Dear Chris/Claus;

 like Claus, I should be interested to know more precisely how this problem has come up in your practice.
 It sparks off a number of thoughts in me (not necessarily connected). For instance:
 
1 I recall that some years ago the BBC ran a series of concerts under the title "The Innocent Ear" in which they played pieces without introducing them with the usual "explanatory" introductions like "Gustav Mahler was born in what was then a rural area in the old Austro-Hungarian Empire...Unlike his near-contemporaries who became known for their passionate Czech nationalism, he....". The idea was that listeners would approach these pieces as pure music without preconceptions. How does that work?

2 Most of childhood learning starts with some kind of imitation but soon we become socialised to follow some sort of style, often our parents. Scientists have recently reported that it appears that English cows MOO with distinct regional accents....How does that work?

3 .When I was a keen schoolboy athlete I recall a coach advising me sternly that interval training was not just a way of building up general body stamina but a means of disciplining the body to learn certain motions as "natural". "Let your body do the thinking" he would say, "If YOU think about what your body is doing, you lose the "natural" rhythm,, you become nervous and do the wrong thing". How does that work? Why do some athletes appear unable to break the mould of their typical performance once a race has started, and others can do that?

4 My sister is a professional actress and I have noticed that when she is in a part with an established company, she gets very defensive, even angry, when a fellow-actor gives "notes" (feedback on a performance, with suggestions for improvement) during the course of a run, when there is little time to review and change one's performance. The reason, I believe, is that she learns a set of interpretations that are internalized as routines precisely because they seem "natural" within that interpretation of the part, but appear "original" on stage. But arguably, these are in fact "imitations" of the original performance. How do actors become original through imitating themselves?

None of the above, I am sure, is at all "original" but at the moment of writing, does not seem to be "imitation" either!

Best
David

Start Original Message -----
Sent: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 14:49:00 +0200
From: Claus Springborg <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Originality<>Imitation

> Dear Chris
> 
>  
> 
> I'm very interested in hearing more about the recent events in your work, that have caused you to focus on originality & imitation, and on how you perceive the dynamic between the two.
> 
>  
> 
> My immediate thoughts (based on my own experience) are, that imitation is a way of gathering information. When you observe someone in action, you can perceive a lot, but when you observe yourself while imitating the other ones actions you can perceive even more. Imitating and paying attention / observing to your own experience while you imitate is something you can do. 
> 
> Out of extensive curious imitation / observation original ideas can emerge. This (I believe) is not something, you can do. All you can do, is pay attention and be curious while you imitate, and resist numerous impulses to become mental about, what you are doing and where you are going. Like fx:
> 
> - Start reducing what you experience to something already known, cutting away the richness of all the "irrelevant details"...
> 
> - Start judging whether you like, what you experience or not, and thus start thinking about how to get more of the good part and less of the bad part...
> 
> - Start focusing on the goals, on what you can get from imitating, and how good you will feel when you get it, for how long you should be imitating before getting to your goal, if there might be a quicker way - a more effective way of imitating....
> 
> - ect.
> 
> These impulses can be seen as part of the experience you are observing while imitating. Then they wont take you out of the experience - but rather deepen it.
> 
> In my experience if you can balance in this space for a while, interesting things will start happening. Getting original ideas is one of those things.
> 
> 
> 
> Just brief description of one way of looking at the relationship between imitation and originality. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter.
> 
>  
> 
> About literature: David Bohm: On Creativity, chapter 4 (the range of imagination) might be interesting for you
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Cheers Claus Springborg
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: chris stagg 
>   To: [log in to unmask] 
>   Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 12:34 PM
>   Subject: Originality<>Imitation
> 
> 
>   Dear Fellow Aacorns,
> 
>    
> 
>   I am a creative consultant and arts-based trainer working in the UK.  Recently, through my work with clients, I have become very interested in the dynamic relationship between Originality & Imitation - both in art and in business - as a means of making sense of the creative process and its relationship to innovation.  I am keen to develop a conversation with others who have an interest in this dynamic and, also, in hearing whether there is anything in the literature around creativity/innovation that focuses specifically on the question of Originality & Imitation.
> 
>    
> 
>   Thanks,
> 
>    
> 
>   Chris.
> 
>    
> 
>   Chris Stagg Associates
> 
>   Office:   01273 690811
> 
>   Mobile:  07939238573
> 
>    

----- End Original Message -----