It is obvious that anything a scientist discovers or invents is based on previous discoveries and inventions. The same applies to the arts.
It is obvious that anything a scientist discovers or invents is based on previous discoveries and inventions. The same applies to the arts.
Why do we pigeonhole and label an artist? It is a sure way of missing the important, the contradictory, the things that make him or her unique.
Yes, influences are enriching, and they can be found in every work of art, even the most original.
Personality is essential. It is in every work of art. When someone walks on stage for a performance and has charisma, everyone is convinced that he has personality. I find that charisma is merely a form of showmanship. Movie stars usually have it. A politician has to have it.
Most people think an artist tries to be original, but originality is the last thing that develops in the artist.
I strongly suggest that we play down basics like who influenced whom, and instead study the way the influence is transformed, in other words: how the artist made it his own.
That is why the analogy of stealing does not work. With a thief, we want to know how much money he stole, and from whom. With the artist it is not how much he took and from whom, but what he did with it.
In the nineteenth century the more grandiose word inspiration began to replace the word idea in the arts.
© 2020 Inspirational Stories
© 2020 Inspirational Stories