To make a tangent from the constant political bickering, I'll raise the question of whether art imitates life or vice versa? AS for me, I believe there is some sort of medium, the two feeding off of each other. I had a teacher that said the concept of romantic love as we know it today did not exist until Shakespeare put it into writing. Personally I think he was a loon for saying that, especially after we had hoarded over the concept of art being an imitation of life. Any who, somewhere along the way the human mind's ability to think imaginatively led to it abstracting things from outside of it. In turn, other men also learned from these abstractions and hence their lives were then influenced by them. Strictly speaking, the first time art occured by humans had to have been an abstraction. Unless of course art existed first, which gets into the question of essence vs. existence, which we should probably investigate one day.... Anyways, for the purpose of argument, I'll take the first option, but will be willing to listen to arguements against me...
I went with Combo because, to me, that is the obvious choice. Great art inspires and inspiration changes people. On the other hand artists at some points draw from Life. CASE CLOSED. (That was a free illustration)
I picked combo. But, you can break it down to a lower level...(just for fun) Followers vs Leaders Doers (on what's already available) vs Thinkers (new ideas) We see people imitaing what they see in film, art, and writings. We also see that others will fight against the status-quo. Seems like you have both forces.... 1) "Art Imitates Life" Original ideas about life. 2) "Life Imitates Art" Doing/copying what's been proven and works in art. The funny thing is...is there really any pure "original" ideas? Seems like we don't live in a vacuum. We live in a world where everything influences everything else and vice versa. Even quantum physics talks about this; everything is about interconnections and relationships of probability.
One a side note... Hey giddyup (cat lover). Did you check out twhy77's signature link? I predict a love-hate relationship; communist kittens!
But one had to come first, right? So which is it? And on a side note, that kitten flash is genius, just watch their eyes, its great, I fall on the ground laughing everytime I see it.
Chicken, egg. We'd have to go back to the dawn of time for that. But I do think that "ideas" based on established ideas is the catalyst that feed the cycle. If no new ideas came up. The system would stagnate. Of course, I'm talking about a perfect world; it's unrealist to think that would happen. I mean, show me a "place" where there is "no change." Stopping time, would facilitate that. It's like talking about Good and Evil. They are inseparable. At least in this world; the rules we've been given; rules to follow.
I'm surprised no one has put life imitates art. Maybe we should broaden the definition of art to mean, philosophy, music, math, etc. Would anyone's answer change if they thought of it in these terms? I guess the question is really that of what is first essence or existence. MAybe we should just open up those flood gates...
