I'm talking mainly about music, but I guess it applies to other fields of art too. Has anything not been done? Is there anything left that is truly original? Is it even that important? And so on.
Yup....of course MANY stuff has been done but hey...you got an imagination, no? hehe but of course usually an idea comes from other influences, i think!
since music is intentional sound , what is the originality of intent ? like creating revolution , and a real revolution has never been before . then , maybe you got to invent some ways and means to pull it off . mostly it's the intensity of intent .
If you knew what hadn't been done, you'd have already invented an original style. You have to pretty much stumble across it. That's how most original artists say they made their music. Usually it doesn't "come to you" so much as you just stumbling over it while improvising with your band in a few different styles. I personally think originality is only important insofar as you want to be original. If you're like me, and what you enjoy immensely has already been created, originality doesn't mean a whole lot. To me, the only originality with which I now concern myself is originality in phrasing my melodies within a particular style that has already been invented for me.
originality is music like lucid hallucination is thinking , it's always in the moment and essentially more true than tradition . the lessor artist will be content with perfecting the craft .
Self Control. Anything that comes from you has to be original. That is to say, as long as you have not completely reproduced another’s work. Originality seems to exist only in bedrooms and basements. You can blame that solely on capitalist society. Record producers keep spurting out Britneys and Christinas because the youth of today are not very cultured. That is what passes for music. It is very simple, very plain. When songs are comprised of four chords repeated over and over again to a simple percussion roll it seems that originality has died. A group like Radiohead can increase the number of chords to seven, throw in a few key changes, a haunting harmony and abstract lyrics and be labeled the masters of our generation. The evolution of music has been influenced by big business to the point that we are now worse off musically than we were 200 years ago. It seems we have been musically castrated. Perhaps castrated is a wrong word. Perhaps we have been all awarded musician status. See that Chinese American idol reject. She bangs, now he bangs. It is ridiculous. But that is not music. So much so that I have to question if I have ever heard real music from a musician of our generation. I guess none of that answers any part of your question in any sense. Originality doesn’t make music. Originality is something that is awarded to your work after the fact. Name any original piece and it can be broken down into influences. Whether these influences are simple concepts like happiness or love or jealousy or depression, or complexities that have only been experienced by a few, they are based on something else. Originality is awarded when you put those same things in a way that no one else would. The way to express influences originally is to express them how you see them. If you have talent, if you recognize what music is understood to be now, then you have a chance to make something original. You want something simple though? Try two drum sets playing back and forth at one another, one emphasizing the lacking of the other like neal peart versus buddy rich, while the violin plays at the bass and shows it a thing or two about what it was made to do. The guitar harmonizes with the piano whose melodies compliment both the violin and bass with one unifying and elegant piece. Elements of now and then. Big sound. No chord restrictions because violins and pianos are dying to show how beautiful they really are. Theme it all on the last time you got your heart broken through the time you had no one to the time you fell in love and let the end signify the beginning by harmonizing the very first few bars with the very last few. And fuck the lyrics, no words can justify the sounds that such a compilation of sound will produce. Then paint a triptych of triptychs to coincide with the change in mood and tone.
Well, this has been done, I mean, a lot of Bossa nova, Flamenco Diablo and Cuba nova uses polyrhythm drum technique, and classical violin/cello phrasing over a standing bass. To the other poster, I don't consider myself the lesser musician because I like to perfect a craft that I already enjoy. I, as do many musicians who perfect a craft they love, have the ability to make something original, but what I care to play has already been created. I have no desire to create a new genre, even from spurr of another. You're not a bad musician because you simply don't want to create a new genre or something completely original. I'm content with Progressive, latin Jazz, Flamenco, Classic rock and Classical music. OSF, you have a point to an extent, though. Something truely original, in the fact that it hasn't been done and pertains to no genre, cannot be done while confined to the standards of Western theory. You'd have to create your own theory like Shawn Lane did (the tritone method), and even then, he was still using a lot of Jazz theory. And Jazz? Jazz came through classical phrases improvised into something "original". In this context, if you really wanted to make something "original", in that technical sense, you'd simply have to go into the basement and read your theory and accompanying books and come up with a style based on Western theory, but then, you're not really all that original, you're an innovator. Something like playing a vacuum cleaner on stage ala Phish, is what I'd consider truely "original", because it's not based on anything theoretically (or a based on a band that plays that instrument, or in any theoretical terms). While it's not really a good sound, it's truely original. This is what I believe is truely original.
I think what I was trying to work out is: is there a new genre waiting to exist? Like when ambient music kind of emerged, ok, it was influenced by people like Brian Eno, but it pretty much went from being a bedroom studio practise of a few innovators to suddenly being a markettable genre. I'm trying to imagine what is left to do that would still make sense musically.
There are a lot of genres that are waiting to be created, certainly. Just take a few of your favorite genres, blend them together, and improvise crazy shit over them and you've created your own genre. Swing Jazz mixed with bluesy rock would be a new genre. Sort of like rockabilly, only, swingarock or something. That's not exactly original, but it's not really being done a whole lot. I mean, Funk was just people taking progressive, and Jazz fusion ideas and going crazy with them, arranging for Samba instruments and stuff. It's just up to you to find the right musicians with whom you can really create something new and interesting.
When it comes to my part of performing arts; music I don't care much. I just play stuff I like to play and listen to. Most people trying to be original ends up soundling like everyone else anyway.
