Originality is dead.

[Cellmold]

I think it depends on how you define "originality" here. I think developing a totally novel idea is rare, but it is possible to find novel applications for existing ideas. I think that's what innovation is about, and that matters. I mean, why would anyone sit around lamenting how little difference there is between a chariot and a Model T?

Real and successful originality is recognizable as an idea that doesn't just introduce one single thing, but rather has a system-wide effect. Effective original ideas shift paradigms, and create facets to society that hadn't existed previously. Society hasn't stagnated, so people somewhere must be trying and implementing new ideas. There's still an avant garde, but it's hard to be a lay person and know about these kinds of things. It takes expertise and a little obsession to recognize these ideas as game changers before they percolate outwards and become standard.

That's really encouraging and in fact you're first part about developing something new from something existing ties in with what [MENTION=8444]Mad Hatter[/MENTION] was trying to tell me.
So would you say such ideas are more difficult to get across now than before? In the sense that many might resist them by seeing them as just a rehash?

 

[violet_crown]

So would you say such ideas are more difficult to get across now than before? In the sense that many might resist them by seeing them as just a rehash?

People rarely resist an idea because it's too familiar to them. The world that we live in always benefits someone, and a new idea necessarily challenges those established interests. However, we live in a time now where sharing and generating new ideas is easier than it's ever been, and that's what's truly exciting. We're not to the point yet where individuals have become jaded by the present rate of idea-exchange and generation made possible by "flattened", collaborative models, because frankly we're still just at the beginning of identifying the full potential of those models.

 

[KDude]

I've never had a strong preference for originality in the first place. It's cool when someone gets close to it, but I never exactly miss it either. I can appreciate classical forms in art, 3 chord rock, and a formulaic buddy cop movie.

 

[UniqueMixture]

I don't think originality is dead, it's just hard to keep just the right level of crazy necessary to sustain it w/o putting your life in jeopardy.

 

[Mole]

Literacy has given us originality such as the origin of species, and the origin of consciousness and even the origin of the universe, so we have no more need for originality. In fact we have had too much originality, so thank heavens the literate ascendancy is being replaced by the electronic ascendancy, where there is no teleology, no beginings and endings, no origins and no originality. We are all starting to feel as one in our electronic tribe in the global village.

 

[mmhmm]

Ive noticed a lot of recycled genre's and themes in the world of entertainment and fashion. New breakthroughs seem new, especially in science or medicine, but are usually just building upon what is already there. Although this isn't necessarily bad, (the refining of an idea to greater success or benefit for others is never a bad thing), it does make you think about what might happen once the idea's stop coming....

i like how paul romer puts it into context,
he champions that growth occurs whenever
resources are rearranged in ways that are more
valuable -- like cooking-- in order to create something
valuable, we need to blend in ingredients.

i mean ideas are essentially new combinations
of ingredients--yes, ideas grow out of other ideas--
and because it has to always relate back, so the
word original doesn't seem to fit in.

however, i think it's also important to understand that
creativity and innovation isn't about trying to get away
from the trials and tribulations of trying to re-combine stuff.

i think being able to see that the internal structure
of ideas is a new combination, but at the same time,
creativity has this wonderful interplay with tradition and
discontinuity (ie. street fashion you'll see people wearing
70s clothes in 90s, 80s clothes in 00's). i think because
when new combinations are discovered, ideas will tend to
re-express, interpret, and reinvent what has been done before.

it makes what picasso said makes sense: 'bad artists copy,
good artists steal' and the perfect crime is the ability to
assimilate past traditions and sucessfully integrate it and
transform it into something fresh or something new, without
noticing the inheritance.

 

[Elfboy]

There is no such thing as originality
There never was
Prove me wrong

originality can mean two things
- the creation of something COMPLETELY new (by the laws of physics, a theoretical impossibility)
or
- a unique combination of what already exists to accomplish something greater than the sum of it's parts.

the former is dead; the latter is not

 

[visaisahero]

Nothing can be completely new- anything that exists builds upon others. But things can be new or original within a particular context or setting. This is why poetry, music and art continue to dazzle us to this day, and will continue to dazzle us for eternity. It's not that you're saying something that's never been said before- it's how you're saying it, why you're saying it, who you're saying it to...

you can never step in the same river twice

 

[Stanton Moore]

This thread has been done before...

 

[Seymour]

This thread has been done before...

I think someone already said that.

 

[Cellmold]

I think someone already said that.

Haha yeah, I also already assumed it would have been hence the comment in my original post about it being ironic. And this is doubly ironic....

 

[RaptorWizard]

You don't need to do things in new, original, and creative ways. Rather, you can just follow tradition. Tradition makes it okay!

 

[Blank]

And we have killed it.


Nah, but in all seriousness, I read an interesting article on originality, which more or less argues that originality isn't important and that authenticity and the desire to create and innovate is. Actually, it may not have been an article. It may have been from an English textbook.

 

[redacted]

As society and technology progress, the web of concepts people interact with shifts and morphs. Obviously we all think about the internet and other new technological leaps now, and essentially no one ever thought of these specific things 40 years ago.

Think about it this way. Lets just say there's some total amount of thoughts people have, let's call it x. 50 years ago, there were 3billion*x thoughts about the web of information then. Now, there are 7billion*x thoughts about the web of information now. So unless someone's gonna say that the 4billion*x extra thoughts covered literally zero new ground AND the new things people have been exposed to haven't changed the way people think, I don't see how anyone could argue that there haven't been an absurd amount of original thoughts in recent times.