Nancy Somners has stated in her works that she has used other people as like a crutch. In terms of editing and preparing speeches and papers, I don't believe she is alone in feeling that we do need the known approval of others for our work. As a result of such a need, our work tends to be just a cookie cutter product of the people around us.
We enter a paradox whenever we reach out of an existing meta. Take a common PC game League of Legends as an example.
If we follow the typical strategy and build for any game, the typical team will consist of 1 person in top lane, 1 person in mid lane, 1 person in the jungle, and 2 people in the bottom lane. The mid lane is always a magic-based champion. The top lane is always a strong melee champion. The bottom lane is always a ranged physical damage dealer with a good champion to support them. The support cannot get any farm from the minions. Any alteration from this pattern, and you will be raged at by the community. However, if the professionals do it at a tournament, then it's genius.
That's the trap we walk into. How can we experiment in the world where if the average being alters from the norm if we are the common man? How can we initiate change, or originality for that matter if this is the trap that we walk into?
No comments:
Post a Comment