>>Finding a bunch of incremental changes that (1) amount to something really new and (2) still manage to produce something good -- that's what's difficult.<< W

>>Finding a bunch of incremental changes that (1) amount to something really new and (2) still manage to produce something good -- that's what's difficult.<< Well of course it's hard. If it wasn't, everyone would be creative geniuses... >>but who'd ever considered that as a Thing that could be Changed, before the cubists came along?)<< I think that's exactly the point. Who would have considered it? Well, if you systematically break something down into its component elements, and then make changes to those elements, it makes it much more likely that you'll stumble across something totally new. Think of it as a more sprawling form of A/B testing if you'd like. The more salient takeaway is the fact that "creativity" doesn't have to be some mysterious lightning strike or whisper from the gods (or "non-linear intuitive leap" as someone describes below) that only a few of us lucky ones get to be party to.