I’ve long thought the low-hanging fruit phenomenon applies to music. You can see it at work in the history of classical music. Starting with melodies (e.g. folk songs), breakthroughs particularly in harmony generated Renaissance music, Baroque, then Classical (meaning specifically Mozart etc.), then Romantic, then a modern cult of novelty produced a flurry of new styles from the turn of the 20th century (Impressionism onwards).
But by say 1980 it’s like everything had been tried, a lot of 20th century experimentation (viz. atonal) was a dead end as far as audiences were concerned, and since then it’s basically been tinkering around with the discoveries that have already been made.
If it is the case (and I think it is) that the invention of ‘common practice music’, i.e. tonal music with tunes & harmony, is actually a discovery of what humans like to hear, then there is a genuine limit on the number of tunes and chord progressions and rhythms possible, let alone good ones. (Cf the upper limit on the number of distinct flavours or colours, hence dishes or pictures.)
I suspect there is a similar story with novels. 20th century experimentation (stream of consciousness etc.) was a dead end, and it could well be we’ve already discovered broadly the optimum kind of novels that can be written. No doubt some great new ones will come along, some new genres, and occasional new Shakespeares, but basically it’s tinkering with an existing format—stories of a certain length with plots of various standard kinds about humans (or human-like characters).
Hence also film/TV (similar to novels). And no doubt the other art forms too.
Partly what I’m saying here is that the arts involve discoveries more than inventions: it’s discovering what humans are hard-wired (by evolution) to like. The element of culture/fashion is rather limited. Once you’ve made the key discoveries, you can still be creative by tinkering around (recombining elements etc.) but the scope is limited. Cf Damien Hirst said some years ago that all possible pictures [i.e. all significantly different kinds of picture] had already been made. And Edward Elgar made a similar observation a century ago about the limited number of different tunes you could make.
(PS If you think this is a pessimistic view, bear in mind that in your lifetime you won’t read even all the famous classic novels or hear all the highly-regarded pieces of music. So the fact there can’t be an infinite supply of future ones doesn’t matter. First go away and read all the books ever written, then I’ll listen when you complain there’s a finite limit on new ones.)
I’ve long thought the low-hanging fruit phenomenon applies to music. You can see it at work in the history of classical music. Starting with melodies (e.g. folk songs), breakthroughs particularly in harmony generated Renaissance music, Baroque, then Classical (meaning specifically Mozart etc.), then Romantic, then a modern cult of novelty produced a flurry of new styles from the turn of the 20th century (Impressionism onwards).
But by say 1980 it’s like everything had been tried, a lot of 20th century experimentation (viz. atonal) was a dead end as far as audiences were concerned, and since then it’s basically been tinkering around with the discoveries that have already been made.
If it is the case (and I think it is) that the invention of ‘common practice music’, i.e. tonal music with tunes & harmony, is actually a discovery of what humans like to hear, then there is a genuine limit on the number of tunes and chord progressions and rhythms possible, let alone good ones. (Cf the upper limit on the number of distinct flavours or colours, hence dishes or pictures.)
I suspect there is a similar story with novels. 20th century experimentation (stream of consciousness etc.) was a dead end, and it could well be we’ve already discovered broadly the optimum kind of novels that can be written. No doubt some great new ones will come along, some new genres, and occasional new Shakespeares, but basically it’s tinkering with an existing format—stories of a certain length with plots of various standard kinds about humans (or human-like characters).
Hence also film/TV (similar to novels). And no doubt the other art forms too.
Partly what I’m saying here is that the arts involve discoveries more than inventions: it’s discovering what humans are hard-wired (by evolution) to like. The element of culture/fashion is rather limited. Once you’ve made the key discoveries, you can still be creative by tinkering around (recombining elements etc.) but the scope is limited. Cf Damien Hirst said some years ago that all possible pictures [i.e. all significantly different kinds of picture] had already been made. And Edward Elgar made a similar observation a century ago about the limited number of different tunes you could make.
(PS If you think this is a pessimistic view, bear in mind that in your lifetime you won’t read even all the famous classic novels or hear all the highly-regarded pieces of music. So the fact there can’t be an infinite supply of future ones doesn’t matter. First go away and read all the books ever written, then I’ll listen when you complain there’s a finite limit on new ones.)