tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3827571952667939231.post5898832510328086231..comments2024-01-07T20:06:04.817+11:00Comments on Dualism aside . . .: Professionalism in Music (Audio Included)Marc Hannafordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08610156181502423015noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3827571952667939231.post-80442004819816418602011-10-13T10:57:21.322+11:002011-10-13T10:57:21.322+11:00Fantastic... thanks for the clarification.Fantastic... thanks for the clarification.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3827571952667939231.post-74842525615837801572011-10-12T18:01:43.457+11:002011-10-12T18:01:43.457+11:00Hi Kynan,
Thanks for reading.
At no point do I ...Hi Kynan,<br /><br />Thanks for reading. <br /><br />At no point do I lock myself into any dogmatic statement as to what constitutes creativity in art, but simply that conventions are worth questioning to explore other avenues of art-making. I'm not saying that repetition, or professional convention, for that matter, is counter-productive, but that it can be if not treated carefully. <br /><br />Irony is a way of making repetition productive. The process you described is the knowing, ironic employment of repetition to allow for new concepts. Paul Bley's comment that repetition is counter-productive refers, when read against his stance towards improvisation and industry, to be a rebellion against professionalism, both on extra-musical and musical levels. I'm not saying that repetition is counter-productive, but that it can be if not treated carefully. <br /><br />Coppolla's statement is ironic in that it refers to the possibility that technology might allow beautiful art might to be made without the self-important arts apparatus, but that this possibility could not have come about if it was not for the apparatus in the first place. Hence technological development in the art form contains the seeds of it's own destruction.Marc Hannafordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08610156181502423015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3827571952667939231.post-40030049267514842752011-10-12T13:12:34.668+11:002011-10-12T13:12:34.668+11:00Hey Marc while I agree with the sentiment behind w...Hey Marc while I agree with the sentiment behind what you are saying it seems that you yourself have locked your own ideas into your personal construction of what constitutes creativity or art.<br />Repetition might be the downward spire but maybe the downward spire is where something amazing will be discovered.<br />For a creative thought to occur the brain needs to move into a place of cognitive dissonance and confusion before equilibrium can be achieved leading to a previously unknown concept - or original thought..<br />Repetition can produce this confusion or dissonance because of its counter productive nature - something you present as a negative.<br />Or were you alluding to this with this statement Irony, in this context, is “an acute awareness . . . of the forces playing upon the self as an improvisation proceeds,”.<br /><br />I do love how this post seems to argue for 2 polar perspectives (or does it) and the name of your blog is dualism Aside that same dualism is what makes Scotts version of boring completely different to another's.<br /><br />And what is the conceptual context behind the representation of ironic creativity coming from a fat little girl in the state of Ohio?? Has no one who is fat little female and from Ohio ever produced a creative moment before in history so therefore if it happened it would be overwhelming and a huge cultural shift?<br /><br />Hey Marc I have a new blog url www.kynanrobinson.wordpress.com where I am getting down a lot of thoughts regard creativity and education would love to hear your comments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com