Science, Art, Litt, Science based Art & Science Communication
Science is universal in nature where as art has roots in and dependent on the culture it originates from for its evolution. So art was varied from place to place and culture to culture earlier. But globalization is changing all this variation in art and making it look like a stunted pigmy these days.
Everywhere in the World I see the same kind of creative works these days! I
wondered several times why this thing is happening. Because everybody
wants to sell their works & become famous. So they follow famous
creative people & their trends. They stop thinking about new trends.
This kills innovation. Creativity suffers as a result. Don't agree?
Here is the proof from science:
In his book predictably irrational, author Dan Ariely makes the case that globalization inhibits creativity
and ultimately reduces innovation. His idea is that the concept of ‘one
large market’ reduces the diversity of ideas and approaches to the
problems of today.
To make his point, he uses a passage from The Lost World by Michael Crichton in which the chaos-theory scientist character named Malcolm goes on a pessimistic rant against one of the offshoots of
globalization – cyberspace. Malcolm’s point is that in a world where
everyone is connected, creativity, innovation and ultimately, evolution
The idea that the whole world is wired together is mass death. Every biologist knows that small groups in isolation evolve fastest. You put a thousand birds on a ocean island, and they’ll evolve very fast.
You put ten thousand on a big continent, and their evolution slows down.
Now, for our own species, evolution occurs mostly through our behavior.
We innovate new behavior to adapt. And everyone on earth knows that
innovation only occurs in small groups. Put three people on a committee
and they may get something done. Ten people, and it gets harder. Thirty
people, and nothing happens. Thirty million, it becomes impossible.
That’s the effect of mass media–it keeps anything from happening. Mass
media swamps diversity. It makes every place the same–Bangkok or Tokyo
or London: there’s a McDonald’s on one corner, a Benetton on another, a
Gap across the road. Regional differences vanish. All differences
vanish. In a mass-media world, there’s less of everything except top ten
books, records, movies and ideas. People worry about losing species
diversity in the rain forest. But what about intellectual diversity–our
most necessary resource? That’s disappearing faster than trees. But we
haven’t figured that out, so now we’re planning to put five billion
people together in cyberspace. And it’ll freeze the entire species.
Everything will stop dead in it’s tracks. Everyone will think the same
thing at the same time. Global uniformity…
Yes, I fully agree with the author Dan Ariely. Benefits from Internet & Globalization? - Yes. Cultural Evolution? -No!
Go to any art website & observe the trends in creativity.
Only a hand full of people have the courage to go against the tide. Only these people can innovate & become trend setters. Others are just trend followers. Majority of the people belong to this second
group. In the Cyberspace you assume a global identity & your
cultural identity is lost. The culture you are born into becomes
secondary & its influence on your creativity gets affected. Cultural
differences - which are very essential for creative evolution - get
diminished. Doesn't "true creativity" suffer in these circumstances?
What do you think? Please let me know.
(Effects of globalization on creative evolution is the main topic here. Not creativity or benefits of cyber space.
And now proof from various parts of the globe:
Creative Evolution: A theory similar to that of biological evolution, which argues that human creativity changes gradually throughout time, as a
result of a number of cultural processes.
Culture is an integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that
depends upon the capacity for symbolic thought and social learning
Sorry, I don't see "evolution in creativity". Yes, there is evolution in marketing, evolution in finding new ways to show your art to the world, evolution in following trends created by some people, evolution in new media & technological usage. I want to see true creative evolution of art in all this. This happens only when artists from different parts of the world can find new trends based on true cultural basis in which they are embedded. Not by following a single global culture!
One of the most important things that enriches culture is variety of thoughts! Are you thinking your own thoughts? Or are you, like too many people these days, blindly and unconsciously seeing the world through the beliefs, convictions, and assertions of others?
You might not know this: In India - for that matter in several parts of the world - in which there was a rich cultural diversity earlier, most of the art forms are becoming extinct. Yes, earlier we had several types of folk music, puppetry, some sort musical story telling on stage - we call it "Burra Katha" & "Hari Katha", rural painting forms, regional painting art works on clothes - all these forms of art are disappearing! Why? Because nobody is encouraging them & nobody is following them because they don't have a market. New globalized market which wants to follow only certain trends doesn't encourage these things. As people who are creative in these art forms cannot earn their livelihood through these they are discarding them & following pop music or painting that the global market wants! And it is happening all over the world. Most of the art forms that belong to different cultures are becoming extinct & this is a fact! I have seen with my own eyes all these things disappearing! There are lots & lots of complaints coming from all parts of the world. I have read several reports myself. Here we are not only talking about individual's creativity levels but also on global creative terms! The world has rich cultural heritage. Most of it is on the brink of extinction. I am sure our creativity is not limited to fine arts. )
Your point that areas and patterns of local culture are disappearing in vast swathes of the globe that are becoming connected is true Dr Challa, but only up to a point. Once cultures have evolved, as organisms have , in isolation, they come into the mainstream , at one point, and compete with the general population. We are talking about a metaphor though. The competition is not the local culture that is lost , but the spirit, intelligence and culture of the people that have been transferred to the wider arena, the wider world. They have not yet found their voice. Perhaps the third world is not competing culturally, vis a vis - in terms of the west, especially in the visual arts. There are many Indian writers, scientists, who have achieved very significant success though, Perhaps visual arts are different. I might suggest that part of the problem in the visual arts might be that India is at a crossroads between a new voice of it's own and the devotion to an ancient immersed culture that ( and it is a generally wonderful experience for those born into it) but is not sustaining artists in the same way that it did in the last century. People are unsure where they belong. Visual culture is about power, in good and bad ways, and also about breaking the bonds of the past, which can be invigorating or depleting. China has been more successful than India because the hold of ancient Chinese culture was destroyed in the Cultural Revolution. India has never been a place for Pop Art as far as I know. It is still a place where the relations are still in a more sacred space perhaps. I still believe that the Internet will change things as people are becoming more active, less passive. The idea of "Creative Destruction" a phoenix-like way that capitalism destroys old forms and creates new ones. The concept started with Marx and evolved or devolved in the work of Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter. What will take the place of the old forms Dr Challa? Are you saying the people will just give up?
Why have so many Indian writers, although I am not so sure
they are living in India or the diapora have had success in writing
there seems to be another factor working
I have been working with that group Cultureinside.com
Maybe we could organize theme shows on Art Lab
I would be excited to help somehow
In my art against war show the exhibitions I organized were found by galleries
and museums, and went to India and Mumbai
Although I said that the art on the subject, I will not comment. I am writing this comment as a senior conservator, not as a sculptor, artist, supposedly .. it understands well the first lady of Art Lab, Dr.Krishna ... scientist, analyst of all states of existence, 2 . thermodynamic law (constantly striving to change state) is first constant that is all changing ... and so all values are related to not only the symbol and meaning of art ... This is changing and awareness, and it always begins an individual and not society. Always been so and will be, even in this so-called global gatherings third Millennium. Nothing new in the west .. it started in the East, unique, Original ..... the rest is called correlative, imitators, faksimilat.-Third Way does not have all led to the largest infinity-Forgetting .. all over again! Tradition is the source of all modern diversity and in some ways becoming a new tradition, .. first there is the so-called Russian Experiment.No revolutionary art, everything evolves, so she!.
Ps. Mr. F. Shifreen very interesting to analyze the present knowledge about the so-called history in the interaction of art and good relationships with their awareness about entitled .. mostly see it in his works.
- Since the Web we are in the middle of an explosion of creativity and innovation.
- I think it is nonsense to compare birds with humans. With humans it is not about survival of the fittest. Humans have the task and the possibilities to achieve world peace. Birds have their own problems.
- Creativity is not dependend on circumstances.
- Do you believe humans have to evolve? Into what?
What I respected, through the history of thought is learned that the individual man is and the animals .. and do not differ only in a small percentage of the so-called creation of Evolution ..., our creations and mind are not above that, consciousness does not evolve, it is cultivated in humans, is grown as a garden, plants from the culture we live in, the weeds do not need to cultivate already know how to use it .. and this man has the advantage of so-called lower species, there is no lower species. and I now think, is not I evolved into this year as I'm old, but education and learning throughout life, without stopping .. new awareness, science and art and a traditional value in the same =New sociology culture
Birds are not able to make a workaround for their communication problems. We have no other option then to coorporate with almost 7 billion other humans. The worldwide access to knowledge is a good start.
Our cultures will merge into one worldculture. But it will not make us less different. On the contrary, the more we get to know each other, the clearer visible are our differences.
"Everywhere in the World I see the same kind of creative works"
I only see an ocean of difference.
I have never met a "better human being".
I get the feeling that as people get to see lots of work from other parts of the world with the explosion of electronic media, they think that creativity is booming. Okay they see some difference in others' work as it comes from another part of the world. But people are getting influenced by most popular works in the world & following the trend. In the process several types of works that have the stamps of different cultures are taking a back seat & some of them are even disappearing as nobody is following them anymore. I don't think that is true evolution. It is evolution of one type of work & extinction of several other types!
You can see another proof here - now from an art journal quoting Darwin again! : http://artradarjournal.com/2011/05/04/good-fences-make-good-artists...
It is not obvious but we have a dichotomy: we support community and culture but we also want openness and freedom. I am not so sure we can have both. My experience from school taught me that strong cultures are built behind strong barriers. You can’t have it both ways. Either you support vibrant cultural diversity in which case you must insist on barriers or you support the more bland homogeneous culture of a global connected world.
There is something Darwinian about the evolution of culture. Differences emerge on islands. This law applies not just to general culture, where we see the emergence of distinct languages, behaviours and values, but it also applies specifically to fine arts. If you don’t want to see homogeneous or derivative art, then slam the doors, erect fences. Original fresh practices evolve in closed communities. It is counter-intuitive. It is a conundrum.
I am glad my point is accepted by an editor of Art journal! The editor says Globalization effects creativity!