Is the corporate culture of creativity killing our creative impulses as a society?

[mathew101281]

In the old days intellectual property was a finite term. Something that at best lasted the life of the creator of said property. In the old days the highest echelon a creative person could reach was creating something now. Nowadays the most well paid “creative people,” mostly work on established “franchises,” reboots and adaptions of older material. Is creativity being strangled by the modern dynamics of corporate culture? Sometimes I feel the present culture of fanfiction, is the corporate culture of remakes that has trickled down to the novice level. All this creative energy wasted on old ideas instead of the new. I know that not all new ideas are good ideas, but I also feel that all this returning to the same dry watering holes time and time again leads to a creative culture that barely tries to be creative anymore. And conditions the modern audience to expect the same thing over and over again.

In comic culture you can see it in the latest batch of “replacement heroes.” Fans have been so conditioned to believe that only certain names matter, that they won’t buy a Falcon book, but will buy a Captain America book starring the same exact character. So in other words t’s all about brand recognition rather then quality.

[skyvolt2000]

In the old days intellectual property was a finite term. Something that at best lasted the life of the creator of said property. In the old days the highest echelon a creative person could reach was creating something now. Nowadays the most well paid “creative people,” mostly work on established “franchises,” reboots and adaptions of older material. Is creativity being strangled by the modern dynamics of corporate culture? Sometimes I feel the present culture of fanfiction, is the corporate culture of remakes that has trickled down to the novice level. All this creative energy wasted on old ideas instead of the new. I know that not all new ideas are good ideas, but I also feel that all this returning to the same dry watering holes time and time again leads to a creative culture that barely tries to be creative anymore. And conditions the modern audience to expect the same thing over and over again.

In comic culture you can see it in the latest batch of “replacement heroes.” Fans have been so conditioned to believe that only certain names matter, that they won’t buy a Falcon book, but will buy a Captain America book starring the same exact character. So in other words t’s all about brand recognition rather then quality.

Folks want ownership of what they create and not settle for just seeing their names on a credit for a film. They want ownership and MONEY.

Nobody wants to do all that work so someone else can make money. That's why you see guys run to Image and have no trouble struggling with their own stuff because no matter how hard it is-they OWN it.



As for Falcon-it's not that folks won't try or buy his book-it's STORES not willing to sale or stock the book.

Even if folks actually want and ask for the book-you have sore willing to lose money if they don't care for who is on the cover.

[Kirby101]

Or they can see it's shit and by creator owned books from Image, Dark horse, etc..

[lancerman]

Yes but the fans are equally complicit. When all you but are Batman and Star books. And the movies you flick to see are about characters from the 30's and 60's. And the biggest consumed media is based off an IP, it's harder to completely blame corporate culture.

And if more money was to be made in fresh creator owned ideas, we know the priorities and findings would change.

[Old Man Ollie 1962]

Overblown CGI reboots, adaptations, and sequels. One hell of a prosaic, dull as dishwater paradigm. But this generation of consumer zombies is comfortably pacified and satiated, so the "Let's Do Lunch" Hollywood movers and shakers i.e. corporate investors maintain the paradigm. John Sayles is my favorite writer/director/filmmaker. He creates well outside of the paradigm. George Lucas, ironically, saw the handwriting on the wall after the colossal success of Star Wars. He still maintains to this day that Star Wars isn't about spaceships and exploding Death Stars. Now, he too wants to create outside of the paradigm. American Graffiti is a masterpiece in my opinion. I wonder if he still has the ability to tell a good story on film. I hope so.

[Paradox]

mathew101281 has a perspective:

In the old days intellectual property was a finite term. Something that at best lasted the life of the creator of said property. In the old days the highest echelon a creative person could reach was creating something now. Nowadays the most well paid “creative people,” mostly work on established “franchises,” reboots and adaptions of older material.

Your whole premise is based on this assumption, that I don't agree is true and that you've shown no evidence for.

[Totoro Man]

corporations actually help enable creativity to continue by publishing it, distributing it, and paying the creators for their work. especially since there's no way private patronage could sustain the comics industry in the way it sustained classical music (in the past).

a better example of something that actively contributes to diminishing our creative impulses would be interactive entertainments like the internet or video games. these aren't bad things-- but based on my personal experience (and observations of others) these are more likely to interfere with the creative process than big corporations.

it varies from person to person. for most people I've known corporate culture didn't stifle their creative impulses-- getting injured, married, having kids, or taking care of elderly parents did. there's only so much time in the day. sometimes being creative takes a backseat to other things.

it used to be that people had to keep applying for copyright renewal to PREVENT their work from becoming public domain. I don't really want THAT practice to come back. it's only been since the late 1970s that things wouldn't become public domain until 70 years after the creator died. and I think this is a good thing. some creators might want their children and loved ones to benefit from their creations instead of having it become a corporate property or public domain.

none of these things is really stopping people from trying to make new material.

not making any accusations-- but I've found that a lot of the people who complain about intellectual property being too rigorous are people who would be perfectly content not paying artists, musicians, or writers a single penny for all of their hard work. "information and ideas should be free!"

"okay... if information should be free then maybe you'd like to hand over your social security number. it's not asking too much that we pay for all this hard work that other people are doing."

was all of this just set up to complain about people not buying a Falcon comic book? ;-)

[ed2962]

Since there's been mass media, there's been adaptations and continuing characters. This has been going on for generations , it's nothing new.

[CSTowle]

And you're just as likely to find a unique and interesting story from a talented writer trying to do something new with Superman as you are yet another Fantasy setting resembling Middle Ages Northwestern Europe. Even if you give me something I've seen before and absolutely nothing new but do it in a way that's entertaining (see the new Star Wars film) I'm fine with that. Distract me and keep me happy and I'll pay you. And companies that want my money (and everyone else's) will continue to employ the people who make it. And that money might lead them to invest in themselves and go on to create their own IP, where they might not if they didn't have those corporations. Corporations can be evil, and will be where there's a nickel in it, but this isn't one of those areas (most of the time).

[dancj]

To the original question - No.

If you think people are less creative than they used to be then you're looking at the past through rose-tinted glasses.

[CliffHanger2]

Because once people figure out how to make money on a consistent basis that will stifle creativity. Corporations will invest in formulas or "hot" new properties that they think will make lots of money. They're less willing to take a chance on something new but the same thing goes with consumers. Once you get used to a brand you know what to expect your less likely to take a chance on something different and new.