PATTERNS

I have patterns. This is a frustrating discovery. It’s not inhibiting, so to speak; I’m not on some all encompassing quest for spontaneity that has suddenly been spoilt by  a, well, spontaneous discovery (but wouldn’t that have been deliciously ironic?).

Nothing has been ruined whatsoever, but it does raise a point into question- and it’s a tough question. It’s been stewing in my brain for some time now.

can one have patterns, but still be creative?

After a brief period of conscious pondering and a far longer period of subconscious disquiet, I have reached two conclusions;

  • A pattern within a routine doesn’t inhibit creativity. At times it welcomes and prompts creativity to grow, or, more often than not,  it simply gives the mind the time and peace to look upon ideas with a reflective clarity.  Sometimes it’s good to fall into routine, to let the body and practical mind bumble through life whilst the subconscious runs wild with new ideas and concepts. It’s good to daydream.

I would consider daydreams to be both food for the mind and a casual release of pent up thought- They fuel new ideas, or add another intricate layer to the workings of the mind, whilst also  allowing for the mind to work its way through its own cognitive ruminations, to understand them and follow their trails.

We find our own causes and solutions in our daydreams. we lose our worries.

We find innovations and improvements in our daydreams. we gain creative thought.

so, pattern in routine. Not necessarily a bad thing. Patterns can create stability, and stability allows for creation to take place.

However, another conclusive thought sprang into my mind (mid daydream, of course);

  •  Patterns within innovation limits creativity altogether. Truly new thought cannot exist within the confines of old ideas. Not every living person and creator has to have entirely original creative thought, as this is entirely impossible-Humanity would simply be a mass of unconnected dots, staring at the sun in isolated solemnity, lacking the evolution created through influence. No. It’s not a case of being an unconnected dot; it’s a case of being a dot, influenced or not, that sometimes make the same thing twice. Unintentionally.

In my eyes, intentional variations within a piece or concept show experimentation; but unintentional copying of the same concept- the creation of an ill-advised series of repetitions- shows a lack of  progression, and of new thought.

It shows creative block.

And I do not like creative block.

How can your work be original, or dynamic, or interesting if you are simply cycling ideas?  And although it does apply to your audience, I haven’t even considered them-  I’m talking as a creator.

It’s a simple question. Does your work inspire you?

Will it grow and morph into something more, or something entirely different?

Are you planting a wild meadow, or simply repotting the same plant?

 

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s