it seems that millions of years of humans creating art there doesn't seem to be any "new" or "original" styles, just the translation onto new medians. Is this just me? Seems to be like the only advances as the human race we have been making is in technology.
not sure if this was a /lit/ or /his/ question
kys
>>8018107
I would say it's just you. Form changing art doesnt come around too often.
Clearly you haven't been looking any further than yahoo.com's frontpage, look harder, faget.
>>8018107
its sad but true. thankfully i dont really mind all that much
>>8018133
I guess that's why anyone that does make a new form or style becomes famous and remembered forever
>>8018135
Clearly you think people still use yahoo
>has "originality" died?
no, but the definition of "art" sure has.
![AN00037562_001_l[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/QStx2IS.jpg "AN00037562_001_l[2].jpg")
>>8018107
The collection of words, the gathering of verses,
the seeking of utterances with heart-searching,
made by the priest of Heliopolis,
Seni’s son Khakheperreseneb,
called Ankhu.
He says, `If only I had unknown utterances
and extraordinary verses,
in a new language that does not pass away,
free from repetition,
without a verse of worn-out speech
spoken by the ancestors!
I shall wring my body for what is in it,
- a release of all my speech.
For what is already said can only be repeated;
what is said once has been said;
this is no vain boast of the ancients’ speech
that those who are later should find it good.'
>>8018162
i guess its comforting to know that people had this problem so long ago yet through the ages we have experienced so many new and interesting styles and forms. Thanks
the definition of art is artistic.
What's in the past just seems more original because nothing came before it. We're on the verge of something fantastic thanks to technology progressing so rapidly. More than likely though the public at large will commodify and sully it
>>8018107
Where do you look for original art?
>>8018107
For visual art, go on any wg art thread. There are a ton of aesthetically pleasing artists.
For film, theres obviously constant new good stuff
For literature, there is always new stuff as well. You should know that.
The story continues forever. The only tragedy is not having enough time to see it all
>>8018107
I rememebr talking to people who were creating music specifically for people with synesthesia which seems kinda new
Read "the reproduction of art in the mechanical age" (Benjamin) and "Simulacra and simulation" (Baudrillard)
>>8018111
Adorno's Aesthetic Theory and The Jargon of Authenticity deal with this subject.
carry on with the discussion now.
Good artists copy, great artists steal
>>8019733
btw this is a modernisation of a tseliot quote
> Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different. The good poet welds his theft into a whole of feeling which is unique, utterly different from that from which it was torn; the bad poet throws it into something which has no cohesion. A good poet will usually borrow from authors remote in time, or alien in language, or diverse in interest.
