Is there such a thing as a 'new idea' anymore?

[Minibit]

On the topic of artistic creativity; are there any original ideas left? Or are we all just paraphrasing or touching up ideas from the past? Does it matter if an idea is new?

Let's keep this civil, folks

 

[Lady Sabine]

Depends on your definition of "new". Can someone think of something that they have not seen, heard, smelled, or experienced before? Yes. But, with all the human beings that have ever existed (about 108 billion at best guestimate), what are the odds that our ideas are noticeably different than those that have been imagined before?

I think of it like DNA. Every idea is unique. Some are, well, seriously mutated. But in the end no one is all that unique. We share half of our genetic code with a banana. "New" ideas are modifications, however slight, on a previous design, that change slowly over time. Guided sometimes, perhaps, by a noodly appendage.

It doesn't really matter how unique things are, though. Art should be about communicating the experience of living, and if no one can relate to your art, well. :/ Most great art is filled with meaning, which means that it is in no way unique because everybody can understand at least some small part of it.

 

[Bel _ Vel _ El]

I think new ideas still exist. I mean I'm going to take writing for example. We are all on Iwaku where people are constantly coming up with new ideas for threads every day. Writers have new ideas popping in their heads every minute. They still exist. I also think that when someone draws, example being characters for stories, that's very unique especially when you have description in your mind and are able to put it to a canvas. I can't speak for anyone else but I'm amazed each time I come to Iwaku, by the writing I see. The thoughts behind whatever people do. Now, that's creativity at work here.

 

[Lady Sabine]

I think new ideas still exist. I mean I'm going to take writing for example. We are all on Iwaku where people are constantly coming up with new ideas for threads every day. Writers have new ideas popping in their heads every minute. They still exist. I also think that when someone draws, example being characters for stories, that's very unique especially when you have description in your mind and are able to put it to a canvas. I can't speak for anyone else but I'm amazed each time I come to Iwaku, by the writing I see. The thoughts behind whatever people do. Now, that's creativity at work here.

Find me literally any plot or image and I can find you something very, very similar. You say that these are new ideas and you're not wrong, but it's not like writers or artists are pulling these things out of their butts. As @Minibit said, there's a difference between something unique and original and "just paraphrasing or touching up ideas from the past". The stuff here is really good, but are the ideas behind it really unique and independent of outside influence? I doubt it.
Writing is the art of putting together a Frankenstein monster that takes all the best parts of previous ideas and refurbishes them into a better finished product.

 

[Lady Sabine]

removed by request

-snip- Pick any one of my characters and I can identify their inspirations for you. I try to avoid prolonged parallels, but I'm no creative genius who can create a new character that doesn't have elements of other characters I'm familiar with- and I don't think anyone else on this planet is, either. The combinations are original; the ideas are not. See my aforementioned DNA parallel.

 

[Ashi]

Well, I believe that there are still original ideas out there. I don't think that, just because something may inspire an idea, that that idea isn't original or not creative. I've seen quite a few original role plays in my days on another site that were very interesting, inspired by pictures or music. Now, to do an adaptation of another role play or story isn't original, but you can still put your own creative spin on it to make it your own. Sometimes I do that with my art. I take inspiration from things I see. If I see an outfit on a character in someone's drawing that I like enough, I'll recreate it for a character of my own with adjustments to suit the character. It's not original, but oh well. But whether an idea is new or not, as long as it's a good idea, why does it matter? Beauty and the Beast for example has been done over and over again, but it's still a beautiful story and has potential to continue to be so no matter how it's retold. But this is just my opinion. And I will say this, though, that there is a line - a fine line, mind you - between reusing or touching up old ideas and overdoing them.

 

[Diana]

There's a difference between having a discussion and being aggressive and argumentative. AHEM AHEM. Cool those jets.


BUT BACK ON TOPIC! I would say yes and no. Art is heavily influenced by experience, and lots and lots of people share similar experiences and thus are gonna have similar ideas. O__O But, we wouldn't be able to discover new scientific wonders if there were no genuinely unique ideas. And through those new discoveries we get new art and stuff.

I don't think it matters at all if an idea is new or original. XD The important part is the enjoyment people get out of it.

 

[Bel _ Vel _ El]

-snip- Pick any one of my characters and I can identify their inspirations for you. I try to avoid prolonged parallels, but I'm no creative genius who can create a new character that doesn't have elements of other characters I'm familiar with- and I don't think anyone else on this planet is, either. The combinations are original; the ideas are not. See my aforementioned DNA parallel.

-Okay.

 

[Artorias]

Well it depends on how in-depth you mean by an idea being creative. Although I agree with most everyone is saying.

I don't know, taking a basic idea and giving it a meaning, story, people, ideas, etc. That is new and creative, but if you break it down. For example, errr. A romance, you know. Add in the time, the people, the story, how long it is going to last, what is going on. That is all new and creative. But, breaking it down simply to Boy loves Girl, or Boy loves Boy, or Girl loves Girl. That itself isn't new, what you do with it is new and original and creative.

I have a feeling I made no sense what so ever @.@

 

[Lady Sabine]

But whether an idea is new or not, as long as it's a good idea, why does it matter? Beauty and the Beast for example has been done over and over again, but it's still a beautiful story and has potential to continue to be so no matter how it's retold. But this is just my opinion. And I will say this, though, that there is a line - a fine line, mind you - between reusing or touching up old ideas and overdoing them.

I agree with this entirely. Pocohontas/Avatar/Fern Gully. Hamlet/The Lion King. A good idea is a good idea.

I gave you that rating because the noodly appendage and the banana genetic code stuff was uhh I don't know. You're going to have to break down what you mean by that and I'm sorry you're getting bent out of shape about a rating. Also, I never insulted your opinions or ideas lol. Where in my original post did you see anything mentioned insulting you. Minibit started a conversation, which after reading your comment about the banana genetic code/noodly appendage, I was like uhh okay hence my rating. In my second comment, I asked you a question that you answered. I am not flying by any standards, I was just commenting. What I won't do is continue whatever this is with you. By the way, my name is not Dude, it's Tamara, nice to meet you.

Well Tamara, it's nice to meet you as well. I'm Sabine. You're also Dude. I'm also Dude. Dude is a colloquial synonym for "person". XD I'm sorry you're getting bent out of shape over a colloquialism, to use your words. It certainly wasn't my intent to offend you.
Now, what I don't understand why you seem to think that your rating is a normal and nice thing to do- it's a bit insulting to put your ideas out there and then immediately get shot down with a tone of ridicule. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to the discussion to ask for clarification? I'm happy to help, but instead of asking me to clarify or explain, you just stuck me with a bad rating, lol.
This is a debate; if you'll just tell me what in my post confused you, I'd be glad to help you understand. ^^ I get that mentioning genetic codes is a bit dry and that Pastafarianism isn't a mainstream religion yet; I just didn't realize that people would be so utterly confused by the mention as to give my opinion a poor rating because of it.

I have a feeling I made no sense what so ever @.@

No, I think I get it. ^^ That's pretty much what my DNA metaphor was for; I guess I should be less science-y. We are all unique as far as our DNA goes (nobody mention twins, ok? Lol) but you can trace every gene back to one or the other parent, then to their parents, then to their parents... there are no original elements (or at least very few if you count noticeablemutations) but every combination is different.

 

[Fluffy]

New ideas are definitely a thing still. People come up with new ideas all the time while unaware that a similar idea exists somewhere else. I myself have experienced this. I've had great ideas for stories that seemed original until I later found out there's a novel with the same principles. Perhaps my ideas aren't new to those who have read those books, but they're new to me and those who are also strangers to the concept. There's also the case of basing your art off of your own personal experiences. Someone out there probably knows how you felt and already illustrated it, but is it going to be exactly the same? Most likely not.

Otherwise, a lot of what we draw, write about, film, sing about, paint, and what have you are inspired by already existing things. You're taking an idea, and sculpting it into something of your own. Perhaps it's not considered "brand new," but it could still be pretty awesomely new to you, the artist. :3

That's just how I see it. Apologies if none of that makes sense, for I am so very tired. XD

 

[Bel _ Vel _ El]

We should edit our posts to include not our own personal discussion rather what is relevant to the conversation which is good conduct on us both.

 

[Melpothalia]

I really don't think there are too many original ideas out there anymore. I've always felt like execution was way more important than having a completely new or original idea. After all, most innovations are just improvements on things that already exist. I don't think we should be caught up on whether we bringing something new to the table as much as we should be about bringing something good.

It's kinda like going to a potluck. You might end up bringing the same kinda casserole as 9 other people, but yours'll be remembered for being the tastiest.

 

[Levusti]

I created this long ass post saying that new ideas exist all the time. Then I deleted the whole thing after a realization that a "new idea" is difficult for me to conceive.

Even the earliest inventions such as an ax or a lever were invented based on imitation or need, so I feel there is no "new ideas" just "different perspectives on the same idea." An ax could have been modeled after the way an animal gnaws through a tree. Humans realized that they're not developed to gnaw through trees so they developed something that simulated that. Someone realized that someone who wished to go to a higher elevation may lack the physical capacity to do so, and invented a way to move items or people from one altitude to another, thus developed an "elevator." Someone realized that calculating numbers was an important task for completing many precise physical tasks such as building or mental tasks such as accounting, so they invented a calculating device such as an abacus which later developed into a calculator with levers, then developed into an electronic machine which performs calculations.

Where I am confused is this: while the INVENTIONS we've created imitate life or simplify a task, who "INVENTED" the concepts of love or of jealousy which is embodied in so much prose, music, and media?

I feel the question we're asking is backwards, that the question we SHOULD be asking is this: "What is an OLD idea? And if it's old, when it was 'created' was it 'new?'"

 

[Alice Falling]

I think I agree with a lot that is said. And I agree with whoever said earlier, (excuse my laziness and not actually looking back to see who actually said it), that we as humans gather ideas from experiences in life and what we see/hear/read/etc.

I believe you really have to define "new". What exactly is "new"? I believe that people are filled with ideas that are created and formed beautifully in the mind. But I do believe they take experiences in their lives or wonderful stories that have touched them and formed them into a "new" idea. Something that is barely resembling something else, with it's own twists. That would be new to me! And that's another aspect to look at. Maybe an idea is "old" to you because you have seen similar ideas. But to someone else this idea could be "new" because they have experienced less than you.

I love Levusti for mentioning what is "old" and what is "new". You could say the invention of light/electricity was not an original idea. Considering the sun has been around forever and technically that had to be the first light/fire in the world, right? And lightning, (which is electricity), surely had to exist before the light bulb. Does this mean Benjamin Franklin's ideas were not "new" because he was taking them from "old" ideas such as natural forces? Can you consider an improvement on something a "new" idea? Or is that just as originality?

My friends and I have created an entire Superhero universe. Like. Not a fangirl/fanfiction world that includes DC and Marvel superheroes! It's a whole new universe all together. But we did set it on earth and I can guarantee you that some of our superheroes and villains have traits/powers similar to superheroes already created. Does this make our universe unoriginal/not new because we took inspiration? And did we unknowingly/subconsciously create characters like ones we have seen before who still live inside a deep part of our mind? And are we not original/old because we have set a lot of it on Earth? Because Earth already exists, does that make our Universe not "new"?

I don't know where I stand on the idea of a "new idea". I believe we are all creative humans who draw inspiration from life. Sometimes this inspiration is out of the need to make something better. And does that make your idea not new because you are improving something? I think if someone is hellbent on being a jerk they can make anything you create/write seem like you are copying something. Because a lot of what can be created is already created and almost anything can be related to something else. But this does not make it unoriginal.

And this post got know where on the opinion of old/new/original/unoriginal ideas.

 

[Fijoli]

Sure there are new ideas all the time, I call it science.

Even nature is popping out newly evolved and mutated creatures everyday, sure most of the DNA is the same, but the new mutation is new and changes a lot of things in living organisms.

On the level of thoughts and ideas, sure, I can believe that humans out there think new things all the time.

It's all about perspective and as an optimistic I like to consider my glass half full @___@

 

[Minibit]

Just a reminder that were talking about artistic ideas, not tools or scientific advances

 

[heliacalRebirth]

There's no such thing as an already thought of idea, because ideas are not tangible things. Everyone processes things differently. If you asked 100 people to recreate the Mona Lisa there will be 100 pretty different paintings not only due to various artistic styles but due to perspective.

Ideas are like clay. They can be broken down and sculpted into new things. There's always more details you can etch into the surface, more holes to fill up... and every single person can contribute, or take away. And every time you do that you make a new layer, a new sculpture, a new idea. It's almost safe to say ideas are infinite, limited only by the human mind itself.

 

[Fijoli]

than I would say it's its 50/50.

No one can draw exactly the same thing as another it will, not mate how much one tries, be different is alot of ways.
we can't have new ideas without the old ones to have practiced with.

New artistic Ideas can be scientific.

http://www.trueactivist.com/ingenious-19-year-old-develops-plan-to-clean-up-oceans-in-5-years/

Sure we have had the creative thought before

But this 19 year old sat down and actually thought about it and created something new based of things he had already seen. There fore in my opinion it is new and also to me, you have to be somewhat artistic to come up with things like that and I totally count it into the artistic spectrum of "New Ideas", Because it had to be designed.

 

[Laggy Lagiacrus]

There's a saying for this kind of thing - "Nihil novi sub sole." There's nothing new under the sun.

There are no truly "new" ideas. Chances are, no matter what you may think of, somebody's already beaten you to the punch. Every idea can be deconstructed and analysed, and can be traced back to something else. Personal experience, another series - every idea has to come from somewhere.
Does that make any idea or concept any less valid? Of course not. An idea may be old, commonly used, or just worn out. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad idea.
Just look at the Pokemon games, for example. At it's core, everything remains the same. You could deconstruct and analyse it, and come to the conclusion that it's been the same for every iteration of the main series. But things have been built around it. The idea's been expanded, it's been altered, and it's evolved.

What I think I'm trying to say, is that while there are no new ideas, it's entirely possible to build off of a new one, and create something of your own. Sure, it's not "unique," in the sense that it's never been done before. But you did it your way, with your own personal flair. It may not be a new idea or concept, but it's your own unique variation.