Jump to content
ANNOUNCEMENTS
  • TLE is now in updgraded BETA! Check out our new CLUBS under Community! Don't just Like a post, add a Reaction!
Sign in to follow this  
Stickyflames

Art and stories

Recommended Posts

Stickyflames    1,004
Stickyflames

Art and Stories

  • ( A collection of questions relating to art and storytelling I have asked the Michaels over the year, channeled by Troy)


    Objective vs Subjective Art

    Hi michael, I have a question concerning OBJECTIVE art ( as stated by gurdjieff and OSHO) vs. Subjective art. What is your description of the differences between them and what centers are utilied?

    [MEntity] In terms that differentiate the arts as Subjective versus Objective, one is a function of an individual's subconsciousness, various layers of processes, including those that tap into collective consciousness, yet all of which are interpretative and rather metaphorical. Whereas the Objective is utterly its own, standing as itself, with or without meaning, metaphor, and relevance.
    When the Subjective is referred to as "soulless," it was not intended to mean "less than," but more to represent the perspective of Personality, the temporal. That art which is Objective is of Essence, or at least, of the Personality that is awake.

    Subjective art represents something. Objective art represents itself. 
    Most of what passes as "art" is not of Essence, is "soulless," if you will. It is of Personality, and that is about as derogatory as saying that a single lifetime is the result of the choices of Personality, not necessarily those of the soul.
    All of the Lower Centers are involved when Subjective Art is created. ALL of the Centers are involved when Objective Art is created.

    Modern Storytelling

    Hello Michael , recently I asked about Objective Art vs Subjective art. I would like to take that into the realm of Modern storytelling. I don't feel there are a lot of examples of "Objective storytelling"; how might it differ in terms of approach than a lot of what we see in cinemas today? 

    [MEntity] The effects of art are not often a fair representation of its origins. Objective and Subjective Arts can be interpreted and experienced in any number of ways relative to the interpretor. In fact, a great deal of Objective Art is "hated." It is not often received well. It is often threatening to the comforts and familiarities of the Personality. The same goes for genres. There can be Objective Horror and Subjective Horror.
    Objective and Subjective Art can only really describe the sources.
    However, there is validity to the fact that the source can have some effect, of course, but the individuals receiving/interpreting that art will always have the final say for how it is experienced.
    In terms of modern storytelling, a great shift is already in motion away from passive storytelling and into interactive storytelling. As we, as sentience, are now in the Century of Choice as a Platform for the spcies, CHOICE is becoming the vital key to a truly Objective method of storytelling. Modern gaming is already on the cutting edge of this, with Sages, Artisans, and Scholars flocking to its intial waves to help refine, expand upon, and spread its foundations.
    This move away from passive storytelling and into interactive storytelling is yet another expansion of impact from the shift in Soul Age away from Young to Mature. In that regard, it is an evolution, and represents Objective Art, as the source of that creativity must be inclusive, considering the broadest range of perceptions, paths, and probabilities as a means to fulfill the core of a story.
    We have never seen anything like it, and we find it beautiful. We often "sit in" with Troy as he plays. We are finding there is little difference between the architecture of gaming, and the process of incarnation, parallels, and probabilities. All higher concepts are eventually reflected in the Physical Plane in some way, and this dimension of existence is finding its footing.


    OLD SOUL ART

    Art as I know it at its best is a reflection of the mysterious, the wonder, the beyond words . As the world begins to approach an old soul paradigm in a few hundred year or so...how would art change. would it still be neccessary in the ways we know it? as more PEOPLE become the reflection of that WONDER that art encapsulated, what place will ART have in that world?

    [MEntity] Though this varies among Old Soul worlds, Art escalates in range and importance among all of them. It is often no longer confined to a specific range of media or obvious creativity, but comes to include the entire life of an individual, how he or she creates his or her day, etc. This is already being glanced at in your current paradigm, though colored heavily by Young Soul filters.
    "Reality TV" is, at its heart, a glimpse of Old Soul Art.
     Becoming a celebrity only because one has become a celebrity is also a distorted form of Old Soul Art.
    These things may be repulsive to older souls as they are being presented now, but these hint at an undercurrent of acknowledgement of the LIFE as ART.
    In many Old Soul worlds, Art is entirely experiential and temporal. Exhibitions are sunsets that can never been seen again, or gatherings where spontaneous suggestions are matched up with random individuals who must then perform, create, or do the suggestion, even if it is well outside of their talents.
    This leads to great rounds of humor and levity that is often at the core of Old Soul arts.
    Interactivity is highly important to the Old Soul world of art, as well. For example, one installation we know of is something like a steep hill of xylophone-like panels that are carefully arranged in ways that an individual could dance down this hill in any number of ways to create his or her song of spontaneity.
    Collaborative art is highly important to the Old Soul world of art, as well. In many probabilities, holographic-like galleries are "online" for contributors to create projects that can be altered by anyone from anywhere. No walk through that gallery is met with the same version of the art.
    Interactivity, Collaboration, Temporal/Amorphous, and spontaneous are key traits for Old Soul arts, though we caution against presuming these traits are definitive. There is more we can say to this subject.

     On Originality

     I have a question about ORIGINALITY...i'm sure many artists suffer with this block of needing to be original. though upon looking at my favourite artists i wouldn't say their work is at all without influence...so what is it we are responding to when we say something is original? Is it the enthusiasm from the artist making it? Is there such thing as originality? I would love your take on originality to help put an end to this ancient crisis of the artist once and for all."

    [MEntity] Originality is valid. Originality does not preclude influence and inspiration. There is a difference between originality that is inspired, and one who is copying or imitating. If one of our students were to write a book about his or her experiences of our teaching and conveyed that in a way that teaches what was learned, it will not matter that the core of what is being taught did not originate with that student. What matters is his or her original take on that, as he or she was inspired. Not even our own teaching originates from us, but is utterly original. We only teach our take on the truth, love, and energy that originated beyond us. But our teaching is utterly original in its form.
    Originality is what one does with one's inspiration.
    Beyond this, the judgments will continue to be subjective in terms of what is "truly" original, or not, but the dividing line fairly clearoriginality is inspired, while non-originality is a copy, imitation, or mimicking.
    For instance, one does not need be inspired to put together a model airplane, or to sing a song that is a pop formula created by someone else. One may feel inspired, but the form taken is not. It is copied. It is mimicked. It is an attempt to capture what was inspired in the original.
    Andy Warhol was an artist with originality, and he exemplifies the precarious, but clear line between copy and creation.
    Consider one more thing when pondering originalityyou are utterly original. You are utterly unique. You are a single idea that will never be replicated. Yet you are not new. You are an evolution. You are built upon inspiration. You are not a copy, though "you" have existed multiple times. Art is similar.
    Let your art, your originality, be an evolution built upon inspiration, and you will relieve yourself of this perplexing and distracting concern.

     

     

     

image.jpg

  • LIKE/LOVE 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×