I get that my thread here is about a separate issue, to a degree, but I think it’s relevant. I think we ought to have wide understanding of what constitutes a kind of “citation” in making art that should not trigger a compensation to the cited.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
But inasmuch as this seems to revolve around a combination of knowledge and innovation/creativity, it seems like a problem that despite a long tradition of thinking about it in both theory and practice, I don’t think there’s a really satisfying account of what innovation or creativity is in art.
Yeah, no, I also don’t. I think maybe it does operate differently, but I’m not certain of that. I can say that I enjoy more iterations of very similar art than iterations of very similar scholarship. But not in a categorical way. My guess is if there is a difference it is of degree, not kind.
Comments
I don’t know. But I also don’t think I know for sure that originality works in a very different way in, say, fiction & music than it does in research.