The idea that all art is “derivative” was something that used to bother me to no end.
There were a few reasons why I think it left such a sour taste in my mouth, but there was one reason in particular that really stuck with me.
It felt like coming up with something completely “original” was the expectation (which to me at the time, meant creating something entirely uninfluenced by others), yet it was almost inherently impossible to do so.
And even if someone were able to come up with something without influence from any external sources (a still impossible goal to strive for), there’s a more than decent chance that someone else would also have stumbled upon the idea some time prior. Sort of like an artistic understanding of Multiple Discovery.
It wasn’t until I came across this Mark Twain quote on the derivative nature of ideas that my thoughts on the matter began to change. It goes:
“There is no such thing as a new idea. It is impossible. We simply take a lot of old ideas and put them into a sort of mental kaleidoscope. We give them a turn and they make new and curious combinations. We keep on turning and making new combinations indefinitely; but they are the same old pieces of coloured glass that have been in use through all the ages.”
Something about seeing art through this lens changed the way I thought about originality.
All of a sudden, everything that surrounds a person becomes open to being perceived through their own kaleidoscopic view, morphing into an interpretation with the potential to be wholly different from that of the person standing next to them.
Imagining our own biases, personal histories, preferences, and all the like as fragments of stained glass, refracting the light of our unique environments to shine in just a particular way, finally to be seen and recreated as art… I think Twain was onto something here.
I ended up writing an essay about the idea in a Shakespeare course during my final undergraduate year talking about the coincidental similarities shared between the stories of Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Disney’s The Lion King.
According to one of the directors of The Lion King, Rob Minkoff, any shared story between the two pieces was entirely a coincidence, but he doesn’t deny that, having been quite aware of Hamlet and other Shakespearean works, it may have played some small role in inspiring the directions taken in the film. He notes that there may have been some “unconsciously channelling” of Shakespeare’s work.
Personally, I think this too is a variation on Mark Twain’s kaleidoscope. Even when not happening entirely consciously, we take in inputs, and we produce outputs, and the magic that happens along the way is what we call art.
And so what exactly is the takeaway here?
I believe that part of existing in this world in some meaningful way so often requires the inclusion of one’s own creative expression.
We have to make things to feel.
Not everyone may agree with that, but I think that “making things” can come in many, many different shapes and forms. Even making a sandwich can be an art form, given the right circumstances.
So what I encourage those of you out there to do is polish your own mental kaleidoscopes.
Take a look, see the different colours and shapes twirling about in the light—notice patterns and see images appear where others can’t.
It’s my belief that the more people who are aware of their kaleidoscopes, and can make use of the unique perspectives that they have on the world, the more uniquely varied the art out in the world can become, and I think that’s something worth striving for.
I’ll leave you here with a few journaling prompts for those who want to do a bit of guided thinking around this topic:
Consider your own creative process. How do you incorporate influences from your environment, experiences, and cultural background into your work?
Consider the art piece you're currently working on, no matter how small. What inspired you to create it? How does it reflect your unique perspective and experiences?
Consider Mark Twain's quote about the derivative nature of ideas. How does his perspective change your understanding of originality in art?
Let me know what you all think of this idea, or what art piece you’re currently working on, no matter how small.
For now, have a good week, and I’ll see you at 100.
This reminds me a bit on AI art too. It's basically just taking all the bits out there and sort of combining them differently like the kaleidoscope. I think the thing that might help and apply is that no one really cares what it's made. It's the people and personalities and life behind the art, even if it's derivative, that make it meaningful.
yeah, really great thoughts Aidan!!
I agree that there may never be a fully original thought... this ties into my own studies on yogic philosophy (not to plug yoga here but...) in yoga we are all ONE consciousness-- perhaps individual egos, personalities and identities, but one consciousness nonetheless-- so it makes me think that all my ideas are everyone’s ideas and vice versa!!