Creative responsibility

We are in the business of making the ordinary exciting but the problem is that 99.99% of films over do it. Any departure from the ordinary has to be handled with care, logic and relevance to the ordinary so that it does not construct a dehumanizing and demeaning narrative which people might mistake for a normality and something which is to be simulated and encouraged. The problem is that it is very hard to construct such narrative. The talent required to create such narrative is hard to find. Instead of focusing on creating a meaningful narrative most filmmakers settle for ordinary meaningless crap because it’s either that or a long search for the rare writing talent and most people want to shoot regardless of what it is. They forget about their moral responsibility. Therefore they shoot whatever they can and don’t think about the consequences their creation will have on the audiences. But thinking about the message would improve their work.

Advertisements

An original perception and the decision to express it as the origin of the creativity

Perhaps the origins of the creativity are the realization of the importance of a new and original idea which forms within your mind and the gift is the belief that you have the right to refuse to simplify it, that you have the right not to reduce your imagination to something which can be understood by anyone. If on the other hand you are not brought up in a way which encourages you to be on your own and consider (for a lengthy period of time) any thoughts which occur to you before you break them down and communicate them then you will not be able to realize when an original idea is starting to form in your mind. So because you do not realize the importance of your new idea you adjust your thinking and say to yourself, wait, this is not how most people think, they will not understand me if I think this way or if I behave this way, therefore you abandon your new insights which are the  foundations of your new ideas, and you continue to communicate using the ideas and therefore the concepts which everyone can understand. This same thing applies in arts and sciences. Rather than developing a new language you stick with the same old images, same old, patterns, same old sounds. I guess people continue to perpetuate this state because of their fear of isolation. I’d rather be isolated than oblivious to the beauty of the universe and surrounded by ignorance.

The internal state of creation and its externalization as a new form of communication

I have come to realize that people with a certain level of ability to imagine and invent have to communicate through visual arts or visual languages or mathematical formulas or mathematical or scientific languages or they have to create a new form of literature or new words or in general new forms of  constructs in order to convey their ideas and feelings because what they feel on the inside is so overwhelming that that it cannot be expressed in words which have to reduce all new complex feelings or emotions or ideas into a small number of letters which can be understood by anyone. A truly artistic or scientific mind understands that the internal state of the imagination loses its dimension when it has to be reduced to a one dimensional  language in order to be externalized.

Through artistic or scientific languages they do not encode or simplify their emotions and ideas for everyday usage but they communicate them in their new raw state. They do not reduce them because they know that any attempt to simplify them would remove the new meaning thus what they have to do is believe in their work and leave it as it. What this means is that they are creating a new form of communication. Always deeper and richer and more complex than the works on which their ideas are founded but most people cannot understand this process or the most significant new artistic or scientific developments.

The general public has to learn how to read and decode and deal with the new scientific ideas or pieces of art. For example Mozart’s and Beethoven’s works were so complex and rich that no one in their time could understand them. If Mozart were able to explain the importance of his new compositions he would not have to compose in order to communicate them. But what he felt he could not explain through anything else but music. Perhaps due to his education, perhaps due to his conviction, perhaps due to his choice. But he could not explain them because the language to describe them was not there. The mathematical complexity of his starting point, just like that of Beethoven’s, was so far ahead of what was considered contemporary that they would have had to have invented a new mathematical language in order to explain how and why they started their compositions and new words and new type of scientific language or psychology in order to explain their mental states. But to them they occurred as spontaneously and as organically as patterns in nature. Always there but not perceived by everyone. Thus ego is irrelevant. For the beauty is always there and everyone can see it, only if they look hard enough, and of course if they are willing to see it and willing to sacrifice the time.

Furthermore, a truly artistic or a scientific person is always forcing itself to perceive all events, actions and objects in as many different dimensions as possible without reducing their perceptions and experiences into words in their minds in order to share their newly discovered experiences with other people. On the contrary, they turn their experiences inwardly and expand them and multiply them inwardly and let them grow and create a depository of ideas, feelings, perceptions, senses, sensations, memories which exist in multiple dimensions thus encoding them in their work and manipulating them and transforming them in order to develop their work and to expand on current works thus in order to create new more complex piece of art or science which can help us get closer to the universal beauty of the universe.

Thus the creation itself becomes the artist’s or scientist’s mean of communication. The new piece of art or science is, in a way, his or her form of language. The way in which he or she perceives and describes the world can be and should be found in his or her work. The important thing is to know when one is creating this work. The important thing is to continue with it. The important thing is not to ensure that everyone knows what it is or why it is important to you or why it will be important to other people. This is not important because it is impossible to enable people to share your unique perspective. It is impossible because they are not you. In time, they will see what you see, hear what you hear, smell what you smell, imagine what you imagine. But not until they are ready.