And perhaps there is a difference between the beginner and the master, even if the rendered creative output are similar from the superficial experience of the art - and that is the intention and depth, and the context or the artist. That changes everything. i remember seeing an artist who used his entire arm to swing around and draw pircle circles, and people were awe inspired. but you can make an even more perfect circle with an animation program. but it wouldnt hae tha same depth. it dosnt have to do with the thing itself, but the underlying sturcutre and thought process
And also the professional artist - oing against the grain of his opponents - would face resistance, as he is questioning standard practces. This is what amateur , begineer musicians do too. they , without knowing it, break rules, they p;auy around the instrument, in a joyfuil like manner, without rules and constraints. Thus the innovator and amateur are also similar in some respects - the childlike exploration and the SOUND being the most important thing. The dismissal for rules and regulation. Those in between believe in the framework that has been established - and there is nothing wrong with it - it works, it is beautiful, and serves as the catalyst for immense potential itself,, and see everything outside of it is to dismiss it as dirt, as noise.
So the innovator must be careful, as to mnot come across as too much of a maverick, or else he will be considered to be an amateur. Thus playing in the system for the first few years is important. To show people that you can play the game, and then to step outside of it is one of the coolest things ever.
there is the existential idea of the buddist- he sees the mountain as a mountain, then sees mountain as not a mountain but empty entity, but after being enlightened he sees the mountain as mountain.
coming back full circle. something satirical but also mysteriousabout it.