Does Technology Ruin Creativity?

[john grey]

We have seen things (toys) such as "Guitar Hero" that allow a child to pretend to play an instrument. When just a few years ago when a child pretends, he KNOWS that music must be created by the hand of a person.
We have seen rhyming dictionaries. Shifts from human face to face communication to typed communication.
We have seen an enormous influx of heightened technology which spans our need to spell correctly, to the loose the need to use functional arithmetic mathematics. Software has not been the only medium that has changed our method of functioning.
The original acoustic instruments have been copied by electric instruments so that what once was accomplished by technique- can now be imitated electronically (tremolo, etc). Yet some of these are exciting additions to creativity. But perhaps some of them stifle creativity.
IF Hip Hop is (for example) is completed totally electronically from the drum track to the pre-recorded musical arrangement and the only level of musical work is in combining the tracks via a computer.....is that music or poetry? If a digital picture has never seen a darkroom and altered via Photoshop; is that photography?
What is your opinion......?
Is technology pulling us further and further from elemental creativity?

[Marial]

Well, anyone can record into their computer now, or manipulate photographs digitally. On balance I would say tech is fostering creativity by broadening access. One can bemoan the fading of certain manual techniques, but I think more people are doing more creative things than ever before. And that seems like a good thing to me.

[echoSE7EN]

Imitation of a specific instrument does not mean the death of creativity. I would argue they are unrelated constraints. I often time whistle or hum a potential line or melody before I've ever picked up my bass, or sat at my piano. My creativity isn't linked to the fact that I own a specific instrument. Creativity is a mental exercise. The execution of that exercise is technique (again, not creativity).

Was Pink Floyd any less creative when composing The Dark Side of the Moon because they utilized synths, theremins (sp?), effects (both stomp and studio)? No. The technology available gave them the means to achieve what they heard in their heads.

I don't care for hip-hop, but it's a creative spark that allows someone to mash-up samples, or sound-clips, or whatever. Example: Danger Mouse mashing up The BEatles and Jay-Z. Did I like it? Not so much. Did I think to do it? Nope. He's a creative dude for the idea.

[Absentia]

Working in a school, hell yes.
We have middle schoolers that have never used scissors before.

Oh and hip hop and pop should be the main example of such.
Turn on the radio for the rap and R&B station for a few minutes, I'll wait.



Back? Retarded isn't it?

[MakiSupaStar]

In some areas I would say yes, but in other areas I would say that it enhances it. For instance, it's a lot easier for me to record and work out ideas now using technology than it was before.

[GregC]

Short answer: No. It gives us more choices, it's up to us to use them wisely.

I don't know of any hip hop (mashups aren't really hip hop) that requires absolutely zero new input, even if it's just the vocals in some cases. Furthermore, hip hop producers and beatmakers can be extremely creative just using existing material.

[EricF]

For those people who are creative and motivated, a computer is just another tool or medium to express that creativity. Current techonolgy makes some things (music recording and production, for example) more accessible than every before, and therefore increases the opportunity for more people to explore their creativity. Is mouse-clicking a piece of music less creative than playing an instrument. Maybe, but maybe not. If I have a sound or a combination of sounds that I am imagining for a song, but I can't create them on "real" instruments (maybe just a lack of playing skills with a particular instrument is my stumblng block). Is my creativity any less if I can assemble those sounds through recording/instrument software? If I use Autotune/Melodyne to fine-tune some singing pitch errors, is it a lack of creativity, or a lack of skill that's the issue?

[Absentia]

Originally Posted by MakiSupaStar

In some areas I would say yes, but in other areas I would say that it enhances it. For instance, it's a lot easier for me to record and work out ideas now using technology than it was before.

Also true,
More I think about it technology is mostly used as an excuse to do things lazily and not put as much effort into it.

[EricF]

Originally Posted by Absentia

More I think about it technology is mostly used as an excuse to do things lazily and not put as much effort into it.

I can't agree 100% with that. Technology has cerainly made things easier and more accessible, but I wouldn't equate that with lazy, necessarily. Sometimes, it's economics. To keep with the example of music, if I couldn't possibly afford to purchase all the instruments I would need to make the sounds I want for a particular song I'm recording, why is it "lazy' for me to use the availaible technology? With a single MIDI input device (i.e. keyboard) and a small amount of software, I can have a wide range of sounds at my fingertips, and create the song with the sounds I envisioned.

[Phalex]

Creativity has always been creative. The mediums change from time to time, but creativity remains a constant IMO.

[Jimbob Jones]

Technology creates more of a platform for non creative people to spew out trash.

Creative people will always be creative, no matter what the medium.

[i_got_a_mohawk]

It only kills creativity if people are lazy and let it!

[Gaius46]

In a word no. Creative people find ways to creatively use technology.

[TheSuzie]

Originally Posted by Jimbob Jones

Technology creates more of a platform for non creative people to spew out trash.

Creative people will always be creative, no matter what the medium.

This

Also think of what someone like Frank Zappa would be able to do with today's tech.

Victor Wooten said something like (this is a *very* loose paraphrase) - I am a musical person. I am a musician not a bass player. The bass is what I use to let you hear the music in me. Some of you are still concentrating on playing the bass. Stop playing the bass and play music.

I do think that different neural connections and personal experiential connections are made by individuals. I grew up in the time before computers were available outside of laboratories. I write very differently with a pen in my hand than at the computer. Even switching from a pen to a pencil can make a difference since I have certain childhood associations with the act of using a pencil.

S

[Popbumper]

Yes and no. Speaking from experience here, and you may laugh at will (on my behalf) if you feel the need:

Rockband launched my son into playing drums. After a year of "beating the plastic" at "expert" level, he asked for real drums, and we went out and bought him a Yamaha electronic drum set. He's almost 12, and I am hoping he will continue in this vein (as he also learns sax at school).

Additionally, since Dad (me) was unable to muster the coordination for drums, Rockband launched me into learning bass (insert laugh track here). Seriously, Been into it for almost a year, own two basses, two amps, an Epiphone Junior guitar, and a Fender Stratocaster Rock band compatible guitar (I messed with guitar in my 20's, and have been a lifelong clarinet player). I play my G&L L-2000 every day, and am learning a lot!

People may think that the "generic plastic simulated instrument" games are useless, but I guarantee you that a LOT of young folks (like my son) have had a positive impetus towards real instruments as a result.

Now my son and I not only play RockBand, but also "jam" together on real instruments. What's wrong with that?

Chris

[WyrmDL]

I think it gives the opportunity and potential to give rise to creativity, but isn't being utilized by kids and people of today and such.

[TheVoiceless]

I would say no. Because these original processes still exist.Meaning people can still create with a stick and sand, write songs on an acoustic guitar, etc.... So in essence we are just adding to the cosmic pile of existence.

[WyrmDL]

But at the same time, we are burying and distracting all the people from the original processes. It becomes more difficult as time goes on to realize that they even exist.

[L-A]

Creative people don't really care whether they use a computer or not. Now that they are available, they'll use them as necessary. Creativity, in my book, is the ability to find a path to your objective. The more creative, the better paths you choose, because you try a ton.

Non-creatives, or rather fake creatives, will surf the technology incomprehension wave until there's something better and less understood that they can exploit instead.

Also, non-creatives are a huge market, because they have no real measure of how unoriginal their "ideas" are and they thrive on cheap, mass-produced uniqueness.

[Popbumper]

Originally Posted by WyrmDL

But at the same time, we are burying and distracting all the people from the original processes. It becomes more difficult as time goes on to realize that they even exist.

In some cases, yes. I think the people that "suffer" most from the technology crush are children. If you had left a kid from the 50's/60's/70's/80's out in the woods for a day, he might come home a bit scratched up and/or sunburned, but he would have probably looked around for something to eat (berries), created a 'weapon" with a stick, walked barefoot in a stream, climbed a tree, and would have overall enjoyed the experience.

A kid from today would want to surf the net/yak on the phone/play a handheld game/find the nearest microwave, regardless of the splendor of nature around him/her.

Kids that PLAY zombies 12 hours a day are BECOMING zombies with no social skills, life skills, or ability to do anything for themselves.

Chris