tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post5895960470707762531..comments2018-06-30T00:23:33.597-03:00Comments on Surrealistic Reflections: Can Too Much Information Prevent Unique Individual Expression?Teresa Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00565322758688058310noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post-89106886641028645072010-03-04T16:50:45.697-04:002010-03-04T16:50:45.697-04:00p.s. pardon my spelling errors... I'm a scient...p.s. pardon my spelling errors... I'm a scientist and writer... not a grammer expert... (Where's Toulouse when you need him!)Nina Munteanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00311070435293186699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post-31682443286834576202010-03-04T16:48:13.315-04:002010-03-04T16:48:13.315-04:00As a practicing scientist and a published writer, ...As a practicing scientist and a published writer, I can't disagree more with Kevin's assesement. From the standpoint of science, these two -- rigidity and curriculum -- are what are wrong with science these days. It locks scientists into what IS, rather than what COULD BE and negates imagination, creativity and risk-taking, which are the very basic tenets of ground-breaking research. Of course, a certain amount of self-discipline and standard methodology is required for science to prove itself. But this is a far cry from "rigidity". You see how this brings us back to LANGUAGE and how it is evolving...<br /><br />As an artist -- a published writer of novels, short stories and essays, I submit that "freeing" the artist is equally unbeneficial to both artist and those to whome the artist is communicating. There is a great deal of self-discipline and integration of world/culture for an artist to remain relevant and heard by his/her community. Chaos without order is anarchy and order without chaos is tyranny... hmmmm... you can quote me on that... :) (I'm a writer, after all)...<br /><br />It is BALANCE that both scientists and artists should strive for...<br /><br />Which brings us back to LANGUAGE. Go check out my link (I give it in my comment above)...Nina Munteanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00311070435293186699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post-2958981044539866522010-03-04T16:34:15.615-04:002010-03-04T16:34:15.615-04:00Hmmm. It's an interesting thought, but not one...Hmmm. It's an interesting thought, but not one I'm sure I totally agree with. <br /><br />If we left rigidity of curriculum in place for technical people, then the internet itself would never have changed and grown at all... <br /><br />Not to mention evolution of science. Science is constantly changing because of people that consciously put aside what they know to think outside the box. It's much the same process and ignoring a wealth of known processes to create a new art style...<br /><br />Thanks for the comment;-)<br />Teresa.Teresa Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00565322758688058310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post-48034374310530928022010-03-04T16:23:46.447-04:002010-03-04T16:23:46.447-04:00You are totally right about information and expres...You are totally right about information and expression, but I think it's only harmful for artists. For non-artists, I don't think rigidity and curriculum are harmful. So the problem is, how do you free the artists and continue to train the non-artists (a situation in which everyone benefits). In other words, I think freeing everyone from information overload can be harmful too, in the physical sciences, for example.Kevinhttp://www.kapauldo.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post-33103833823192294372010-03-03T17:02:37.875-04:002010-03-03T17:02:37.875-04:00Maybe that's the first question we need to ask...Maybe that's the first question we need to ask ourselves on the road to self-expression. What art really is personally... <br /><br />Certainly it would be something that would help in developing more unique forms of artistic expression as the answer to the question would form a basis for the expression itself.<br /><br />Thanks for the comment!<br /><br />Teresa.Teresa Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00565322758688058310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-847947158651684642.post-43941730983619731772010-03-03T14:05:16.451-04:002010-03-03T14:05:16.451-04:00I find the question you pose in your title very to...I find the question you pose in your title very topical, particularly in light of how communication and associated self-expression in our culture (at least in North America) is evolving and changing so rapidly with cell phone texting, internet blogging, social networking and google.<br /><br />It begs the question of what IS unique individual expression and how is it achieved in this current over-rich arena of information-expression. <br /><br />I feel that artists need to remain emmersed and yet apart from their culture in order to fulfill their role as commentator. It's a fine balance (keeping one foot in and one foot out)to be relevent to -- and heard by-- one's society.<br /><br />Your readers may be interested to read my post on the evolution of language and associated expression (which includes artistic expression from writing to abstact art) and what it might mean to the artist of today...<br /><br />Here's the link: http://sfgirl-thealiennextdoor.blogspot.com/2010/03/is-our-language-going-to-pot.html<br /><br />I guess this brings up for me that cliche question: in light of our information-expression rich society today where everyone and her cat (private joke here for those who know me) can share and "publish", what IS art NOW?Nina Munteanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00311070435293186699noreply@blogger.com