|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? 1
#27106622 - 12/24/20 10:21 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Short answer: "there is nothing new under the sun".
Long answer: Inspiration is part of the art process and this entails borrowing from previous experience or other areas or landscapes, etc to funnel into the final process of the piece. It can be seen as original but the process is one taking pieces from what they have seen before and mashing them together into a "new" piece.
So is this really creative or mere duplication, or copying? Dragons from fantasy are inspired by lizards, same with other mythical creatures in D&D games. These aren't really original, just mashing parts together. I'd even extend this to alleged non conceptual art.
But if this really is the case does it matter? In art I can see the case for no creativity or originality, but in music it's different I feel. The parts do little on their own and while some music is derivative there are other songs I find are wholly original in composition. Or is this mere illusion?
I wonder if this is similar to the argument in math as to whether it is created or discovered? What do people here think? Does creativity need to involve novelty in order to "count" or is that not the point?
|
TheMagicConch
MC



Registered: 09/11/20
Posts: 841
Loc: Over here
Last seen: 2 months, 21 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27106660 - 12/24/20 10:53 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Creativity is just a form of an idea. The way I see it is if you're inspired to paint something or write a song and you pull from a bunch of different references in your head to put together something new, the new thing is a new idea; something that hasn't been thought of and created before that very moment. Sure, in creating that thing other things had to be created first in order to be inspirational to the person who thought of it. But the thing in and of itself is creative in the sense that literally it was created and has not been created before.
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 28 days, 3 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27106674 - 12/24/20 11:01 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Yes.
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: TheMagicConch] 1
#27107136 - 12/25/20 09:33 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
But in a sense it has been made before. A pegasus for example is just a horse with bird wings, mermaids are fish with human anatomy. There is nothing new in the final process, it's more of a collage than synthesis. In a sense it has been thought of before. Even sculptures are just photos of people more or less. So how can it be creative when you're duplicating parts?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27107187 - 12/25/20 10:13 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
nothing is ever just "a few related words on the subject" least of all any honest expression or art form.
however I will not minimize the value of reductive thought and speech.
so carry on, even if you do oversimplify. that may also be an honest expression of your experience which is 100% your own.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27107209 - 12/25/20 10:35 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What is creative? Create something that relates to nothing else? No, creative means to use something pre-existing to create a new whole. Otherwise the only creation was the universe. In regards to art, there would be almost no art if every separate idea or expression could only be done once...
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27107276 - 12/25/20 11:18 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
art always gets better the more you make it it just takes a hundred hours or so for it to become very good and very advanced but it good to make it get better in the beginning but after a hundred hours or so it is very good and very advanced and from there it gets better but already there it is a joy and fun to make and a joy to look at and can be really dazzling (in quaity) and that is a good thing
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Ferdinando]
#27107279 - 12/25/20 11:19 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
it's probably true for everything music building houses practice makes perfect it's such an interesting idea topic that the more you do something the better you get
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27107574 - 12/25/20 03:41 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Some say those who can't do, teach and those who can, just do.
It probably could also be said, with some accuracy: those who can't do, (something) BS about it, and those who can do (something), just do it.
In the case of art and its critics, this may be particularly obvious.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27107744 - 12/25/20 06:32 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
makes sense but I can't remember it very easily
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27107829 - 12/25/20 07:56 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
InnerWisdom said: What is creative? Create something that relates to nothing else? No, creative means to use something pre-existing to create a new whole. Otherwise the only creation was the universe. In regards to art, there would be almost no art if every separate idea or expression could only be done once...
But what I am referring to is that if it is already pre-existing then does that really make the "whole" new in any sort of meaningful way?
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27107860 - 12/25/20 08:25 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
It's a question of novelty. Do new, novel forms come into being over time? I would say yes, certainly. Does this apply to the history of art? I think any art historian in the world would say yes. It seems you are arguing that new works of art are necessarily a re-hash of previous forms. Do you have evidence for this?
To draw an analogy with the natural world, elephants never existed until elephants evolved. Novelty is a real and, I may add, salient phenomenon in nature.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,230
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum]
#27107929 - 12/25/20 09:07 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
There could be an endless supply of novelty but that doesn't mean the created is every fully novel.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum]
#27107936 - 12/25/20 09:10 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Those who resent the limitations of the world, like the author of the book of Ecclesiastes with its sour attitude, criticize those whose creations they can never approach. While those with innocent happy eyes see worlds of wonder everywhere.
William Blake & Einstein understood.
“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
― Albert Einstein
And when it comes to doing, the easily available, quotes of Picasso shed a lot of light.
But basically the question works like a Rorschach test, and tells more about the answerer, than 'reality'. That those who pose such questions miss this, may say something more, about their issues with creativity, than they realize.
I won't even bother to comment on the (unconscious?) assumption that creation was a one time event, and that similarly creativity is something that stops and starts, among other such unexamined assumptions.
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27108162 - 12/26/20 01:50 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Yes. Art (any form of) is created as a unique expression that feels meaningful. That's the novelty. I don't understand what the problem here is for you, or if you are just being very literal in a way.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27108234 - 12/26/20 04:18 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
nothing is truly new to the cynical attitude that nothing is truly new.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Ferdinando


Registered: 11/15/09
Posts: 3,664
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27108293 - 12/26/20 06:21 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
art becomes really great and you become really good at it after a few years
-------------------- with our love with our love we could save the world
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Rahz]
#27108391 - 12/26/20 08:30 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rahz said: There could be an endless supply of novelty but that doesn't mean the created is every fully novel.
That's true, but OP seems to be contending that the created is fully non-novel.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog] 1
#27108436 - 12/26/20 08:55 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: Those who resent the limitations of the world, like the author of the book of Ecclesiastes with its sour attitude, criticize those whose creations they can never approach. While those with innocent happy eyes see worlds of wonder everywhere.
William Blake & Einstein understood.
“There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle.”
― Albert Einstein
And when it comes to doing, the easily available, quotes of Picasso shed a lot of light.
But basically the question works like a Rorschach test, and tells more about the answerer, than 'reality'. That those who pose such questions miss this, may say something more, about their issues with creativity, than they realize.
I won't even bother to comment on the (unconscious?) assumption that creation was a one time event, and that similarly creativity is something that stops and starts, among other such unexamined assumptions.
Very well said, I agree completely. I take the opposite view of the OP -- I see creativity as a very deep phenomenon, a sort of "fire" in the fundamental levels of the subconscious and of nature herself. The unfolding of this can be seen not only in art, literature or invention, but in the very unfolding of the natural world. I see the creative everywhere, personally.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,230
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum]
#27108557 - 12/26/20 09:50 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Quote:
Rahz said: There could be an endless supply of novelty but that doesn't mean the created is every fully novel.
That's true, but OP seems to be contending that the created is fully non-novel.
Yea, I got that. There's a quality in painting for instance that could be called style. A person could be influenced by the style of others and yet develop their own style, derivative but still unique. This would be typical. A viewer examining the art may not appreciate the novelty or even acknowledge it. I'm sure most people have seen a style they don't like (I don't care for a lot of abstract work that is primarily hard edges) and don't care to appreciate the novelty. And for that matter, just because something is novel doesn't mean it will be soul moving for anyone or everyone.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Rahz]
#27108846 - 12/26/20 12:05 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I agree with you, but my only intent was to counter the OP. I agree it's not black and white.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Rahz
Alive Again



Registered: 11/10/05
Posts: 9,230
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum]
#27108879 - 12/26/20 12:23 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Cool. I wasn't replying to or taking exception to anything you were saying. It was just a general comment toward the thread. Sorry for the confusion.
-------------------- rahz comfort pleasure power love truth awareness peace "You’re not looking close enough if you can only see yourself in people who look like you." —Ayishat Akanbi
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Rahz]
#27108884 - 12/26/20 12:25 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum]
#27108932 - 12/26/20 01:03 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Because it really isn't novel if you think about it. All art is created based on something else, so nothing new is truly made. I cannot say the same about nature though but I wouldn't hazard to say the process is different. Looking through art history (which I took in college), nothing was truly new or inspiring but heaven forbid you tell the teacher that.
Side note: elephants don't exist, just the concept of an elephant, there is no permanent and unchanging thing we can call an elephant, etc.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27109110 - 12/26/20 02:30 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I think you are hung up on stamping things out, which is a natural assembly line, the way proteins are spun out of ribosomes by stamping the right amino acid against the growing chain based upon the RNA that is being expressed. this goes on billions of times per second without any mental interventions.
we are constantly making ourselves according to our genes and our diet in our life at our homes etc.
that part is the everyday.
making art, even everyday making of art is not everyday.
it is always a foray into something timeless and human. this may not be easy to express or understand, but when we touch something and change it, it becomes an extension of our minds, and our minds can reach out to other minds via the marks we make on paper, the shapes we build, the music we make.
this is so even when the themes, arrangements and tunes are recognized as something familiar. The familiar connection is very meaningful, as is the unique expression of any insular self.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27109158 - 12/26/20 02:56 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
InnerWisdom said: What is creative? Create something that relates to nothing else? No, creative means to use something pre-existing to create a new whole. Otherwise the only creation was the universe. In regards to art, there would be almost no art if every separate idea or expression could only be done once...
Contingency - if that’s the right word. Creativity fashions from the pre existing. I agree that the nuts and bolts don’t change in some empirical sense but that is the plumbing level of reality. Creativity is not foundational. But uses it
Which makes me think TMs novelty theory may be off. Novelty might be fashionable but not empirically valid. Physical is about repetition and foundation and basic order. Beside the point
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Rahz]
#27110780 - 12/27/20 02:25 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Rahz said: “I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather did. Not screaming in terror like the passengers in his car."
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27110821 - 12/27/20 02:57 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What is human isn't exactly "human" though. Other animals use tools and shape their world, even have culture. We ain't that special it turns out. I wouldn't call what we do timeless either as everything withers away eventually.
It doesn't even become an extension of our minds or anything at all really since art only exists in the mind, not reality, like any concept.
With that said, have you actually made anything?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27110988 - 12/27/20 04:45 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
Rahz said: “I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather did. Not screaming in terror like the passengers in his car."

yikes
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27111295 - 12/27/20 08:10 PM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Re: "Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made?'
. It turns out that there is no absolute answer to your question, because you haven't defined what you mean by "new".
. Anything new will actually be made of old atoms and molecules, and exist in the same old 3 dimensional space, and be impermanent. So yes, on these grounds we can say nothing is new.
. But if someone offers to give us a new car, to replace an old one that is falling apart, ( as they must leave the country on very short notice, for example), we will gladly say: "Thank you for the NEW car."
. So you need to do something new, in phrasing your old question, if you want, anyone to respond with a new answer, to what is by now, not only an old question, but a poorly formed one, that of necessity will always continue to defeat itself.
. Of course once you actually define what you mean by "new", "creative", and "art", the superficiality of the question will become obvious. Quite often superficiality disguises itself in ambiguity as something profound. . Of course if no one really wants an answer, but rather wants a game or pastime, where spouting opinions, is taken to be meaningful, then ambiguities of this sort are ideal. It all depends on what the players want.
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 28 days, 3 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27111524 - 12/28/20 12:57 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The concept of "new" is entirely relative, so there's actually more "newness", on a constant basis, relatively speaking...
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#27111542 - 12/28/20 01:34 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Its creative because it takes our ingenuity.. our skill and compassion.
In reality there are two types of people..:
First, beings that were created. Second, beings that have always existed..(like Adam Kadmon). The true host oversoul to the many masses.
The truncated part of the tree exists so people can save themselves.. By practicing klipoth (The dark side of the tree Qabbalah) daily is good for defense against magical attackers.. which is the most effective way for ancient immortals to harm somebody..
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: BrendanFlock]
#27111545 - 12/28/20 01:43 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Novelty is made of chaos..
Something new is just an extension of something before.. Explicate order..
The implicate order is the fact that even though something is new it still fits in or blends into the order of all things.
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: BrendanFlock]
#27111546 - 12/28/20 01:45 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Conservation is of habit necessarily..
So habits are branched out of order and chaos.. The order being the habit.. The chaos being the novelty.. the difference
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27112067 - 12/28/20 11:07 AM (3 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: Re: "Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made?' It turns out that there is no absolute answer to your question, because you haven't defined what you mean by "new" ... , "creative", and "art", ...
...Of course if no one really wants an answer, but rather wants a game or pastime, where spouting opinions, is taken to be meaningful, then ambiguities of this sort are ideal. It all depends on what the players want.
Given that spouting dogmatic opinions seems to be desired, (as its much easier than defining terms) Sirshovel's statement: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? ... Because it really isn't novel if you think about it. All art is created based on something else, so nothing new is truly made. I cannot say the same about nature though but I wouldn't hazard to say the process is different. ..." etc etc.,
will do as well as any other statement. You are all right and correct.
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 28 days, 3 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: BrendanFlock]
#27113340 - 12/29/20 12:38 AM (3 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BrendanFlock said: Novelty is made of chaos..
Something new is just an extension of something before.. Explicate order..
The implicate order is the fact that even though something is new it still fits in or blends into the order of all things.
Keep this in mind when I refer to determinism with you down the road, because this is the perfect example of you logically following it forward and backward (a good thing)!
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27114199 - 12/29/20 12:51 PM (3 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said: Re: "Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made?'
. It turns out that there is no absolute answer to your question, because you haven't defined what you mean by "new".
. Anything new will actually be made of old atoms and molecules, and exist in the same old 3 dimensional space, and be impermanent. So yes, on these grounds we can say nothing is new.
. But if someone offers to give us a new car, to replace an old one that is falling apart, ( as they must leave the country on very short notice, for example), we will gladly say: "Thank you for the NEW car."
. So you need to do something new, in phrasing your old question, if you want, anyone to respond with a new answer, to what is by now, not only an old question, but a poorly formed one, that of necessity will always continue to defeat itself.
. Of course once you actually define what you mean by "new", "creative", and "art", the superficiality of the question will become obvious. Quite often superficiality disguises itself in ambiguity as something profound. . Of course if no one really wants an answer, but rather wants a game or pastime, where spouting opinions, is taken to be meaningful, then ambiguities of this sort are ideal. It all depends on what the players want.
New in the case of art is something that has not been done before. Since all art is based on something that already exists nothing is new is made hence art cannot be called creative.
If you wanted to anthropomorphize nature you could argue nature is creative in that animals show up that are truly novel. Humans however can never lay claim to that.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27114290 - 12/29/20 01:51 PM (3 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
I cannot think of anything anywhere anywhen which would satisfy some people here as compliant with the absolute requisite of indisputably non-derivative newness or even non-derivative existence.
it seems to me that dependent origination prevails universally even in quantum physics.
the question in my mind is "who gives a flying fuck? if you appreciate the art you got a bonus experience, and if not, move on."
Those convoluted artist statements are not that helpful in getting the appreciation going, but they mean a lot to some parts of the art world.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27114684 - 12/29/20 05:45 PM (3 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
The iching points out that humans live in a limited world ... only 3 dimensions, only 6 primary colors, etc. if we understand this, then our expectations are in line with reality.
If we want flying purple unicorns we will always be disappointed.
As RGV hints of more value may be ; asking ourselves how we can feel more appreciative, and so enjoy life more.
Advertisers certainly hit upon a formula for success by getting Americans to associate "new" with "good", where-as in Europe where there is hundreds of years of more history, cathedrals and castles, what is old and traditional may be more valued, as well as in native and traditional cultures. Which casts some doubt on the absolute formula of new with good that the advertisers sold Americans on in the pursuit of profit.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27114726 - 12/29/20 06:28 PM (3 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
the move on part figures as well.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27114906 - 12/29/20 08:28 PM (3 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
I think something is creative if it is beautiful.
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 28 days, 3 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27115233 - 12/29/20 11:50 PM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: I cannot think of anything anywhere anywhen which would satisfy some people here as compliant with the absolute requisite of indisputably non-derivative newness or even non-derivative existence.
it seems to me that dependent origination prevails universally even in quantum physics.
the question in my mind is "who gives a flying fuck? if you appreciate the art you got a bonus experience, and if not, move on."
Those convoluted artist statements are not that helpful in getting the appreciation going, but they mean a lot to some parts of the art world.
This is ultimately the correct conclusion in my honest observation.
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27115235 - 12/29/20 11:50 PM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
I covered this many years ago and we are in agreement on many points.
An artist has a computer with 1 b&w pixel. Is it creative if he chooses black or if he chooses white?
An artist has a computer with 4 b&w pixels. Is it creative if he chooses 1 of 16 combinations?
An artist has a computer with 16 b&w pixels. Is it creative if he chooses 1 of 256 combinations?
And so forth...
We can add color and do the same thought experiment.
At what depth is creativity definitively declared?
--------------------
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 28 days, 3 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#27115237 - 12/29/20 11:51 PM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: I covered this many years ago and we are in agreement on many points.
An artist has a computer with 1 b&w pixel. Is it creative if he chooses black or if he chooses white?
An artist has a computer with 4 b&w pixels. Is it creative if he chooses 1 of 16 combinations?
An artist has a computer with 16 b&w pixels. Is it creative if he chooses 1 of 256 combinations?
And so forth...
We can add color and do the same thought experiment.
At what depth is creativity definitively declared?
Correct! It's called thinking rationally and you've just displayed it perfectly. MOST of what we assume is concrete, is not dissimilar to what you just said in the above example, my friend. Bravo.
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#27115257 - 12/30/20 12:14 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
So there is nothing (degrees of freedom) compared to the first thinking compared to the most valid perfect thing..
There is always a thing that gives you the most reletivity equalling zero..
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#27115287 - 12/30/20 01:04 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Creativity is when the artist decides to sit down with an idea that rose out of their mind and selected the pixels to represent it. Now art doesn't always need to be creative. Someone could just do a copy of any art and it would still work as art pretty much. Creativity is like dreams. That's like the essence of human creativity in work.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#27115731 - 12/30/20 08:43 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: I covered this many years ago and we are in agreement on many points.
An artist has a computer with 1 b&w pixel. Is it creative if he chooses black or if he chooses white?
An artist has a computer with 4 b&w pixels. Is it creative if he chooses 1 of 16 combinations?
An artist has a computer with 16 b&w pixels. Is it creative if he chooses 1 of 256 combinations?
And so forth...
We can add color and do the same thought experiment.
At what depth is creativity definitively declared?
is this a thought experiment meant to discredit 'creativity' (a word I find obnoxious and infantalizing for the most part - I prefer synthetic art versus creative art, as there is more connecting going on during synthesis as opposed to creative expression which could just be candida (fungal excresence))
depth is irrelevant. with graphene you get 20 layers from 20 molecules, but with trump you need a building with 20 stories so a naked lady can jump on your table.
I hope that helps.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27115762 - 12/30/20 08:59 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Even a non-mathematician can multiply on a log table.
--------------------
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#27115852 - 12/30/20 09:49 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
usually log tables have gobs of dried stew and beer to keep you boinking
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Pinkerton
Ultrasentient

Registered: 02/26/19
Posts: 3,127
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27116021 - 12/30/20 11:00 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Can you say hi to orkie from me? He's ignoring moi.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Pinkerton]
#27116082 - 12/30/20 11:30 AM (3 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Pinkerton said: Can you say hi to orkie from me? He's ignoring moi.
that is not possible
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Loaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist



Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,006
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 28 days, 3 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
#27117384 - 12/31/20 12:58 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Even a non-mathematician can multiply on a log table. 
0 x anything is always 0, but 1 has to exist in the first place before it can be added to nothing (0).
The Big Bang is Bullshit.
--------------------
  "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#27117523 - 12/31/20 04:20 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
So zero is a kind of abstraction?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#27117595 - 12/31/20 06:13 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Loaded Shaman said:
Quote:
OrgoneConclusion said: Even a non-mathematician can multiply on a log table. 
0 x anything is always 0, but 1 has to exist in the first place before it can be added to nothing (0).
The Big Bang is Bullshit.
yes, except if you consider the nature of time itself. of course the universe does not come out of nothing, until time shows up which suggests a kink in gravity etc. i.e. one little shift and BOOM! although before time, there was no concept of before. (and I am not sure what that suggests, but something else anyway)
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27117939 - 12/31/20 10:16 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
Before time must be timeless. Timelessness either has quality or doesn’t. Since 1 cannot come from zero then the state of timelessness has quality.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#27117963 - 12/31/20 10:27 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
it's not about you and if there is not any information it is not therefore proof of that missing information having any qualities you would recognize.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27117987 - 12/31/20 10:41 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
That’s a one not I
Besides since it is not about “me” then you’ll sympathize with the humility present in order to state something without information at hand.
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Yellow Pants]
#27118020 - 12/31/20 10:53 AM (3 years, 28 days ago) |
|
|
And are we debating recognition or existence? I am just saying that it is sufficient proof of existence in timelessness and not that I would recognize anything of it.
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Loaded Shaman]
#27119276 - 12/31/20 08:39 PM (3 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Big bang is not BS but I already know how flawed your logic is so that's beside the point.
The point being that there is no such thing as creativity since nothing new is made and everything we "make" is just duplicating something else.
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27119594 - 01/01/21 02:53 AM (3 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sirshovel said:...The point being that there is no such thing as creativity since nothing new is made and everything we "make" is just duplicating something else.
. One may wonder if you are secretly suffering from the illusion that you just said something new, surprising, creative, or particularly relevant, or are just addicted to trolling, all those who think you are actually open to some sort of meaningful discussion, not that it matters; its slightly amusing in any case, to see how long this thread can go on, going nowhere. So far we have about 1 week, of you maintaining your position fiercely against all challengers, congratulations !
. Of course this being now over a year of covid-19, as we go into 2021, many are probably rather bored, so you don't want to take too much credit, for all the fish you catch, in your net. . Many probably really don't give much of a shit one way or the other, about the supposed issue. Posting is perhaps just a way to chat a little without risking much. And most would apparently rather post in an existing thread than start a new one, as anyone can easily see.
. Some people are sweet, some troll, and some seem to enjoy seeing how many people they can offend at once, from time to time and a few actually have something interesting to say; and so on... what a strange mix !
Edited by laughingdog (01/01/21 03:16 AM)
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27119909 - 01/01/21 08:42 AM (3 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
stubborn negativity strikes again
you would not know a good piece of art if someone smashed it over your head and left you wearing the frame.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Yellow Pants


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc:
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27120039 - 01/01/21 09:55 AM (3 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sirshovel said: Big bang is not BS but I already know how flawed your logic is so that's beside the point.
The point being that there is no such thing as creativity since nothing new is made and everything we "make" is just duplicating something else.
I don’t think the word “duplicate” is accurate at all. Duplicate means to copy and form another object mirroring a pre existing object. The artistic is literally opposite of this
In regard to Big Bang I think it’s sound. It’s just going further and saying that that infinite point of energy and density came from nothing isn’t true. But no actual theorists make this statement just arm chair interpreting
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27120059 - 01/01/21 10:09 AM (3 years, 27 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sirshovel said: Big bang is not BS but I already know how flawed your logic is so that's beside the point.
The point being that there is no such thing as creativity since nothing new is made and everything we "make" is just duplicating something else.
This is a poor argument, and actually is not an argument, but just an opinion. You do not want to present any arguments for your stance and are stubbornly declaring that you hold the truth of the matter, without defining creativity or anything else.
So you hold the opinion that creativity doesnt exist. Ok.
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27125066 - 01/04/21 12:38 AM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
redgreenvines said: stubborn negativity strikes again
you would not know a good piece of art if someone smashed it over your head and left you wearing the frame.
There is nothing negative about it, seeing through illusions isn't supposed to be about flowers and positivity. Seeing that art is not truly creative did ruin art for me though.
I have made my arguments for it, but the ones for creativity seem poor at best. The fact that what we make is based on something that exists already you can't exactly call it new or original. We drew a lot of inspiration from nature when it comes from designs and eventually you just get variations on a theme.
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27125355 - 01/04/21 06:18 AM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
I guess the only thing to say here is what did you fucking expect from art or creativity
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27125463 - 01/04/21 07:29 AM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
I see a juvenile attitude without interest in the details, and I think this is from glacial thinking, which compares layers of rock forming over millions of years with the value of all poetry and painting being no more than dust in a forgotten valley.
wrong context, but choosing to use one value system for all things is an attractive way centralize thought control and homogenize humanity and all it's aspirations into tofu and mud.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,332
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 2 seconds
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel] 1
#27126279 - 01/04/21 02:15 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
I find that to be the definition of creative, making something new out of something old.
For example, your dragon example. There are no known living reptiles that have wings and yet with Human creativity, we made them "real". Thats what creativity is to me, modifying something real or something that was real in the past and changing it into something fictional/semi-original.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: LogicaL Chaos] 1
#27126553 - 01/04/21 04:25 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
I think the creative and novel arise as one of the deepest forces of nature, but I am not interested in trying to convince Sirshovel of it.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,332
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 2 seconds
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum] 1
#27126585 - 01/04/21 04:34 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Noted. Creativity lies at the Heart of Creation
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: LogicaL Chaos] 2
#27126659 - 01/04/21 05:12 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum] 1
#27126787 - 01/04/21 06:06 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made?
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: ....but I am not interested in trying to convince Sirshovel of it.
. Well I'm surprised by the whole thread ... its time, for someone to finally answer the question literally: "Yes, we can call art whatever the fuck we want to !"
What a dumb question !
Edited by laughingdog (01/04/21 06:08 PM)
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,818
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27126862 - 01/04/21 06:45 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
True enough.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,332
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 2 seconds
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27126885 - 01/04/21 06:59 PM (3 years, 24 days ago) |
|
|
Ok, yeah that lizard does have wings but it glides not flies like a dragon.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: LogicaL Chaos]
#27127516 - 01/05/21 04:41 AM (3 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
never be too sure of anything
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27127766 - 01/05/21 08:57 AM (3 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Loaded Shaman said: Yes.
Quote:
laughingdog said: Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made?
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: ....but I am not interested in trying to convince Sirshovel of it.
. Well I'm surprised by the whole thread ... its time, for someone to finally answer the question literally: "Yes, we can call art whatever the fuck we want to !"
What a dumb question !
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27127948 - 01/05/21 10:55 AM (3 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
I run into this dumb question fairly often
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: DividedQuantum]
#27129182 - 01/05/21 08:01 PM (3 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: I think the creative and novel arise as one of the deepest forces of nature, but I am not interested in trying to convince Sirshovel of it.
I'm not denying that "nature" exhibits such creativity. I am merely denying that humans hold the same capacity as I have already shown.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27129779 - 01/06/21 06:37 AM (3 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
you are therefore a denier, no prob here. be yourself. do your own thing.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
skOsH
Functionally dysfunctional



Registered: 07/03/19
Posts: 1,372
Loc: the PNW
Last seen: 1 day, 15 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27130313 - 01/06/21 12:37 PM (3 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
I think art mostly speaks to people, or it won't. Most people relate better with the art if they connect to it emotionally. Some art just doesn't cut it if it's just duplicates, but if it is slightly different, it might depict something that sparks insight to create even more art
I don't think there is such a thing as bad art, just some people like different art,
|
OutsideOfMyMind
LSD Self Administrative Director



Registered: 10/05/20
Posts: 5,383
Last seen: 1 hour, 37 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: skOsH]
#27132103 - 01/07/21 01:37 AM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
In my opinion there hasn't been any real art for the last like 15 to 20 years.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OutsideOfMyMind]
#27132157 - 01/07/21 03:42 AM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
but before that well, what came before 20 years ago, what a statement!
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27132189 - 01/07/21 04:45 AM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
Can one call the OP either intelligent or interesting if he has had nothing new to say for about a week &/or 4 pages?
And if one did, would anyone believe it, let alone care?
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27132194 - 01/07/21 04:56 AM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
maybe it's a rigged thread, like the election. hold onto your lecterns.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27132427 - 01/07/21 08:36 AM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
let's turn this into a discussion about art and creativity more generally, such as the opinion Outsideofmymind stated.
Personally I am not very familiar with modern art if we are talking about visual arts. I do recall a very boring abstract art installation with paintings being up to 5000euros and being just a big painting of nothing interesting. Something to hang in a hall or waiting room in some fancy place I suppose. In that same place was my cousin's much more creative art in which he used various techniques to make collages and each piece had a theme of its own that was clear immediately or took some time to familiarize in the work. A lot of it was based on modern internet culture such as memes. There were also fragments of his own life in there. That I would call art compared to the uninspiring albeit inoffensive to the eyes abstract art works.
Therefore I initially somewhat agree with Outsideofmymind's statement, althogh I am sure lots of good visual art has been made in the last two decades.
Obviously a banana taped to a wall is not art, but a way to avoid paying taxes and what not.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27132565 - 01/07/21 10:04 AM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
you may fail to realize that the gallery in which you saw the large abstract painting is also a creative art even though it was built by tradesmen, and the wall was construed as a place for a large painting, and the thought was that people would be able to experience something when they encounter the large painting in the well lit halls that are impeccably cleaned. all of those sensibilities are part of the overall umbrella of art culture. in japan they have wabi sabi, this may be more accessible to you before engaging in abstract art directly. a consideration of the impermanence and imperfection in life.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27133372 - 01/07/21 04:30 PM (3 years, 21 days ago) |
|
|
ThisQuote:
InnerWisdom said: let's turn this into a discussion about art and creativity more generally, ...
Whether one likes a particular piece of art or not, has nothing to do with the experience of the person who made it, while they were making it.
. That this has been ignored here shows that most if not all, of the posters here aren't artists, painters, or writers, although some may like to dabble a little.
. People who go to a rave don't judge each other's dancing, they're having too much fun. Yet compared to the everyday behavior most people engage in with their bodies, something that feels creative seems to be happening.
In the case of "Burning Man" every thing that is created also gets destroyed, so if we grant that some of the constructions that occur there are amazing, that the people there are having great fun, making friends, and take home with themselves feelings of more energy and empowerment--then again we see the experience of making and modifying an object (aka creating) is separate from the object, separate from the price of the object, separate from any opinions about the object, and separate from any influence it may have on others' ideas and future creations.
. Notice that the OP's silly statement lies purely within the field of opinion, after the process of manufacturing, modifying, and creating has entirely ended. . And that it is assumed some sort of random sampling of opinion by those who know nothing of the creation process of the item in question, has some sort of validity, and furthermore the statement shows the OP to be unaware of all these factors, as well as, of course as predicted, to be totally incapable of defining his terms. . In particular, as regards definitions, the importance of knowing what of the OP refers to as "art", and the motivations of the creator, of course effect the answer as well. . To ignore all this reduces the question to trolling, or purely low level journalism. As all of the operative words are undefined, a paper with this question, submitted in a philosophy class, as posted here, would simply be flunked - pure and simple.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Burning+man&t=h_&iax=images&ia=images
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Burning+man&t=h_&ia=web
|
OutsideOfMyMind
LSD Self Administrative Director



Registered: 10/05/20
Posts: 5,383
Last seen: 1 hour, 37 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27134295 - 01/08/21 12:06 AM (3 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
I'll get back to this when I don't have a headache.
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: laughingdog]
#27134604 - 01/08/21 07:08 AM (3 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Excellent post. You described the creative process and joy very well as the basis of art. That is to me what constitutes art, regardless of how many other opinions there are. It is enough that one person, usually the creator had that joy of constructing (using this instead of creating) - bringing into existence - something of significance to them.
Art incorporates beauty, aesthetics into the work of art. I would consider a valid definition of any work as art that someone holds the opinion that it is a work of art, because how it makes them feel: appreciative, touched, and so on.
|
Sirshovel
Stranger
Registered: 09/24/20
Posts: 101
Last seen: 3 years, 7 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: skOsH]
#27137905 - 01/09/21 03:37 PM (3 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
skOsH said: I think art mostly speaks to people, or it won't. Most people relate better with the art if they connect to it emotionally. Some art just doesn't cut it if it's just duplicates, but if it is slightly different, it might depict something that sparks insight to create even more art
I don't think there is such a thing as bad art, just some people like different art,
I think it only speaks to people because we are raised to believe that. Without any conception of what art "IS" I highly doubt it would speak to as many people as it normally would.
I'm not a denier, merely unable to go back to seeing art as the masses have been told to (IE, that it even exists to begin with or that it's creative).
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: Sirshovel]
#27137935 - 01/09/21 03:49 PM (3 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Why do you think art doesn't exist? We went through the creative part, but what about that which is referred to as art, is it not real?
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27138903 - 01/10/21 02:16 AM (3 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
The "creative part" as in a stage in Jungian psychology?
|
InnerWisdom


Registered: 08/09/19
Posts: 1,936
Loc: North EU
Last seen: 4 days, 10 hours
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: BrendanFlock]
#27138907 - 01/10/21 02:18 AM (3 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
no, as in this thread my wording is problematic sometimes it seems
|
BrendanFlock
Stranger


Registered: 06/01/13
Posts: 4,216
Last seen: 4 hours, 23 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: InnerWisdom]
#27140638 - 01/10/21 08:13 PM (3 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
But maybe what is revealed has never been revealed in that way before..
There should be an option to see change.. between choice and adaptation/reaction.
|
OutsideOfMyMind
LSD Self Administrative Director



Registered: 10/05/20
Posts: 5,383
Last seen: 1 hour, 37 minutes
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: BrendanFlock]
#27143250 - 01/12/21 06:52 AM (3 years, 16 days ago) |
|
|
Art should be something that expresses something within yourself. It shouldn't need a story or explanation in order to explain what it expresses, otherwise it's not art, but just a commodity. A lot of contemporary art is bullshit and is not real art. A lot of it is commercialized and has been turned into a commodity. I'm talking about more of the fine arts, painting, sculpture, things of that sort. The problem with contemporary art is that it can be any medium with any idea. Before contemporary art, each style incorporated the basic principles and elements of art in a very composing way, a great composition, if you may. In order to create a good composition, it should use the principles and elements of art in a way that is composing to the eye.
The kids these days who create their shitty digital art don't know anything about the basic principles and elements of art or how to make a good composition. They don't know anything about portraiture. Nothing about color theory or how to mix paint. Most people who do actually paint only use acrylic. It's very rare to meet anyone these days who likes painting with oils or watercolor or pastel. In my eyes, you're not a REAL fine artist unless you know how to paint with oil paints. Although acrylic has its uses, it's mostly for pussies who don't know how to blend paint and who are too impatient to use oils.
There is not really any such thing as real photographers anymore. Most photographers or should I say people who call themselves photographers just have some cheap digital camera and know how to use at least the basic functions of photoshop.
So now what makes a good artist? I think having a wide breadth of knowledge in the mediums and the principles and elements of art are important. Do you not only know how to make harmonious compositions, but can you also work with pencil, charcoal, graphite, watercolors, gaouche, oil and dry pastel, oil paint, acrylic, tempera, et al???? Are you familiar with the tools and methods to create basic and advanced art? Do you not only know how to make abstract pieces, but can you also draw and/or paint a photorealistic copy of what you see? How about perspective? When I think about the greatest artists, my favorite is Canaletto. Perfect perspective and colors and very photorealistic. That's a guy who knows oil paint!
So here now, each era of art also has its criticisms. A lot of art gets censored. There was the "degenerate art" that was made during the war. That was before contemporary art when there were a lot of "isms" such as cubism, surrealism, etc. Before that, each period had its own style of art as you see with baroque, rococo, impressionism, etc.
|
redgreenvines
irregular verb


Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,531
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: OutsideOfMyMind]
#27143281 - 01/12/21 07:35 AM (3 years, 16 days ago) |
|
|
you might be at the beginning of a long journey into Art.
what is missing in your summary is the direct communication of feelings that are not explicit, and how that works with the overall composition, which is greater than any individual part of an artwork.
no one rule dominates all.
--------------------
_ 🧠 _
|
Cyonic
Stranger


Registered: 12/27/20
Posts: 245
Last seen: 11 months, 9 days
|
Re: Can we call art creative if nothing new is truly made? [Re: redgreenvines]
#27147789 - 01/14/21 01:35 PM (3 years, 14 days ago) |
|
|
If nothing new on is made the in process is still the creative process.
The work created however would not be original.
|
|