It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Creative Expression -Necessarily- Subtle?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I just composed a reply to a thread here on ATS, and noticed that I was expressing myself with complicated phrases, big words, and tightly-packed paragraphs, rather than simply saying what I was trying to say in a simple, straight-forward way.

Maybe that's just my writing style; I often express myself that way. It's not the best thing for communicating, to be needlessly complex.

Or is it? That got me thinking about the unknowns of how creative expression works, and maybe bringing in some ideas from the "Law of Attraction"-type of thinking.

See, one thing I get out of the "Law of Attraction" stuff is that, perhaps, cause doesn't always come before effect, when we look at what things are possible. Sometimes, the results of our actions may be related to the origins of our actions in subtle ways that aren't 'provable'.

So I thought: maybe communicating in a complex and hard-to-understand way isn't always a bad thing. Maybe, there's some effect from the result of a more limited audience who will wade through what you're trying to say, and a different effect from them having to think and puzzle over the meaning. And maybe that effect, in a 'non-linear way', makes it easier to express one's self in a complex, convoluted manner, rather than just getting to the point simply.

That got me thinking to how, sometimes, the best works of art (painting and such) are those where the impact of what the artist is trying to do isn't obvious, or even clear at all. I think that, in many ways, such works of art manifest themselves in the mind of the audience, and not so much on the canvas or even in the mind of the artist.

Does that mean that creative expression has some kind of 'awareness' of subtlety, and its audience? Is the idea that everything is best be expressed as simply as possible somehow not conducive to creativity?




posted on Apr, 24 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
My opinion is that any kind of art comes from the persons heart no matter how simple or complex.
We all have it and some people can express it better than others no matter how simple the person is or how complex they are.
Since it comes from the heart it is recognizable to any person but its all subjective to the person and to their hearts and minds.
The subtlety lies in a persons perceptions and the awareness is in a persons mind.
The simplest thing can be amazing just like the most complex thing can be amazing.
I think it is all subjective.
I barely understood the question so I hope I answered the right question.
Thats my 2 cents....That was a brain melter!!



posted on May, 2 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
i agree.

i have never read much of the law of attraction because i feel like it focuses on material gain which is counter to what the real message is. on the nature of the focus of awareness and causality and all that. but i haven't read it so maybe it does start to take it in the purely spiritual/metaphysical direction i believe it should go.

i think you are brushing against one very deep cause of so many problems today; to truly reflect something the message and its medium must necessarily be a complicated thing with many invisible relations which has the uncommon affect of causing an investigation but, unfortunately, often causes someone to turn away from their uncomfortable confusion.

i agree with you that the best creative displays are ones which confound at first glance. these have the effect on the curious individual of making them ask the question about the existence of someone else and what happened for the artist to cause what we are seeing or hearing right now which is a big question that causes a dozen equally big and important questions.

i think the awareness present in true works of art is just a very deep personal understanding of what it means to be alive as a human, displayed by the creator and understood separately but similarly in one's own way when witnessing. this is why there is a very limited pool of true talent and true appreciators.

just my two wandering wheat pennies, which are technically worth two cents but also ten cents but ultimately worthless, being american currency.



posted on May, 4 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Ian McLean
 


for some reason I haven't seen this thread - it's just not turning up in my "My ATS" choices - and now I see why - it hasn't gotten nearly the attention it should

maybe if you worked the words "Swine Flu" into the title somehow...

this is so interesting to me - I don't even know where to start - so, if it seems like I'm just babbling - not only is that my usual style of expression, but in this case - I can barely organize my thinking - there's so much too say
:-)



...and noticed that I was expressing myself with complicated phrases, big words, and tightly-packed paragraphs, rather than simply saying what I was trying to say in a simple, straight-forward way. Maybe that's just my writing style; I often express myself that way. It's not the best thing for communicating, to be needlessly complex. Or is it?


this is something I've been thinking about a lot recently - while I was putting stuff in to a music thread I started

about creative expression and the person who is doing the creating - you can't escape yourself - even when you're trying very hard to sound like or be like someone other than who you are

musicians, painters, writers - they all have a way of trying to express something inside (that they themselves may or may not even really understand) and it always just comes out "pure them"

you can work at your craft - examine it, refine it - guide it - play with it and experiment with it as much as you want - but in the end you can't escape yourself

the difference between Shakespeare and Hemingway, Van Gogh and Rembrandt - you can't really separate the messenger from the message - the form works for the person doing the creating

but it seems the person on the other end – receiving the message – is free to choose the form that’s most meaningful to them – and discard what seems meaningless


... Sometimes, the results of our actions may be related to the origins of our actions in subtle ways that aren't 'provable'.


I love that idea - without even having to get metaphysical about it


And maybe that effect, in a 'non-linear way', makes it easier to express one's self in a complex, convoluted manner, rather than just getting to the point simply.


I'm not sure exactly what you're thinking - do you mean that a convoluted journey towards what you're trying to say is the only way you (as in you) can think through it all to arrive at what you're saying? You couldn’t say what you mean to say if you said it any other way?


That got me thinking to how, sometimes, the best works of art (painting and such) are those where the impact of what the artist is trying to do isn't obvious, or even clear at all.


I’ve gotten into actual arguments over this – because much of the time I don’t think the artist knows where they’re going – they just get there – and are just as surprised by what they’re seeing as anyone

So if we go back to the results of our actions being related to the origins of our actions - I think many times the person who is doing the expressing would like to believe they’re in control of the message – just ego maybe

maybe it’s possible that the process that’s going on in the background at all times is always trying to get it’s message out – with or without your permission – so, it creates a fistula (yeah – sorry about that) of sorts – with some form of artistic expression


I think that, in many ways, such works of art manifest themselves in the mind of the audience, and not so much on the canvas or even in the mind of the artist.


if you believe in something like the collective unconscious – not so much as a psychic connection (or at least, not necessarily psychic) but in as much as we may all share a very basic language of symbols that exists separate from a language of words – with it’s own rules - something that we all understand without understanding how or why – or even really knowing that it’s even there – then I see that – very clearly

art does manifest meaning in the mind of it’s audience – it’s always seemed to me to be the most immediate explanation of a feeling or experience – knowing without knowing

the most interesting part is the feeling that you do know something – but you don’t have a way to put that into words – even when words were what you were using to express yourself – as if there are invisible subtitles under everything you say


Does that mean that creative expression has some kind of 'awareness' of subtlety, and its audience? Is the idea that everything is best be expressed as simply as possible somehow not conducive to creativity?


novel, short story, prose, poem – I don’t know – it may not be about complex versus simple – but what language belongs to you

like I said – probably just babbling – don’t know if I got where you were going with this

but I can see this subject shooting off in about a dozen different directions – and I’d like to go off after each one




top topics
 
2

log in

join