3 ms·
>but if they are easily imitated, it's hard to argue the works themselves make their author a great artist. By this logic no writer is a great artist, as anyon
by superhuzza 6y ago
>but if they are easily imitated, it's hard to argue the works themselves make their author a great artist.
By this logic no writer is a great artist, as anyone could just copy out their books by hand - their work is "easily imitated".
- OJFord 6y agoImitation isn't cloning - writing a novel novel in the style of requires more skill than writing (/painting) out the same thing. What's up for debate I suppose is to what extent a 'non-artist's splodges in immitation of, are stylistically the same but original, or just clones. (Some might also argue that the entropy in such paintings make actual clones rather harder they are of than something more real and 'of something'!)