Early Chinese Art History
- Chinese Creativity? - Defending and expanding on Lederose’s thesis that Chinese creativity is an on-going process rather than a onetime even which differs to creativity conceiving by the West.
Introduction
In the book, Ten Thousand Things The author Lothar ledderose, argues that Chinese conceive of originality of creativity differ from that of the western. The western and Chinese arts have rather opposing traditions in regard to their creativity and representation of the world (Ledderose, 2000). While the western art creativity from the renaissance period in depicting the world has always held the central objective and concentration on salience regarding scenes and items, Chinese creativity is more focused on contextual information. The western art traditions that commenced with the influence of Genesis derived from the bible, which implying that creativity originates as a form of creation that involves the development from nothing driven by objectivity thus placing premium on such things that lead to the breaking of the created norms, overturned traditions and focus on uniqueness by creating and reaching points that no one has attained prior. On the other hand, according to Ledderose Chinese creativity traditions mainly asserts on gradual transformation (Ledderose, 2000). The emphasis of these traditions is based on evolutionary distinction where artists are focused on improving and furthering to the well accepted and popular artistic styles rather than creating new ones like the west in search of uniqueness. The Chinese approach mainly asserts on differentiation within a given genre or pattern. In this context, while the Chinese creativity is a progressive procedure the western one is a one-time thing. I agree with Ledderose’s thesis that the Chinese creativity originality differs with that of the west which seeks to create fresh patterns that are objected and seek to achieve differentiation via unique patterns while the Chinese one improves the existing styles but assert on differentiation.
Leddrose in his quest to demonstrate the gradual nature and the one-time artistic style utilized by Chinese artists and western based respectively focuses on discussing the development of art, images creation, themes design, originality and creativity of artists (Ledderose, 2000). It is through detailing this subjects that he does an appealing contribution to the Chinese artistic industry which has grown to place most of its concentration and effort to the issues of recognition, acceptance, historiography and socio-economic forces. Based on the authors emphasis on this differences the primary theme that he offers from the theory is related to the manner in which the creation and manipulation of the popular and accepted units in every aspect in art ranging from writing to paintings has enhanced the artists capability to high quantity production of art pieces in China thus shaping the state of Chinese thinking, creativity, and society in general. His argument is accounted as influential and yet contentious as he made a full comparison of the originality and creativity that of the western region (Keane, 2013).
Although, the western has acquired substantial success in their artistic venture in regard to the production of differentiated and unique artifacts the concentration of Chinese artists on improving popular and accepted art has influenced their ability to produce in large quantity while still adhering to differentiation (Keane, 2013). Chinese has not accomplished this by being unique rather by centering on what has already been established in the market. As shown by the Work Pan Tianshou (1897-1971) by a Chinese artist, Chinese are well known for their commendable art that is categorized as origin even though the ideas are mainly borrowed from the already existing materials (Chang, 2011). On the other hand, Ledderose’s thesis is accurate because the western is not the only objective in its arts but mainly assert on uniqueness which is achieved by reaching heights which have not been achieved before.
Chinese creativity is one that appears to be grounded in conventional Chinese calligraphy while that of the western region is more of abstract manifestation. This can best be demonstrated by the art of the modern artist Tian Wei Verde that was published in 2013 (Keane, 2013). Although her art is primarily driven by the western and Chinese influence it is easy to view the difference. The primary difference amid China’s art and the western one is grounded on conventional calligraphy. The Chinese based art is mainly driven by ideographic sense and over the centuries the artifacts have grown to fit more into abstraction. The Chinese artist's thinking and creative attempt to do mainly is to innovate as well as develop a differentiated manner of generalization. On the other hand, shifting to the western region the abstract expressionism that mainly became stringer from the 60s explains it all since the artistic energy is mainly in opposition of the western one which is well illustrated by Joan Miró (1893-1983) by a Spanish artist (Chang, 2011).
Western creativity mainly encourages realism and mastering of skills and concepts but the Chinese one relies on the influence of abstraction (Keane, 2013). The western style of art is mainly grounded in the real world based on everything that is happening, the freedom, oppositions, experiences, feelings and everything that one comes across (Keane, 2013). This incorporates honesty as art is personalized generally. However, for the Chinese art is basically differentiated from the ideas that are in the industry and have been accepted and embraced in general. The west and the Chinese creativity are rather two major different systems that are highly competitive. According to Dunhuang Frescos a Chinese based work, this difference is based on the gradual change concept that is utilized by Chinese artists that have slowly increased its capability to focus on mass production on the grounds of diversification (Keane, 2013).
To the western creativity is perceived as a form of skill that should be expressive of the real world while Chinese artists uphold on the general concepts of improving everything that is in existence (Justice, 2012). In that, the western follows a style that is more focused on adhering to certain trends due to the need of utilizing art as a means of expressing societal or an individual’s life. Chinese art is not one that is customized based on reality but based on the existing needs in the market. Chinese art creativity can be differentiated from the western generalization and expressionism via the incorporation of writing and focus on meaning. To the western language is particularly important and authoritative since it can be utilized in transmitting, precise communication and without its presence, the concepts and description can be misunderstood. Language primarily affects almost every characteristic of the artistic life ranging from written art to painting (Justice, 2012). In this context, it is worth noting that the western creativity focuses on the consistent search for the general meaning of art while focusing on the appearance, exposing the authority and replicating on the unseen (Keane, 2013).
Chinese calligraphy has over the centuries evolved rather gradually from a distinguishable system developed of graphic characters into characters abstraction that is being utilized today (Keane, 2013). Chinese creativity sense tends to be more influential based on Ledderose’s view which has been proven to be true as it is driven by language and differentiation. The western is mainly driven by 26 English alphabetic number while in Chinese there are thousands of characters which create the whole difference in regard to mass production (Chang, 2011). The western abstraction has not evolved because it is mainly based on consistent change. Rather than adding or adjusting to everything that is already in existence it is evident that the western mainly focuses on achieving rather new concepts that have not been achieved before by which is a form of searching uniqueness and differentiation simultaneously. From the western notion, abstraction is the primary means of developing art which seeks to emphasize that the viewers can easily recognize the intended message from the real life (Justice, 2012). The Chinese creativity has evolved up to modern abstraction which is utilized to triggering fresh concepts that are relevant although not easily visible. Chinese creativity is grounded on the need to consistently comprehend the hidden power that is related to artifacts on the ground of rhythm and attitude (Keane, 2013).
The western conceive creativity as a one-time thing and rarely focus on gradual growth and change. In that, while Chinese arts is developed from the existing concepts and ideas the western one is mainly grounded on the uniqueness that seeks to create customized pieces based on different thoughts (Tsao & Ames, 2011). This is usually the case because the focus is primarily on realism. Every artistic holds different views based on their differentiated experiences, knowledge, and skills which therefore fuels objection. In this context, it becomes rather evident that both artistic grounds are characterized by different based on their attitude and perception of creativity. While the western tend to encourage individuality and customization, the Chinese one mainly encourages change from what has been achieved. This has led to the consistent and gradual evolution of the conventional Chinese calligraphy (Tsao & Ames, 2011).
Ledderose utilizes Chinese writing and creative thinking as the standard for comprehending the logic behind modular systems while highlighting the Chinese language made of extensive characters each with a differentiated representation (Keane, 2013). He makes the assertion that the design of the current artistic system that mainly supports the production of distinguishable pieces in large quantities with a rather commendable dimension is the highest achievement that has occurred for the Chinese populace. In this context, the Chinese creativity is mainly driven by their capability to invent, draft and recognize the most accepted pieces through the organization of limited components as a way of standardizing its general production (Chang, 2011). In this context, it becomes clear that the west is mainly limited by its language borders and perception that tends to oppose gradual changes and evolution of its abstractive expressionism.
The stylishness and the inventiveness of Ledderose’s argument evoke mainly based on quality and the nature of Chinese thinking (Chang, 2011). The western is widely recognized for its differentiated development which is mainly focused on customized thinking while Chinese although being categorized under the originality category mainly depend on their potential to develop what has already been created. This to them is a form of the invention that assertions more on growth, diversity, and differentiation. The west mainly focuses on innovation and invention rather than the development of all that is in existence. This shows the two words differences. In that creativity to the west is not an evolution but is an aspect that it is to be utilized uniquely to represent the real world as a form of representation and expression (Pang, 2012).
Essential to the difference between Chinese and western creativity perception are the aspects of harmonization, expectedness, and standardization. These principles are mainly associated with the Chinese creativity (Pang, 2012). In other words, it is easy to predict art growth and change in the Chinese industry rather than that within the west region. Chinese artists mainly work in regard to creating standardized pieces that create a form of harmony. This means that although the creativity tends to be different it is mainly grounded some form of resemblance. This is the case since the development mainly grows from the ground that their creativity is gradual and similar. Harmony from the western region is not to be matched in particular because it is not harmonies as it expresses different subjects that relate directly to the real world in general. To predict the creativity of the west is not possible based on the assertion of customization and the need to reach levels that have not been attained before (Pang, 2012).
Chinese creativity is perceived as a collective measure that seeks to assert of standardization. These are not present in the west as creativity is conceived to be mainly acquired from reality as well as personal experiences. This trend has mainly facilitated the growth of mass production in the Chinese context (Keane, 2013). The western creativity takes time to develop and design substantial pieces which affect the capability to generate items in masses. In addition, even after the concepts are developed in general they are only utilized for a single time and gradual development. Chinese creativity is assumed to be a form of an army that works based on certain and specific aspects that mainly seek to grow the existing achievements. The Chinese production is mainly grounded on the conventional elements of architecture as something that evolves gradually. As demonstrates by leaders, China's art is mainly reliant on the replication of the modular pieces (Chang, 2011). Individuals mind plays a critical role in regard to creativity in China contrary to that of the west that is dependent on experiences, expressions, and reality.
In summing up, according to Ledderose calligraphy is the most valued art among Chinese artists which differs from the abstract expressionism from the west. In China, art is mainly driven by aesthetic ambition. This means that the thing that has the highest value the artist’s capability to overcome the limitation of art and invent unique, differentiated and acceptable pieces. This differs from the west based one that mainly focuses on standardization, and creativity uniformity through customization. While the Chinese creativity is gradual the west one transforms consistently based on artist’s experiences and realism.
References
Chang, C. (2011). Creativity and Taoism: A Study of Chinese Philosophy, Art and Poetry. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Justice, L. (2012). China's design revolution. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Keane, M. (2013). Creative Industries in China: Art, Design and Media. Hoboken: Wiley.
Ledderose, L. (2000). Ten thousand things: Module and mass production in Chinese art. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Pang, L. (2012). Creativity and its discontents: China's creative industries and intellectual property rights offenses. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Tsao, H., & Ames, R. T. (2011). Xu Bing and contemporary Chinese art: Cultural and philosophical reflections. Albany: State University of New York Press.
