Creativity does not necessitate originality
Or: No good comes from a vacuum
Even the above statement is not original. (No, really…you’ll see…)
All writers are influenced by what we read, whether conscious or unconscious. For example, my writing style takes several cues from Terry Pratchett, sometimes very deliberately.[1] And there are no doubt countless unconscious influences feeding into my life in ways I don’t even realise.
So in that sense I am in no way original. But in that same sense, it doesn’t matter.
Stealing’s no good.[2] But remixing is — has always been, will always be — the foundation of creativity.
Creativity is naturally cyclical. Readers write, and writers read. After all, there are only three[5] plots.
It’s not just writing. Everyone is influenced by everything. Our imagination isn’t entirely our own — all media that we consume, all experiences that we have, every last thing that we see — gets thrown into one pot. Much like a baking recipe, the blend is original although the ingredients are not.
Accepting the art of the remix is the first step on the journey to finding a voice — YOUR voice. Your personal experience (original by nature) will blend into everything else that shapes us as people, all those influences known and unknown.
And that’s as original as it gets.
So it’s a poorly kept secret my drafts section is overflowing. This is one more of those drafts finally being shoved out into the world. My original title was thus:
Then Medium dropped this on me:
And here we stand. The same sentiment, much of the same words. Classic example of case-in-point, in a meta sense. Pleasingly neat, actually.
[1] Footnotes being just one recently rediscovered example
[2] Unless you’re Robin Hood[3]
[3] Sidenote[4]: is a rhyme split across a sentence and its footnote still a rhyme?
[4] Footnote, sidenote…notes aplenty…Dear oh dear.
[5] Replace ‘three’ with x number as appropriate. Doesn’t change the sentiment.
