last quote that caught my attention stated the opinion that, "Science is to catch up to art." I understand what this is conveying. It is saying that art is far ahead, but does not have proof to back up its results. Science is still trying to catch up by doing all the left-brained work to support the right-brained art portion. Eventually it might catch up, but it all has to start with that spark to want to know, which is where the right brain comes in. It was interesting that Charles Limb used so many quotes in his presentation, but it helped to make it more valid.

While watching Charles Limb's TED talk, I had many thoughts and connections. Although his job is ironic because he is a surgeon and a specialist about creativity, it makes sense to me. Everyone needs and uses creativity. Both a surgeon and creativity in the brain are about the body, and involve how the different systems work. I feel like it is more effective and intelligent to know about more than just one small, specialized area. For example with him, it is helpful for him to know about the brain and about surgery in the body. It is important to understand more pieces, so that it is easier to see how they connect and interact. Like Daniel Pink addressed in A Whole New Mind, synthesizing, and putting together the whole picture is an important part of what will make right-brainers successful in the future. It is not enough to just focus on the little details and specific areas anymore. It is beneficial to understand how everything works together to create a symphony. Also, during his presentation, Charles Limb mentioned that he had a lot of questions, and that he was not going to answer many questions, but just keep asking them throughout the presentation. That did not make sense to me because I thought that he answered several questions, such as realizing that creativity is a neurological process, and all the studies that proved which parts of the brain became active during improvisation. I think that part of what he meant was that there will never be an end to the amount of information we can research and understand. There will always continue to be more information, more questions, and probably more answers. But it also made me realize that questioning is not bad. Usually in school, lots of questioning irritates teachers. For me, I know that I usually do not ask about 8 out of 10 that I have. Part of that comes because of previous experience that I have had with teachers getting frustrated or annoyed. Plus, I just do not always feel comfortable in a classroom environment to ask questions because I feel like I am putting a part of me out there that others could criticize. I think asking questions is a very effective way to learn. I am a curious person, and I love to understand why something is a certain way. But since I do not ask most of those questions, I do not usually get them answered and then they disappear after a while. This made me realize all that I could be missing and not learning. Those inspirations and to start learning and researching something come from those questions lingering in the mind. I think why asking questions so effective is because of the motivation it brings. I would not ask a question unless it had something connecting personally to me, or my interests. I think about my personal life, and how when I have a question and get it answered, I am much more likely to remember that question than just a whole chapter of reading from a textbook. Plus, the intrinsic motivation within causes that wonder, and the topic or passion is much more likely be pursued and enjoyed because of the personal connection involved and the motivation to know. In education, I feel like sometimes it is looked down upon to challenge or question something. But like we learned in first semester, challenging the system can be a good, and necessary action, when the system is not beneficial or is harmful. Questioning, in a similar way, constantly keeps at bay the matter of is this working or how could it be better. It is a way to constantly stay in check. In education, I think about all the ways that questions could enhance education. What if education was structured in a way that kids brought and asked questions that they personally really wanted to know, and then got them answered by teachers or by looking it up themselves. I feel like eventually kids would get deeper and deeper into asking questions, and it would get almost addicting. I know that in English, when questions are brought and discussed as a class or group, then many ideas are pooled together to formulate an answer. Many minds are more effective than one. I realize that there could be flaws in this system, such as kids who take it as a joke, or those who would only ask questions about one subject, and so never get a well-rounded education. But still, if there was some way that question could become more of a strongpoint in education, I feel like it would be so much more effective and engaging for students. In the global perspective, there would be more answers, and there would be more questioning, and we would keep each other in check. We would have more solutions to the world, and it would be a happier place because people would be pursuing what they have passion and interest in.

The main topic that Charles Limb talked about, improvisation, really caught my attention. I really hate improvisation, because I really fear having to act on the spot. I am an organized, planned out person who has to think through and plan everything in advance. I love music, but I am more of a sight-reader, and I hate memorizing and improvising. I have to have the music right in front of me to be able to play it in an excellent way. I know that many people thrive off of that, but I just do not understand that. Especially after this presentation, I feel like everyone has the potential and ability to be good at improvisation. But, it uses that communicating language area of the brain. It applies back to what Mrs. Brock taught us. We each may have a bigger inclination towards the right or left brain, but we are not all one or the other. We are both, and some people have to strive harder to develop that side that is not as natural to them. We all have it all in us though, we just have to decide to bring it out. We learn what our strengths and weaknesses are, so that we can improve our weaknesses. Improvisation is magical and miraculous, and we all have it in us. Personally, I know I could strive to develop that more. It would be a great skill to have. If we all were amazing at it though, in education, and world-wide, I feel like that could create chaos. There needs to be order, and balance. If everyone was thriving off of last-minute and improvising everything, no one would know what to expect. I think it is important for everyone to recognize that it is not just a talent that some people were born with that can never be acquired by anyone else. Some people are just naturally more comfortable with it. Individually, in education, and worldwide, improvisation could open new doors to new ideas. Closing off that section of the brain and opening another section, like Charles Limb talked about, might just allow new ideas to come in that could lead to new discoveries or amazing creations. The brain is so miraculous.

Charles Limb made use of several techniques to help enhance his TED talk. The most prominent was probably his knowledge of science and his display of it. He is a surgeon, and he showed that he knew a lot about how the brain worked, and the science of the human body in general. It was fascinating, yet confusing and overwhelming at some times, to listen to him. Sometimes he used words that were way above my head. By using that characteristic, though mind numbing and frustrating, Charles Limb revealed to the audience just how smart he is. He showed that he knows his material and he is not just winging it. An additional strategy he used was use of the screen yet again. Many speakers tend to use this as a primary source for their talks. The same was true of Charles Limb. He projected pictures, videos, and quotes up on the huge screen, so as to make it easier for the audience to see. A visual example always enhances comprehension at least a little. After all, we do learn by examples and visuals. Although this was not as out of the ordinary, it was crucial for his specific presentation. Without the pictures and examples, I personally would have been lost, even more than I was. Because he talked so much about science and the interactions in the brain, showing the actual videos and pictures of the fMRI scanner and the brain activity really helped paint the picture. Another common, but still used skill was humor. He started out by talking about the irony of his profession; he is a surgeon who studies creativity. He said he had never had a patient that asked him to be creative during surgery. Using humor engages the audience and helps them loosen up so they can understand the topic more in depth. Lastly, he started rapping out of the blue. It did relate to his presentation, because he was talking about brain patterns of people who rap, but it was odd. He actually invited the audience to join in with him, but no one did, which confused me. Still, I thought it was a good idea to have something that the audience could do to be involved in the presentation. It probably made them more alert. Plus, the underlying humor of a professional speaker rapping during a TED talk made it even funnier. Charles Limb used several different and similar tactics for his presentation as other speakers.