Evolving Your Art: Is It Necessary?

Theres alot of talk about the art evovling, like it was something living.... But's it's not.

An art only exsist in 1 person, and no other. You can find simularities in a group of people that are very munch in common, and therefor can postulate that they are doing the same thing. You can also postualate that a person can learn to do the "same" as the group/individual.

Since each person has his own history/karma (what ever), the things they do and teach will differ, from the original start. This is invedible(sp?).

Part of a persons teaching are the both conscious and unconscioud. For both: the teacher and the pupil.

And that learning is a question of what the pupil whants/can learn.

In a sense, the person learning decides what the art is for him, but he's not receiving th art. It's not jumping over to him. It's something he's doing to himself(and choosing concsoius/unconcsius which parts he wants to learn).
To put it in other words: The art is dead. long live the art.....!

Hope you get what I'm trying to say.... argumenting in english isn't my speciality.

/Yari
 
Back
Top