Some of the people who know me might be aware of this thing I call the “Star Trek Musical”. I started writing it when I was 13 and, based on the fact that it is “copyrighted” to “Angie K****** Enterprises 1996”, I finished it when I was actually 14. This, in combination with the other Star Trek based short stories I used to write around this time, has always been part of my claim that I used to get creative and make something. But is it really being creative? Does creativeness imply that you create something mostly out of your own head and not have it be part of something other people made first? Can I be creative and claim to make things if I only kind of riff on what other people do? I don't feel terribly creative right now in terms of making something new (Creative works and academic papers for my classes aside). It makes me wonder what's wrong with me. No many people enjoy being around uncreative people. And I haven't spent much social time with anyone other than Ted recently so maybe there's something there.
The problem is that I really enjoy doing creative projects based off of stuff other people do like writing a new story involving television characters that I really like or making tongue in cheek handcrafts that riff on a theme that's sure to make people laugh (See “Paint By Number Wil & Velvet Wesley” and “Woodcut Wil & Wil & Velvet Wesley”). But is that enough?


Angie, your project is still creative even if it's derivative. Look at the Beatles; much of their early work, although original, was pretty darned derivative of American R&B. They'll tell you that themselves (well, if they knew you, they would...) The fact that you're creating a new thing based on an old thing does not negate the significance - nor the originality - of your new thing. Create away, & have a good time! :-D
ReplyDelete-Alicia
www.thewagband.com
Thanks Alicia. I guess I'll consider it creative homages.
ReplyDeleteYou're quite welcome! :-) "Creative homages" works for me!
ReplyDelete-Alicia
www.thewagband.com