dial_100 Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 What are you getting at? I provided an exception, so clearly morality (or lack of) has got diddly squat to do with creativity. And I agree with this. Morality will merely decide the flavor of creativity.
Lurker Posted January 16, 2013 Author Posted January 16, 2013 Why do you want to put her at a loss for not being able to conceive such a thing? If a life of a person is not involved with particular activities then the subconscious of this person will never lead to such imagination. So stereotypical indian woman would not conceive even 1 shade of grey let alone 50.. because shez not raised that way.... lolll. Oh I am not putting her at a loss at all. Creativity is very subjective and one can not complain about it one way or the other. But haven't you answered the question in a way? Since an Indian woman is not "raised" in a certain way, even his imagination are not entirely hers. They are held hostage by the way she was raised. Just for record, this is not a woman thread. It can be argued the same for men. I mean it is not exactly that men are falling over in heaps writing 50 shades of grey either :giggle:
Lurker Posted January 16, 2013 Author Posted January 16, 2013 If we assume religion is considered a vanguard for morality' date=' then some of the best literature, art and architecture is religion inspired. So answer to the question is a resounding no.[/quote'] There is a difference between stifling and completly wiping out. Yes you are exactly right that many literature, arts and architecture, even science are rooted in Religion. But the same religion can, and have, also hinder what it would call "immoral" at the time We may have to slice every religion differently. But is it fair to say that Europe and western world came out more creative once they started putting religion to the background? I mean today's Western world, specially those who are considered the influencers in Arts and Creative world, are hardly religious at all. On the other hand those states that are highly religious today are not creative. So maybe there is a co-relation? Perhaps?
dial_100 Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Oh I am not putting her at a loss at all. Creativity is very subjective and one can not complain about it one way or the other. But haven't you answered the question in a way? Since an Indian woman is not "raised" in a certain way' date=' even his imagination are not entirely hers. [b']They are held hostage by the way she was raised. Just for record, this is not a woman thread. It can be argued the same for men. I mean it is not exactly that men are falling over in heaps writing 50 shades of grey either :giggle: No sir. I would rather feel that such women are much liberated. But thats a way of looking at life in a perspective. Tell you the truth. I read the OP from the top (wink). Your question should have been; Does Morality stifle SUCH creativity? My answer would have been YES... Sorry dude if I have created a divergence in your thread.
Lurker Posted January 16, 2013 Author Posted January 16, 2013 No sir. I would rather feel that such women are much liberated. But thats a way of looking at life in a perspective. Tell you the truth. I read the OP from the top (wink). Your question should have been; Does Morality stifle SUCH creativity? My answer would have been YES... Sorry dude if I have created a divergence in your thread. Thats interesting. Tell me more dial, if you do not mind. I would like to see where you are coming from.
dial_100 Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 We may have to slice every religion differently. But is it fair to say that Europe and western world came out more creative once they started putting religion to the background? I mean today's Western world, specially those who are considered the influencers in Arts and Creative world, are hardly religious at all. Many of these creations that you are referring to are mere productions which are more conceptualized version of creativity. Creativity comes only in two forms, pure and otherwise. Like what Kabir or Tulsidas and many sufis or writers like Tolstoy have created. That type of creation is rare. But if you are referring to the art of movies, animation etc. then it is a result of a systematic approach towards achieving something. Creativity often dies in such process and such activities become complete mental process, which is based on strong rational process. I find it hard to accept it as a creativity, its more like a production to me. But I would like to ask you for which influencing art form have you seen recently? May be I have missed something. I am very backward in this regard.
surajmal Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 We may have to slice every religion differently. But is it fair to say that Europe and western world came out more creative once they started putting religion to the background? I mean today's Western world, specially those who are considered the influencers in Arts and Creative world, are hardly religious at all. Full out enlightenment doesn't begin till the *** end of Renaissance (you may even say proper enlightenment begins after renaissance). And basically the golden period for Italian Art comes when Europe is still heavily religious. One important point though is that this flourishing of art isn't possible if you don't have your medicis, sforzas, gonzagas etc. You can make a case that these wealthy merchant families funded the Renaissance. So the crucial factor regarding creativity (or expression of that creativity) is money. And as a result of money, the tradition of creative arts (in Europe and the West) continue through baroque, romantic, Realist and Modern Art. So I don't think Religion (Morality) has any role to play. Point could be made that Creative talent is ever present. In case of India, if the rich Baniyas had any interest in promoting Indian Art, I bet you would see a Art boom here as well. On the other hand those states that are highly religious today are not creative. So maybe there is a co-relation? Perhaps? Yeah, I'm not gonna touch this because then this thread will end up getting locked.
surajmal Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 morality seems as much about introspection as about projections, and in trying to project this outwardly moral society various restrictions may be implemented, which is what op seems to be talking about hence my reference about convincing people regarding visits to kotha. Artist job is to put a mirror to the world not to shackle himself and provide biased snapshot.
Raghav_12 Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 There are aspects of inherent conflict between these two. So I agree up to certain extent with this statement. Creativity is about going beyond the established rules while morality is about living within the rules. Creativity is dependent on expression of passion while morality talks about tampering or controlling of passion. Morality is about disciplining yourself for the sustainance of society while creativity doesn't give a dime about sustenance of society. This question could have been rephrased like, Does creativity ignores morality? if you had to put morality on higher ground than creativity:cantstop:
Clarke Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Creativity can sometimes challenge conventional morality :P
Raghav_12 Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Creativity can sometimes challenge conventional morality :P Correct statement is, creativity sometimes is appreciated just because it challanges conventional morality.
akshayxyz Posted January 16, 2013 Posted January 16, 2013 Mortality stifles creativity. It should be 'immortality'.
Lurker Posted January 16, 2013 Author Posted January 16, 2013 Point could be made that Creative talent is ever present. In case of India, if the rich Baniyas had any interest in promoting Indian Art, I bet you would see a Art boom here as well. Patronizing of arts by rich is often needed for certain areas like architecture, possibly painting etc. However, streams like literature be it story writing or poetry is not dependent on the rich I think. In fact you can even argue that the fact these streams are not dependent on rich ensures that imagination is not curtailed by market. No wonder most writers and poets die in penury.
Muloghonto Posted January 17, 2013 Posted January 17, 2013 I dont think morality stiffles creativity. I define morality as having a 'code of conduct' and adhering to it, not an artificially dictated morality sponsored by religions that have no proof to support its case. Having said that, i'd say morality and creativity are largely, unrelated. However, what definitely stifles creativity, is ritualism & social strictures. One reason why the Arab world has very little creativity & India has somewhat stunted artistic and cultural creativity, is because we dont interact with people as we feel like, we are expected to behave a certain way, say certain things, overlook certain things, as a matter of politeness. When taken to a suffocating extreme, this is what stunts society.
Nova Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 What made it amazing to me was how easily he was talking about his Mom dating a bunch of guys, color or not and how that influenced him in a positive way. Think about it. Just the idea of Mom dating is enough to put most of us off, and here he is talking about multiple partners. You are surprised by this? How long have you lived in the US now to understand that this is quite common and accepted in western culture. It is only looked down upon in countries, like India, where morality is defined on different terms akin to local culture and traditions. I say to each their own. So rather simple question now - Does morality stifle creativity?? Creativity can be influenced by experiences in life for sure. If the subject matter is controversial or portrayed in a negative manner, it invariably generates more interest.
maniac Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 If that was the case...How come the most creative works known to man-read religious texts were based on morals supposedly written by god himself or by his messenger PS:I am not an atheist and my intention is not hurt any religious sentiments Or going back to OP's question Can it be attributed to the fact that all these authors had witnessed enough immoral acts to come up with these texts? How does it work
maniac Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 ^Also I am sure these works were more creative and influenced a lot more people than Django and Kill bill did
surajmal Posted January 18, 2013 Posted January 18, 2013 Patronizing of arts by rich is often needed for certain areas like architecture' date=' possibly painting etc. [b']However, streams like literature be it story writing or poetry is not dependent on the rich I think. In fact you can even argue that the fact these streams are not dependent on rich ensures that imagination is not curtailed by market. No wonder most writers and poets die in penury. Authors who write in Indian languages would be lucky to sell 500 copies while hacks like chetan bhagat sell thousands.
Lurker Posted January 18, 2013 Author Posted January 18, 2013 You are surprised by this? How long have you lived in the US now to understand that this is quite common and accepted in western culture. It is only looked down upon in countries, like India, where morality is defined on different terms akin to local culture and traditions. I say to each their own. I suppose one way to answer that is when you look at different things in different cultures, the first encounter is often left with a "Ah they are different, so they behave differently". But once you have seen it a few times, it can, and does, spark the question "Wait a minute, why are they different"? It is not a case of to each their own, it is more an effort to understand if there is anything to be learnt here. Or else we would be singing Kipling whole day long - West is West, East is East...and never shall the twain meet. Let us take the example of Indian message boards. We generally have MBs with largest number of members and yet it is astonishing how deeply non-personal they are! People can, and do, talk about Sachin Tendulkar for days non stop but would never talk about their ex-gfs or their spouse, for example. Somehow even remote personal things are considered sacred, or is there a fear of being judged? I didnt mean to make this a comparison of India vs US. My point is rather if we are going to be moralistic, of fear being judged, how would that impact our creativity? Creativity, to me, should be unabashed..without any boundaries.
Recommended Posts