Tuesday, March 08, 2005

Parallel universes vs created universes

Dr. Clam said
There are of course two ways of looking at any sub-created phenomenon: trying to understand it from the viewpoint of the creator, and explaining its characteristics that way; and treating it as a self-contained universe that is real on its own level. I always try to extrapolate from the small slice of a universe revealed to us in any art form features of the rest of the universe. While the intentions of the creator are an 'explanation' on one level of phenomena within an art form, and have some interest to me, I am far more interested in the level of explanation that applies within the sub-creation. As a sub-creator myself, I like to feel that I am only ever sketching out the merest outlines of something that is, in its essence, far realler than I could ever make it. The true form of each of my sub-created universes,like the Theory of Everything, lie perfect and eternal within the mind of God.

To which andrewww replied (I deleted his reply, that's why you can't see it)

I don't think of myself as a "sub-creator" but a creator among many in my own right. Because I have had the experience of going all the way from idea to finished movie, I can empathise with movie-makers and judge from various angles why the movies were good and where they could improve, to improve my own "creativity" as such. The Monster world gateways were fairly casually modelled in a sense that quite a few physics consequences were ignored (see "The Fork" for more rigorous gateways). The Monsters Inc. world in particular was aimed at kids and their parents, so they didn't concentrate as much on the suspension of disbelief as they would for a purely adult movie.

To which I reply that I don't see movies as a creation of the writer, but as a creation of society. Society after all decides which movies are "successful", which genres become "extinct" and what features are important. The writer is merely the "parent" of the movie. And much as each individual person has a mother and father who "created" them, they can hardly take credit for their creation in a theological sense. After all, it is the whole of society which moulds an individual, and the eons of history etc. which make them who they are!

3 comments:

Dr. Clam said...

Why did you delete Androoo's post? And will you delete this one too? :)

Marco said...

Work with me here, I'm just toying with his mind like a bored housecat.

Dr. Clam said...

I have to admit that I just slipped unconsciously into using "sub-creation", without any polemical intent. I think the term is Tolkien's, and he used it both of his own activities and of the role of humans/dwarves etc. within the world of Middle Earth.