[PREV - DUMAS] [TOP]
February 2, 2005
An interesting aspect of
popular/pulp/series fiction
is that it changes through (as opposed
the gradual accumulation to serious
of small innovations. fiction?)
A new piece is
usually intended to
be only a minor
variation on the old...
In contrast, in the world
of high art, it often Odd exception: in the
seems that an author is graphics art world,
expected to produce a new an artist is expected
work that will be a break to crank out a large
with history, a totally number of variations on
new creation, a thing unto a theme, re-working the
itself. same basic idea.
In the Literary realm, Though there's a more
it's defnitely frowned extreme example:
upon to "write the same architects, expected to
novel" over and over with be members of a "school".
only minor changes, but
in popular fiction that's That weird criticism
precisely what is of Gaudi: one man
rewarded. trying to do the work
of a generation.
Even worse in Literary
literature would be using
someone else's work as a
precise template for your BETWEEN_SOUL_AND_FATE
work.
But this is precisely how
popular fiction works...
Evolution, not revolution.
Novelty produced only
gradually, without
direct emphasis on GHOSTS_OF_THE_SHADOW
the need to be new...
We might use the "X-Men" as an
example of slowly mutating art...
BRAND_X
Interesting thing about
"mutate"... it's an
inherently passive verb.
You don't go out
and mutate something.
It just happens.
UNINTENDED
--------
[NEXT - NOVELTY_AGAIN]