Falsifiable Theorem
Ah, innovation I hate you.
Anyway, hopefully this post will be in some kind of readable format.
So when questioning if you can succeed, whether success is even possible at some point I feel in whatever endeavor that success or failure is going to be determined by other people.
It doesn't have to be, I mean you have two types of endeavor, one where you are just proving shit to yourself eg. can I run a marathon? Those are easy, easy to achieve, you just have to do it. All you need is feet and google maps or something to figure out a 42km course.
The other endeavor though is one where your success is determined by the reception of other people. The arts basically all depends on an audience of some kind, or will usually involve an audiance. Art is generally created for an audience.
And whatever you want them to feel, think etc. You want that audience to be there.
So you hatch a theorem 'will anybody support my art.' and this theorem can be falsified.
I imagine in some way shape or form this test has been adopted by all artists, this theorem formulated and speculated upon in their mind.
There's an easy and hard way to falsify/validate this theorem, the hard way is the most popular. It involves honing and practing your given art in dark lonely studios, printing posters and sticking them up around town, 'viral marketing' through 'social media'. Trying to attract an audience to your art.
The hard way is popular. The easy way is easier. Find some proxy art, then go and support it. By being in an audience, you prove that supportive people exist. This easy way is what Ghandi so famously said in what has become perhaps too easily dismissed cliche 'be the change you want to see in the world.'
Go to things, go see things, see and understand why people go to see things. Create new and more exciting falsifiable theorems. Expand your knowledge.
I mean if you don't support art, how are you ever supposed to figure out why people would support yours?
Anyway, hopefully this post will be in some kind of readable format.
So when questioning if you can succeed, whether success is even possible at some point I feel in whatever endeavor that success or failure is going to be determined by other people.
It doesn't have to be, I mean you have two types of endeavor, one where you are just proving shit to yourself eg. can I run a marathon? Those are easy, easy to achieve, you just have to do it. All you need is feet and google maps or something to figure out a 42km course.
The other endeavor though is one where your success is determined by the reception of other people. The arts basically all depends on an audience of some kind, or will usually involve an audiance. Art is generally created for an audience.
And whatever you want them to feel, think etc. You want that audience to be there.
So you hatch a theorem 'will anybody support my art.' and this theorem can be falsified.
I imagine in some way shape or form this test has been adopted by all artists, this theorem formulated and speculated upon in their mind.
There's an easy and hard way to falsify/validate this theorem, the hard way is the most popular. It involves honing and practing your given art in dark lonely studios, printing posters and sticking them up around town, 'viral marketing' through 'social media'. Trying to attract an audience to your art.
The hard way is popular. The easy way is easier. Find some proxy art, then go and support it. By being in an audience, you prove that supportive people exist. This easy way is what Ghandi so famously said in what has become perhaps too easily dismissed cliche 'be the change you want to see in the world.'
Go to things, go see things, see and understand why people go to see things. Create new and more exciting falsifiable theorems. Expand your knowledge.
I mean if you don't support art, how are you ever supposed to figure out why people would support yours?
No comments:
Post a Comment