Imitate. We are imperfect mirrors(sivers.org)
sivers.org
Imitate. We are imperfect mirrors
http://sivers.org/mirror
18 comments
Thanks for this. I hadn't heard the full quote before. People often quote the “great artists steal” line from him - including Steve Jobs - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU - but the fuller idea is much more interesting.
The "great artists steal" line comes not from Picasso but from T.S. Eliot. Lots of previous discussion about this:
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=picasso+eliot#!/comment/forever/0/... eliot
The line that elliots (not to be confused with T.S. Eliot!) quoted turns out to be authentic, though—or at least there's some evidence for it:
http://books.google.com/books?id=OJTKZeXaUvkC&lpg=PA53&dq=%2...
https://hn.algolia.com/?q=picasso+eliot#!/comment/forever/0/... eliot
The line that elliots (not to be confused with T.S. Eliot!) quoted turns out to be authentic, though—or at least there's some evidence for it:
http://books.google.com/books?id=OJTKZeXaUvkC&lpg=PA53&dq=%2...
[deleted]
Jobs copied it from Picasso who stole it from Eliot ;)
[deleted]
I've been learning music production. Do you know how? By creating copies of tracks that inspire me, from scratch.
I learnt how to program websites when I was 14. Do you know how? I copied a site a loved and made it my own, from scratch.
This is simply my favourite way of learning. Whenever I lack inspiration for something, I go copy, recreate, adjust. Because hey, at the end of the day, everything is a remix!
I learnt how to program websites when I was 14. Do you know how? I copied a site a loved and made it my own, from scratch.
This is simply my favourite way of learning. Whenever I lack inspiration for something, I go copy, recreate, adjust. Because hey, at the end of the day, everything is a remix!
To further your point, most people have probably heard this one already regarding Hunter S. Thompson.
> While working, he used a typewriter to copy F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby and Ernest Hemingway's A Farewell to Arms in order to learn about the writing styles of the authors.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_S._Thompson#Early_journa...
> While working, he used a typewriter to copy F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby and Ernest Hemingway's A Farewell to Arms in order to learn about the writing styles of the authors.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_S._Thompson#Early_journa...
Yes! That's where I got the idea from originally, it was mentioned in Kingdom of Fear, one of my favourite books by/about Hunter S. Thompson -- who is one of my all time favourite authors.
They really should teach this lesson to more people. It took me a very, very long time to learn it too.
What applications can you suggestion for music production?
* Scorewriter program like Sibelius, Finale?
* or a digital audio workstation like FL Studio, Cubase, Pro Tools?
Maybe someone also knows some good blogs, tutorials for beginners.
* Scorewriter program like Sibelius, Finale?
* or a digital audio workstation like FL Studio, Cubase, Pro Tools?
Maybe someone also knows some good blogs, tutorials for beginners.
Be wary of this. Electronic music is traditionally defined by the out-of-the-box workflow of the limited tools available. By extracting every last ounce of creative potential from a box that does 3 things. "Surrendering to the machine," if you will.
The unlimited potential of modern music software will cripple you, and the first step in this is the impossible choice of which software to use. It gets worse from there on out.
If you are already a musician then it makes sense to seek out the powerful tools which will allow you to implement your already fully-formed musical ideas. However, if you want to just create "electronic music," the way to do this is by trial and error, and extensive practice with one tool, which tool is not important.
Skrillex, Basic Channel etc did not come up with their distinctive sound palettes by imagining them in advance and then seeking out the "best" tools to implement them. They did it by turning all of the knobs on the 2 or 3 tools they had, plugging them all into each other backwards and upside down until a sound came out that they liked.
If you want to make "electronic music," that's how it's done. However hard you try and do it deliberately, you will eventually come back to letting the machine play its proper part.
The other universal truth is that when you discover how your favourite producer did something that sounds incredibly complex to you, it have been via an incredibly simple technique that they didn't really understand. "I just plugged the output back into the input, turned it up to 11 and that sound came out." They were able to discover this because they weren't worrying about tutorials and decisions, they were too busy turning it up to 11.
(Note that this is what guitar/piano/etc musicians have been doing for centuries, because they had no choice. How much great music do you think beethoven would have written if he'd had to choose from 10,000 pianos? Would the music that he did write be better or worse?)
EDIT: so, practical advice: try some tools. As soon as you find a small set of tools which you find intuitive, stop looking for more. Use the tools intensively until you have pretty much exhausted them, or got really bored. By then you should be pretty accomplished, so the search for new tools will no longer be painful and limiting, but fun and empowering.
If you're brave, choose a software package at random. Or go to your local pawn shop, buy the first piece of music gear that catches your eye, and force yourself to write 10 tracks with it and only it, no matter how pitiful it might be.
The unlimited potential of modern music software will cripple you, and the first step in this is the impossible choice of which software to use. It gets worse from there on out.
If you are already a musician then it makes sense to seek out the powerful tools which will allow you to implement your already fully-formed musical ideas. However, if you want to just create "electronic music," the way to do this is by trial and error, and extensive practice with one tool, which tool is not important.
Skrillex, Basic Channel etc did not come up with their distinctive sound palettes by imagining them in advance and then seeking out the "best" tools to implement them. They did it by turning all of the knobs on the 2 or 3 tools they had, plugging them all into each other backwards and upside down until a sound came out that they liked.
If you want to make "electronic music," that's how it's done. However hard you try and do it deliberately, you will eventually come back to letting the machine play its proper part.
The other universal truth is that when you discover how your favourite producer did something that sounds incredibly complex to you, it have been via an incredibly simple technique that they didn't really understand. "I just plugged the output back into the input, turned it up to 11 and that sound came out." They were able to discover this because they weren't worrying about tutorials and decisions, they were too busy turning it up to 11.
(Note that this is what guitar/piano/etc musicians have been doing for centuries, because they had no choice. How much great music do you think beethoven would have written if he'd had to choose from 10,000 pianos? Would the music that he did write be better or worse?)
EDIT: so, practical advice: try some tools. As soon as you find a small set of tools which you find intuitive, stop looking for more. Use the tools intensively until you have pretty much exhausted them, or got really bored. By then you should be pretty accomplished, so the search for new tools will no longer be painful and limiting, but fun and empowering.
If you're brave, choose a software package at random. Or go to your local pawn shop, buy the first piece of music gear that catches your eye, and force yourself to write 10 tracks with it and only it, no matter how pitiful it might be.
Thank you for the long and very good post!
I am still searching for a tool that doesn't limit me. I went from experiments with Reaktor and FruityLoops 3 (~ 10 years ago) to MIDI and score editors with virtual instruments. But that was the wrong direction.
Things have apparently improved and there are now professional tools available for Windows. I already played around with a virtual Swarmatron and reproduced sounds like in Social Network and the iconic THX sound. And I will simply try some tools and choose the one with the best interface :)
I am still searching for a tool that doesn't limit me. I went from experiments with Reaktor and FruityLoops 3 (~ 10 years ago) to MIDI and score editors with virtual instruments. But that was the wrong direction.
Things have apparently improved and there are now professional tools available for Windows. I already played around with a virtual Swarmatron and reproduced sounds like in Social Network and the iconic THX sound. And I will simply try some tools and choose the one with the best interface :)
What a great post, please share it with more people. I agree 100%.
FL Studio is great, although I learnt with Adobe Audition -- though, I learnt when it was called Cool Edit Pro, heh. FL is what my brother and I use to produce our tracks nowadays, and I master them (and built sounds and synths) in REAPER on my Mac. I build beats in Hydrogen, and sometimes I play around with LMMS on my *nix laptop!
In terms of tutorials, honestly, YouTube was enough for the basics, and from that I just started trying to copy other songs. Hope that helps at all!
In terms of tutorials, honestly, YouTube was enough for the basics, and from that I just started trying to copy other songs. Hope that helps at all!
Thanks. I went the opposite direction. More then ten years ago I tried out FruityLoops 3 (now called FL Studio). There was no YouTube so I was on my own. I created some cool things using the demo loops and effects but the MIDI editor was very limited.
I used other more advanced MIDI (score) tools with virtual instruments working. But this was a roadblock as you can only compose boring last century style music there.
I did some research today, and I will try out FL Studio, Pro Tools, Cubase and Reaper. Hopefully there is one that has an intuitive interface.
I used other more advanced MIDI (score) tools with virtual instruments working. But this was a roadblock as you can only compose boring last century style music there.
I did some research today, and I will try out FL Studio, Pro Tools, Cubase and Reaper. Hopefully there is one that has an intuitive interface.
Most of my best ideas come from misunderstanding other ideas.
One thing I'd add to this: Replicate work that you respect and appreciate, not work that seems to be successful. To me, that's the difference between copying and stealing in the often-quoted "Great artists steal..." line.
One thing I'd add to this: Replicate work that you respect and appreciate, not work that seems to be successful. To me, that's the difference between copying and stealing in the often-quoted "Great artists steal..." line.
This reminds me an amazing quote by Jim Jarmush:
Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: “It’s not where you take things from - it’s where you take them to.
Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: “It’s not where you take things from - it’s where you take them to.
I love this! When learning to program, I wrote a clone of a basic java game by Notch:
Mine: http://codelucas.com/pages/island-overlord.html His: https://mojang.com/notch/ld12/breaking/
The code: Mine: https://github.com/codelucas/islandoverlord His: https://mojang.com/notch/ld12/breaking/BreakingTheTower.zip
I also "cloned" a well known python article extraction library (goose) on Github with my own api & new functionality and my repo ended up doing super well (even better than the original).
https://github.com/codelucas/newspaper vs. https://github.com/grangier/python-goose
Mine: http://codelucas.com/pages/island-overlord.html His: https://mojang.com/notch/ld12/breaking/
The code: Mine: https://github.com/codelucas/islandoverlord His: https://mojang.com/notch/ld12/breaking/BreakingTheTower.zip
I also "cloned" a well known python article extraction library (goose) on Github with my own api & new functionality and my repo ended up doing super well (even better than the original).
https://github.com/codelucas/newspaper vs. https://github.com/grangier/python-goose
I recommend reading Austin Kleon's 'Steal Like an Artist' for a more thorough discussion: http://amzn.com/B0074QGGK6
I stole an idea for a game which has yet to be implemented by the person who briefly mentioned it a couple years ago. It inspired me, and because the idea was not some highly detailed plan, I know my conception of it will be completely different from that of the original idea-haver.
People talk about idea vs. implementation, but the missing component is the vision that drives and expands that initial idea. That's obviously true in anything related to creative work, but I think it holds true almost everywhere, except in utterly trivial cases.
People talk about idea vs. implementation, but the missing component is the vision that drives and expands that initial idea. That's obviously true in anything related to creative work, but I think it holds true almost everywhere, except in utterly trivial cases.
[deleted]
Not realizing this has hamstrung my thought process quite a bit. I've killed a lot of ideas because I felt they were too similar to others, but really, looking back, they weren't. Everything we do is derivative, even the things we consider original, as they're all built on a common scattershot mass of knowledge. If we all went to make something as simple as a shampoo bottle, we'd get a lot of different, completely unique concepts. This is worth remembering.
The obligatory Everything is a remix series:
http://everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/
http://everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/
Reminds me of a quote from one of the XXIst Century's great art intellectuals:
"All art is either plagiarism or revolution." --Shia LaBeouf
Seriously, though, when it comes to art and code I've always found a useful policy to be "find somebody good and do what they're doing". For example, ever since I first dug into NetBSD code I've found it written in an exemplary style of C, which I strive to imitate myself when I work in C. I may never get it just right, but it's made me a better C programmer than I was, or at least one with a clearer style.
"All art is either plagiarism or revolution." --Shia LaBeouf
Seriously, though, when it comes to art and code I've always found a useful policy to be "find somebody good and do what they're doing". For example, ever since I first dug into NetBSD code I've found it written in an exemplary style of C, which I strive to imitate myself when I work in C. I may never get it just right, but it's made me a better C programmer than I was, or at least one with a clearer style.
I've seen this work in a limited scale in my own venture. I started an lsat prep website, http://lsathacks.com
Almost everything about the site was inspired by reference examples within the industry. And yet the site is unique, because I have my own take on things. I saw the principles underlying various sites, and redid them in my own style.
It's still early days, but initial results are positive. I'd have gotten nowhere if I stubbornly insisted on only original ideas.
Almost everything about the site was inspired by reference examples within the industry. And yet the site is unique, because I have my own take on things. I saw the principles underlying various sites, and redid them in my own style.
It's still early days, but initial results are positive. I'd have gotten nowhere if I stubbornly insisted on only original ideas.
Correct URL is http://lsathacks.com/
Oops, thanks. Wrote the original on my phone, fixed it
I agree. This is why all my personal source code is open, and why I think all the copyrights and what not potentially do the human race more of a disservice than they help.
When stuck in a design rut, try copying something else. Where you end up will generally look nothing like the original. Sometimes you just need the push.
Yep.
Several of my most successful films have come from explicitly attempting to imitate someone else's style.
And I've never once had anyone accuse me of copying - indeed, I'm not sure anyone has ever realised that I was riffing on another filmmaker without me explaining it beforehand.
Several of my most successful films have come from explicitly attempting to imitate someone else's style.
And I've never once had anyone accuse me of copying - indeed, I'm not sure anyone has ever realised that I was riffing on another filmmaker without me explaining it beforehand.
I fear most of you will take this advice the wrong way.
We all know that nothing's completely original. You shouldn't be reinventing the wheel with every program you write. But follow this advice too closely and you'll end up with a clone. A program with all the good qualities of its predecessor, and all the flaws too.
Your clone will be competing with other clones for control of the market. And so long as you're competing on the same turf, you'll be at a disadvantage. Big established companies rule the market for time tested software. Their program came out before your clone, and they've had lots of time to grow their business. They have a bigger research budget than you, and a bigger marketing department.
Besides, everybody already uses their product. You ever hear of network effects?
Start with something that's been done before. But take it somewhere new. Find an emerging market for an established technology. One the big players ignore. Historically, that's where startups have had the advantage.
We all know that nothing's completely original. You shouldn't be reinventing the wheel with every program you write. But follow this advice too closely and you'll end up with a clone. A program with all the good qualities of its predecessor, and all the flaws too.
Your clone will be competing with other clones for control of the market. And so long as you're competing on the same turf, you'll be at a disadvantage. Big established companies rule the market for time tested software. Their program came out before your clone, and they've had lots of time to grow their business. They have a bigger research budget than you, and a bigger marketing department.
Besides, everybody already uses their product. You ever hear of network effects?
Start with something that's been done before. But take it somewhere new. Find an emerging market for an established technology. One the big players ignore. Historically, that's where startups have had the advantage.
I think author should stop reading "The Chronicles of Amber" for a while :)
Zynga lives by this advice :)
They tend to be 'perfect mirrors' though. I have heard stories about flash and android games being de-compiled to "mirror" the code and visual/sound assets as well. AFAIK it's called "respectful borrowing".
"What does it mean for a painter to paint in the manner of So-and-So or to actually imitate someone else? What's wrong with that? On the contrary, it's a good idea. You should constantly try to paint like someone else. But the thing is, you can't! You would like to. You try. But it turns out to be a botch… And at the very moment you make a botch of it that you're yourself."