It seems like a weird question, but other than a couple of users who I recognize on Lemmy, the rest seems to be robotic.
I don’t see a lot of creativity or uniqueness.
Why is that?
It seems like a weird question, but other than a couple of users who I recognize on Lemmy, the rest seems to be robotic.
I don’t see a lot of creativity or uniqueness.
Why is that?
Can’t say I agree with the thesis so I cant exactly give a good reason.
Best I can argue is a lot of people share similar interests here and niche communities aren’t very active here.
So here I can’t talk about how Jack Hobbs record is better fielding first when everyone chose to bat first in his era or the biomechanics of mhd Asif.
Or Oviedo’s play being dictated by their wingbacks.
Or Gukesh beating Magnus.
Or the development of his self analysis in Dylan’s music.
I cant talk about a Marxist interpretation of severance. Or Marxist film theory and fight club.
Or Edgar Allan Poe’s philosophy of composition.
Or the patterns I notice in mythological stories across cultures.
Or creating conlangs.
Simply because there is rarely anyone else who is interested in it who’ll find it. There’s not a lot of engagement with niche topics here
In a Joseph Campbell kinda way, or a “every culture has a flood myth” kinda way?
Both.
Like the common story of the baby of a king being abandoned only to return to power. Often in a river.
The story follows the beats and structure of the hero’s journey. (Similarly theres other structures that are commonly repeated) but also the very story is the same.
Jung noticed this a century ago.
In a creative writing class we were told there are no new stories. How they’re put together and dressed up is a little different, but ultimately it’s all been done.