@raum, one could also argue that it isn’t the instructor’s task to nourish creativity at all, but rather, to instill the fundamentals, the things that can be taught. The bones. You can teach discipline, technique, use of tools, history, etc. You don’t have to follow them in your independent work, but in the classroom you do.
If you have them, you can set them aside at will, but if you don’t, they’re never yours to call upon.
And if your creativity is snuffed out by having to master a little structure, it couldn’t have amounted to much.
One thing I’ve noticed in my class is that if I’m doing something demonstrably “wrong”—e.g., contrary to the teacher’s guidance and therefore presumably contrary to my intent—the teacher will offer a correction. She doesn’t say “The eye is too big in relation to the other features.” She’ll say “Check the top and bottom of the eye. Where do they fall in relation to the bridge of the nose?”
But when I’m doing something experimental—as, for example, once, turning a portrait of a young model with classic features into a painting of a sculptured bust, complete with pedestal and solid marble curls rather than described hair—she stood back and said nothing. Just let me at it.
She also tailors her comments to what she knows the student can handle. When she gets tougher, you know you’ve made progress.
This, of course, is one teacher’s philosophy, and if it didn’t work for me, I’d find another teacher. (Although right now I’d be happy to have any class at all. It’s been five months.)
So, in sum: I can furnish the creativity; that’s not her job. She instills the bones; I supply the flesh and blood.