This notion gets thrown around about a lot lately and I think I just ultimately reject it flat out. Constraint leading to creativity is a cute sentiment you can spew as some “mature” observation, but a world where artists aren’t constrained is always better.
I’ll concede that budgetary limitations can lead to creativity that ultimately distinguishes a work and improves on it positively, but I won’t when it comes to content. An artist being able to express all of their idiosyncrasies in their work is and will always be better.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
I've only ever heard "constraint leading to creativity" in reference to natural constraints on the artist - the clay holding the sculpture within it, the paralysis of blank paper, creative uses of medium, etc - and I question why you're posting some literal who's pontificating as if it were broadly relevant.
Haven't watched the video, but it probably already makes this point, judging by the thumbnail - Bruce Timm is a prime example of how you're wrong. Whenever he does Batman stuff without censorship he just gets weirdly horny and it takes over the story he's trying to tell.
There's also George Lucas who had complete control and a practically unlimited budget for the Star Wars prequels and they sucked ass (unless you're a zoomer who thinks they're good)
As an artist myself I have experienced firsthand how limitations make me focus and forces me to come up with ideas I wouldn't normally have considered
The quality of Lucas' films seems directly proportionate to the involvement of his first wife, that's probably a case of creative collaboration more than censorship.
A person slapping sense into Lucas and telling him when an idea is stupid is the limitation. The point is, Lucas without anything to hold him back is awful.
That’s a myth anon. It’s a common myth, so I don’t blame you for spreading it, but it’s a myth nonetheless
This is moronic and every fricking movie is "saved in the edit"
this shit is always moronic because the guy who directed ESB or Lucas' first wife never made anything as good as THX or American Graffiti. Why is it hard to believe Lucas had some good ideas but couldn't catch the same lightning in a bottle 15+ years later?
"Saved in the edit" is reddit fanfiction. The making of Star Wars is one the most documented movie productions across multiple books btw.
Did they document his private conversations with his wife, or is this an irrelevant aside?
's also George Lucas who had complete control and a practically unlimited budget for the Star Wars prequels and they sucked ass (unless you're a zoomer who thinks they're good)
]And yet, JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson had Disney breathing down their necks the whole time. How come the sequel trilogy aren't any more loved than the prequels.
In particular, look at how Disney utterly massacred Episode 9 by firing the original director and focus testing the fricking movie to oblivion.
Did tons of executives meddling and cooks in the kitchen make that a better movie than the prequels?
He didn’t get “weirdly horny”. Stop acting like the Bruce x Barbara thing was pulled out of his ass. It always was a thing, ever since Adam West. They only aged her down and aged up Dick so they could get rid of bawdfire by pairing Dick and Barbara.
The phrase "limitation leads to innovation" is more a comment on the industrial production side of things and not really found in art or storytelling. You... basically already stated this.
But I would also disagree with
>An artist being able to express all of their idiosyncrasies in their work is and will always be better.
Some artists have idiotic ideas and should be reigned in. If you have the freedom to spout every insipid thought in your head, you're going to spit out something stupid more often than not. This is why writing teams are not an inherently negative thing.
>As an artist myself I have experienced firsthand how limitations make me focus and forces me to come up with ideas I wouldn't normally have considered
>Some artists have idiotic ideas and should be reigned in. If you have the freedom to spout every insipid thought in your head, you're going to spit out something stupid more often than not. This is why writing teams are not an inherently negative thing.
I reject this idea flat out.
An example you always see is the shower scene in Psycho. Of course the editing to obscure the content while implying all of it is brilliant, but if there was no restraints—then Hitchwiener would have had it shot and edited in a equally but different brilliant way. He’s Hitchwiener.
Not true, just because something is coming out without restraint, it doesn’t mean it’ll be done better. For example, for KND, the 2x4 technology is iconic and creative, but it came from the constraint that they couldn’t go with their original idea of the equipment being high tech. Obviously it isn’t always the case, like in Spider-Man 3 with Sam reimi being forced to do things he didn’t want to, but constraints can lead to more creative, better art.
I’ll concede that budgetary limitations can lead to creativity that ultimately distinguishes a work and improves on it positively, but I won’t when it comes to content. An artist being able to express all of their idiosyncrasies in their work is and will always be better.
I won't give an inch towards people who want to censor or ruin artwork for not conforming to their ideals. There's far more examples of constraints leading to worse things than better.
>I reject this idea flat out.
Good for you. Now, how can I unsub from your shitty blog?
Tard wranglers are good thing
This. There have been plenty of examples of decent artists/writers who do something of lower quality as soon as they stop having someone oppose their shitty or crazier ideas. This isn't exclusive to the roles of business executives either, this kind of stuff is often done by writers/artists reigning in other writers/artists working on the same projects.
This and if you don't wrangle tards you get autistic fanfic shit like Come and Learn With Pibby
How about just no restrictions?
>but a world where artists aren’t constrained is always better.
That sounds all good and noble in theory, but down here in reality where we have writers and artists doing work for hire on comics and cartoons involving characters they didn't create and don't own, that are intended to be suitable for all ages, too many of those writers and artists tend to be morons, perverts or lefty activists who all need to be constantly tard wrangled to stop them ruining the product with their fetishes or obsessions.
It's situational. If you're independently creating your own comics or cartoons that you own all yourself, then you should have no restrictions other than the ones you impose on yourself, or the ones you choose to follow so your work can reach a wider audience. But if you're doing work for hire on a property you don't own, you need to be tard wrangled constantly for the good of the property, and nobody's been doing the tard wrangling very well in close to 20 years.
I disagree that a world where artists aren't constrained by restrictions is ALWAYS better.
I think what would be more fair to say is a great artist, is almost always hindered by restrictions because a great artist knows what they are doing and restrictions will constrain them from making good decisions; while a bad artist can be helped by restrictions because it could keep them from making bad decisions.
*Cough cough* George Lucas
To begin with, the entire notion of constraint leading to creativity comes from technological, financial, or time concerns leading to creative new solutions to realize a creative vision, not just finding the best compromise because you weren't allowed to fulfill that vision.
You are wrong OP, I will not elaborate.
Young Justice's very existence proves you wrong. The show was never great, but holy SHIT did the writing nosedive the moment they no longer had restraints.
This. Season 3 and Season 4 of that show made me gain a new appreciation for the restraints that I assume were in place during the first 2 seasons.
>artists without an editorial hand to rein them in are always better
lol absolutely not
Actually yes. Artists that are good will make good art with no constraints. This is a capitalist mindset. You only think good writing can come when corps have the reigns.
It's what happens when people have a cult following on characters and IPs over creators themselves. 90% of the hate for Bruce Timm comes from his name being attached to a grand total of 3 projects where it's implied Batgirl and Batman had a relationship they regret. That invalidates 35 years of work on an IP because it offends their sensibilities on those characters.
Controversial opinion, Nuance and Context matter.
There's a difference between censorship that can be cheated by working around it and censorship that can utterly gut the meaning of the show or stakes. Sometimes an artist will make the best of the situation or it'll completely redirect the trajectory of the work and create something nobody expected. But sometimes it'll just jam in or remove something that completely lessens the impact of the work, sometimes it'll just utterly destroy art for no reason other than to protect the sensibilities of people not interested in it.
For every Over the Edge fix, you have "replace all the guns in beware the Batman with technicolor laser guns because some homosexual shot up a Dark Knight screening"
Sometimes editors have good input and the collaboration makes a stronger work, sometimes editors don't and their input makes things worse. Censorship can't be automatically good or bad, though personally a softer hand is usually for the better because when you go overboard you're much more likely to snuff out creations in the cradle and have artists search for different avenues where they don't have to work under absurd confinements.
Censorship is bad in all cases.
That depends on what you qualify as censorship. Like having standards and editorial in some cases is definitely censorship but I'd personally not want the programming for my kids to have shit most consider reasonably inappropriate for them. I don't want that same censorship practiced on something not catered towards kids, but it doesn't change the fact that there's active restrictions on stuff for kids that I find reasonable. And again I can't deny that sometimes artists spin gold out of their restrictions.
This. I hate when gays like pic related complain about censorship in any form just because breasts aren’t in their face 24/7, and without considering the actual impact it has. Something like Fire force definitely needed more censorship/editing
I don't watch/read Fire Force. Why do you think it needed more censorship?
Because the constant fan service just got obnoxious and distracting, like an entire characters personality is just to show off her boobs. It’s frustrating to watch
Nah that sounds like unnecessary censorship.
Really? Go watch it then, it literally adds nothing
Well that's your opinion, like I said censorship needs a lighter hand. "I personally don't like fan service" isn't really grounds for censorship
It’s a widely held opinion and applies a lot to someone like tamaki, whose whole personality is fan service, leading to tired and unfunny scenarios where she’s stripped. Fan service is fine, I don’t care, it’s just that the execution and use is garbage, and editing out some scenes would’ve aided the story. The author even got so butthurt he created a straw man character to defend the fan service
I bet you support the censorship in the localized version of FE Engage too.
Lol what did they do, change some dialogue?
Removed any semblance of romantic implication from 90% of the S-support conversations, despite the fact that the player character himself is 17. God forbid a 17 year old have romantic dialogue with another character their age, but with a 40 year old man? Sure, no problem. What a joke.
The idea that artists shouldn't have creative freedom is one of the stupidest takes on art and entertainment I've ever seen and somehow everyone keeps treating it like common sense. How did this view become so mainstream? Is the rise of corporate franchises like the MCU to blame?
It's conformity being mistaken for maturity.
>The idea that artists shouldn't have creative freedom is one of the stupidest takes on art and entertainment I've ever seen and somehow everyone keeps treating it like common sense.
Because it is common sense when we're talking about people doing work for hire on properties they neither created nor own. The idea that they should have total creative freedom to do whatever they want with no limits and nobody to say "no" to them is insane, especially when you consider the absolute state of most of the writers and artists doing that work for hire, and their tendency towards doing inappropriate things in their work whenever they get the opportunity.
People here are trying to misrepresent this as an argument that creatives shouldn't have any creative freedom ever, when the conversation is really only about work for hire, not about creator-owned work where they can and should be able to do whatever they want.
I remember hearing that they couldn’t have people die so they used joker gas to permanently deform people instead and personally, I find that worse than death
iirc they always had Bruce make an antidote to Joker Gas in time. They killed quite a few characters off with Joker Gas in Mask of The Phantasm, but even then they retconned the butthole councilor as being fine in the weird season where everyone got a redesign.
I wouldn't be throwing any stones if I were you, Mr Glass Houses
If censorship was good for innovation then comicgays wouldn't constantly blame the CCA for kneecapping the industry.
There's a contrarian going around trying to convince gays that the CCA wasn't that bad/didn't really matter.
There's also morons constantly trying to claim it literally banned all comic genres except superheroes. We can't have a reasonable and well-informed discussion about the CCA here because of our autists.
Catwoman was wearing lingerie in the original pic.
Restraints on content can lead to better outcomes because it can curtail an artists worst habits and self indulgences.
Its a messy example but what do you think is better, the original scene in Jabbas Palace in Star Wars:Return of the Jedi, of the remade versions where George put in a whole CGI alien dance number.
Your life revolves around watching television for children. Get some sense.
You need a tard wrangler more than anyone, rapist.
You lack any metric at all.
Why should there be a metric? FCC shouldn't even be a thing.
https://twitter.com/DustinTheFella/status/1669409778395762690
It was true for regular show
A general example I guess is when writers started using swearing way too much in the dialogue.
But I guess a good artist wouldn't need constraints put on them to begin with, but again, most people aren't good artists.
>But I guess a good artist wouldn't need constraints put on them to begin with
Yeah and you can also add writers/artists should have self imposed rules for their creative work
Some/most don't have the sense to do so, which is why most need editors and such
W*st*rners have shown to require tardwrangling.
Not like japs, who never make anything moronic... lmao
Silence Westoid.
There is constant restraints then there's not giving a shit. Pic is the result of the latter.
People should've been allowed to die in BTAS. Joker should've killed. You're an idiot if you disagree.