Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal.
~ T. S. Eliot
Poetry, is basically the art of showing the world to the world, in ways that the world has neither seen nor been seen.
It’s not the art of creating a new look, poetry is the art of defining a new way to look.
If poetry is going to be the art of framing everyday actions into beautiful works of art – is the poet not much than a mere window?
To quote John Keats
A poet is the most unpoetical of any thing in existence.
Does a poet do nothing but allow us to see the world through their eyes and i’s ? Will they never be sources, but remain redundant as a mere viewing point? To quote yet another person (albeit fictional)
You’ve never been the most luminous of people, but as a conductor of light, you are unbeatable.
Coming back to the point in hand, can we accuse all poets(me included) of plagiarism?
(About that – there is this closely connected post of mine regarding Copy Pasting)
No offence, but we aren’t creating anything new; come to think of it, isn’t every single thing, every story, every “creation” you read in English – a simple rearrangement of 26 different letters? So, now the question arises:
Since every thought process of ours is actually put into our head by the outside world – aren’t all our stories & poems, which arise from these said thought processes, actually unoriginal in nature?
So. In short – would it be right in calling us creators, when we are merely imitators? Wouldn’t it be better if we are credited with something along the lines of imitator? But of course, our personal ego, that becomes so satisfied with the pride that we have produced a work of art worthy of appreciation would be quite deflated by the “i” word.
Now, the comments space is quite empty enough for your take on the subject. Feel free to let out whatever thoughts you had got from here.
P.S. Another quote that matches these are
Great minds think alike while fools thoughts seldom differ.