On Wed, 22 Dec 2010, john saylor wrote:
if i understand you, one of your indirect points is that artists need to get more scientific. this seems correct to me [art has always been practiced by leading scientists, think of einstein and his violin]. and at the same time, this does not mean to ignore imagination- it means you must do everything.
Imagination is most meaningful when it is anchored in real life.
It's one think to imagine Einstein's space bending, and to imagine Minkowski's four-dimensional space-time, but it's another thing to know that a satellite's atomic clock has to be adjusted because it _drifts_, and that timeflow² + speedratio² = 1 isn't a formula that Einstein made up from nowhere.
In a very different domain, if I read a novel by Kafka, Camus, M-C Blais, Zola, C Gauvreau or whoever else, the content makes sense because it is anchored in real life. Even when impossible things or unlikely things happen in the novel, there's something in it that is relevant to real life.
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC