The idea of wanting to do something new is old.

The first thing I was told when I went to art school was, “Artists who came before you have already come up with all the ‘novel ideas’ long before you were born. Rather than focusing on originality and novelty, find value in the inevitability of what you do.

• The idea of wanting to do something new is already old. https://twitter.com/kirisawatae/status/1426715917174534145?s=21

Context: art college The necessity of what I do.

• Inevitability over novelty
• inevitability rather than novelty.
• novelty (patentability)

I thought this area of thinking might be a bit different from the science field. In the case of science, we survey the research of our predecessors and think about how we can produce our own ⊿t, right? There may be “new approaches” there, but I think “The inevitability of what I do” and “Peer review will not pass. Twitter

• Context:.
  • The phrase “does not pass peer review” implicitly assumes that “passing peer review is of value.”
  • Context: a community that believes in the value of writing papers and passing them through peer review

The two may be a difference in community values of whether to value “novelty” or “The inevitability of what I do” (storytelling?). Maybe it’s a difference in community values, which they value more

What caused the value system that emphasizes “the necessity of doing what one does?”

• Because without it, it’s difficult to “Keep doing it.”?

• The type of behavior that takes 10 years to produce results is a big advantage in being able to continue because most people “can’t keep up”.

  • The only way to go to extraordinary places is to accumulate the little things.
  • I guess starting a business or something like that would fall into this category.

• Art is not a technique context is value, so “find value in the necessity of ‘doing it yourself’” means create a context, I guess [Twitter https://twitter.com/ tokoroten/status/1427158068584882177?s=21]

  • Context, not technology, is the value.
    • How it happened.
  • I was just thinking about how the value of “context, not technology, is the value” arose… and then I thought of the case of the femtosecond laser that created a fairy that you could touch with a femtosecond laser.
    • ref: “Fairy Lights in Femtoseconds” Interview with Yoichi Ochiai: “Art is nothing but technology anymore | Gizmodo Japan - Yoichi Ochiai Art will be nothing but technology now.
    • I think it’s just that the majority of people doing art tend to run in the direction of creating value through context (storytelling) because they are too technically inept to create value using technology…
    • If we insist on “human drawing,” we will have to “fight on the same level as many people in the past” because human ability will not progress that much.

  • I think art as a market has uncopyability (it is an object made by human hands) as part of its value, and context as uncopyability by information is added to it.

By the way, I was just talking with an art college graduate at my company, and he told me that nowadays it is more common to use a collection of works as a point of reference originality as a surface rather than a single work as a novel idea. I thought that this might lead to the creation of value as authorship or The inevitability of what I do.

• From the perspective of the ordering side, if there are multiple points, we can determine that if it’s within that aspect, we can place the order. So, if we do several similar jobs, projects that say, “Maybe we can do this too,” will fly in.

• Maybe that’s also in a sense authorship.

• Related: Art as a probability distribution, not a point.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/新しいことをやりたいと言う考えは古い using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.