Reviving the severed connection between humanity and artifice would go a long way towards unlocking folks' potential for creativity - and hope, even, if we can create hope in and begin to decolonise the past, since we build always upon the idea of ancestral achievement (myths being more effective than history).
On the contrary, I strongly believe starting off the discussion with a few words of God-wisdom to argue over would elevate it from complaint to the start of dialogue, potentially even the foundation of a movement. When Tolkien urged people to do the same back in the 30s, he laid the foundations for the fantasy genre in a single speech - imagine a world where all-out worldbuilding, "subcreation" had never been invented, nor "just escapisim" validated as of not only literary but spiritual value: if Tolkien had stopped in the middle and offered forth no theories (and not everyone agrees with Tolkien, which has given rise to more creatvity), that's where we'd live.
[gestures at preceeding paragraph] You see here, though: as a result of what we were given to work with, we're discussing the author's blogging choices rather than her theories for progress. I consider that that is probably less stimulating to creativity in the fantastic sphere than even dissecting something deliberately ridiculously radical (like the time Tilley turned the world of archaeological theory sideways by suggesting we stopped excavaing anything for a decade).
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2016-06-12 07:05 am (UTC)On the contrary, I strongly believe starting off the discussion with a few words of God-wisdom to argue over would elevate it from complaint to the start of dialogue, potentially even the foundation of a movement. When Tolkien urged people to do the same back in the 30s, he laid the foundations for the fantasy genre in a single speech - imagine a world where all-out worldbuilding, "subcreation" had never been invented, nor "just escapisim" validated as of not only literary but spiritual value: if Tolkien had stopped in the middle and offered forth no theories (and not everyone agrees with Tolkien, which has given rise to more creatvity), that's where we'd live.
[gestures at preceeding paragraph] You see here, though: as a result of what we were given to work with, we're discussing the author's blogging choices rather than her theories for progress. I consider that that is probably less stimulating to creativity in the fantastic sphere than even dissecting something deliberately ridiculously radical (like the time Tilley turned the world of archaeological theory sideways by suggesting we stopped excavaing anything for a decade).