Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
|
[shudder] Consider the awful opinion made in “The Incredibles” when the
villain claims that he’s out to provide devices to the public (when he’s really
just got a grudge against super heroes) so “everyone will be super”: “And when
everyone is super, no one will be...” Chilling look at some
folks’ desire for a homogenous, easily controlled and marketed-to populace,
that. But a great metaphor nonetheless.
The discussion that non-creatives will NEVER broach is that of what
distinguishes creative people from folks who couldn’t do so if their lives
depended on it. I’m certainly not going to stir that bowl of stuff.
The moment one makes such a distinction, it leads to an us-vs-them mentality on
the part of non-creatives... if that doesn’t quietly exist already. Have
you ever had a long discussion with an accountant? Some of them insist
that their work is “creative”, when all they’re good at is finding holes in
existing rules, and exploiting them for their clients.
From: Matteo Giudici
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: Do We Perceive Beauty in an Unexpected
Context I
say that "if everyone was equally famous" we would be in a world where all is
equal: equal innate ability, equal ability to study, equal ability to penetrate
the complexity of life and translate it in music or painting or..., equal
ability to manage themselves, equal ability to see a new little point of view,
equal ability to make a serious journey into the "search of meaning" etc...
I think that all these things are distribuited in many different way and so
there are "artists" and "not artists", "art" and "not art". All that in a hard
complex world that asks us every day the effort to penetrate what we are looking
and listening.
Il giorno 20/feb/2012, alle ore 21.55, Jim Goodin ha scritto:
|