posted May 03, 2009 11:14 AM            

As to the whole thing about creations being a reflection of their creator, I would definitely have to agree with that too.

There's the theory too that all pieces of, say, art, are there all along and we just 'discover' them along the way.

posted May 03, 2009 02:27 PM            

Mental processes I'm not so sure. Are we all capable of being super genius scientists if we simply keep at it, or is there a plateau that is difficult to get beyond? Is there a limit to our capacity, or are we as unlimited as we like to believe?

posted May 03, 2009 02:37 PM            

quote:

---

I don't know how someone would fail to think that something they create is not part of themselves. What is their explanation otherwise???

---

Here's what I'm thinking:

Many of the negative circumstances we encounter are of our own creation, yet clearly a lot of people don't look at these creations as a reflection-of or a reaction-to themselves.

Children are particularly troublesome when thinking about the relationship between creator and created. Parents expect that their children will reflect their values, while often the child can be a reaction to its creator.

posted May 03, 2009 02:51 PM            

As far as art goes, there are always peaks and valleys. That's the only thing I do know. In fact without them, as far as I'm concerned, there is no art.

Like the bands you're talking about, I know what you mean....I think it depends on the band though. Is their evolution negative or positive, for who? I think it depends on the reason why they changed in the first place. If they are a great band and they are known for a certain style and they master it, then where else is there to go? Maybe not up/down, but more side to side or whatever.
Just as far as music/art alone, I think those bands change because they need to. There's no room left to stay the same.
So they try something different (unless it's their manager suggesting they try something different for the sake of promotional stuff which IMO is completely different and not really an organic change)....and the reactions are mixed (as in positive or negative).
So is the change made because it's time for it and they chose to change, or is it because they wanted a different reaction to their music? They just pressed the reset button and decided to try something completely new and different and took whatever sound they preferred and played with it.

I guess I am 'for' the changes because a couple of my favorite bands artists are always kind of re-inventing themselves in a way. I like that. I like that their sound changes but their essence is still there.

posted May 04, 2009 01:09 PM            

You said

quote:

---

the more you do something, the better you'll get at it

---

posted May 04, 2009 03:11 PM            

If you keep doing something the exact same way, I do think you'll improve that particular skill. Sometimes, though, repitition can make you worse at the craft overall, because you've locked yourself into one path and have become blind to the others. When that happens, you're no longer a creator. Your skill may even grow weaker because it no longer thrills you, leaving you all technical precision and no heart.

I think to truly master a craft, you must be able to practice it with fresh, open eyes. You must see all the possibilities within your craft, how each choice you make kills a different choice and gives birth to a whole new set. I think it's that ability to let a craft live through you that makes someone a master or genius.

posted May 04, 2009 03:27 PM            

I thought that even with all that practice, with all those potential teachers, he may still be an awful lay. He may have done and received the same thing everytime, blind to the art of sex. If that's the case, his sexual skills aren't any better than someone who's only had one lover, or even one sexual experience.

posted May 04, 2009 04:44 PM            

If you practice with poor form/technique or you aren't sure what you're doing you're just practicing bad habits. With certain disciplines this could even lead to injury or harm to yourself and others.

posted May 04, 2009 07:34 PM              

any old damn practice doesn't make anything perfect.

It has to be PERFECT practice.

posted May 05, 2009 06:34 AM              

and PA, you too.

PERFECT practice is mastery over just picking something up and not being mind, body, soul focused.

Innate talent is essential too to achieve mastery although if you don't 'feel' the thing you want to master you won't practice perfectly anyway, so it all fits.

posted May 05, 2009 08:14 AM            

quote:

---

There's often a lot of confidence given to the notion that the more you do something, the better you'll get at it. What do you think? If it were a true or false question, what would you answer?

---