Rambling About Originality

They say no idea is original. All thoughts stem from other thoughts; all movements from other movements. They say that everything is only borrowed. All that was destined to be revolutionary has dawned, and is now only to be accepted. All that was destined to be discovered has been stumbled upon, and is now only to be understood. Trends are recycled and repeated. What is “in” now was “in” before and will be “in” again.

They tend to insult those willing morph what has been set in stone. They shower them with labels like “fraud,” and “copycat,” and “wannabe.” And if what they say is true--if our new ideas only imitate old ideas--then how does the human race move forward? Do we ever invent, or only improve upon? Do we think too highly of ourselves as creators; as artists? Are we not only thieves of artistry; of prior genius; of old news?

Is our improvement, enhancement, and innovation enough to pride ourselves on?

Short answer: Yes.

Innovation is what elevates us. Innovation is what keeps us moving, changing, growing, thinking--what makes us brilliant. Our genius lies in our ability to look at what exists and improve upon it, so that it better reflects the times and represents humanity in its modern state. Our changes, major or minute, are essential if we are to improve the quality of life. Our changes, major or minute, are what defines what it means to be alive and thinking in the 21st century.

It is not the duty of the artist to produce what is new and shiny, but to make useful, beautiful and seemingly new what has been in front of us the whole time. Value the remix, the edit, the afterthought, and the by-product. Originality, or creativity, is not the ability to see something that’s never been seen. It is rather the ability to see it differently.

An Extensive List of Pros and Cons to Being "That Writer Girl"

I have been frequently--way more often than I'm comfortable with--referred to as "that writer girl" by my peers.

"Aren't you that writer girl?"
"And then that writer girl said..."
"Ask that writer girl."

And considering the fact that I spend an overwhelming, and considerably unhealthy, time writing, this tag makes sense. A lot of people I'm around may not know me personally, but may know that I edit the school paper or ramble on this blog. I'm always talking about writing and writers. My hands are always stained black from ink. My passion is clear. So I'm not at all upset about the name, I actually think it's super cute when people refer to me as that, and my friends have a good time making fun of it. It's the connotations, implications, and tones associated with the name that's interesting to me. Sometimes they're positive, and sometimes they're negative. But they're always interesting. Needless to say, there are some pros and cons to living my daily life as "that writer girl."

PRO: People value your opinion.
CON: People value your opinion.

PRO: People consider you to be knowledgeable, unmistakably.
CON: People consider you to be knowledgeable, mistakenly.

PRO: People read your blog when you're talking about something important.
CON: People read your blog when you're just whining about Statistics.

PRO: People ask you questions which spark intellectual debate.
CON: People ask you questions which piss you off.

PRO: People think you're smarter than you are.
CON: People think you're dumber than you are.

PRO: Teachers expect you to do well on papers and essays.
CON: Teachers expect you to do well on papers and essays.

PRO: People think you're "insightful."
CON: People think you're "pretentious."

PRO: People want to hear what you have to say.
CON: People wish you'd just shut up.

PRO: People want your creative input or editorial hand.
CON: People ask you to edit they're college essay. (Error intended.)

PRO: People want to collaborate.
CON: People say they want to collaborate, but really just want you to do the work.

PRO: You meet new people on a regular basis.
CON: Some of those people you wish you hadn't met.

And so on, and so on. So yes, being "that writer girl" is both good and bad. But I can't say I don't love it.

Read "Overlooked" by Jaylin Paschal on ACEANI MICHELLE

I've written a fashion article. You read that correctly.

For a feature on the Aceani Michelle style blog and in the new fashion magazine, (DE-FI)ance, I was asked to explore the societal impact of style and fashion.

As I was feeling, honestly, a bit under qualified to write such an article, and was wandering beyond my comfort zone, the aspect of society I chose to write about was actually the aspect least like society: countercultures.

In this article I touch on how sub and countercultures have used style to send important messages in relation to the group's intentions, attitudes, and movements. I examine groups like the swinger's of the 1920's, the Black Panther Party, hippies, and the KKK in an attempt to demonstrate just how influential "a look" is on our social behaviors, lifestyle choices, and political ideals.

Check it out HERE on Aceani's blog. Be sure to read her posts, draw inspiration from her style, and be envious of the models lucky enough to wear her original designs.

Do Not Confuse the Discrimination of One Group for the "Freedom" of Another

If your religion, or any belief of yours, keeps you from doing your job, then you probably need a new job. There's a reason you won't find any Amish pilots. There's a reason vegans don't work as butchers. You won't find any nuns with part-time jobs at the gentlemen's club.

Certain values do not align with certain job descriptions, and so the two never meet.

But the thing is, job descriptions are subject to change as laws do; as times do. Specifically, jobs that work with one of the most relevant and dynamic aspects of American life: marriage.

If you are a Christian clerk, who is so against the gay marriage ruling that you are unable to do your job, you probably need a new job. The dynamics of your current position have changed, and it's time to move on to something more compatible with your lifestyle. This is in no way oppressing you, this is challenging you to serve the world in a way with which you are comfortable. You're no longer comfortable here. You're no longer willing, and therefore no longer capable, to perform the tasks for which you were hired.

Expecting people to do their job is not infringing upon religious freedom--mainly because it has nothing to do with it. The idea of being unable to serve someone because their own personal beliefs don't align with yours is not only totally idiotic, but also discriminatory. And, you know, therefore, illegal. And you cannot work for the public, yet disregard public policy that you don't like. You are disregarding our Supreme Court. You are breaking the law, and there are consequences.

So please, for the love of God (pun intended), stop making county clerk Kim Davis out to be a hero. Please understand that Jim Crow was once a hero too, for standing up for what he believed in. Please stop making this about anything but bigotry.

To call this a fight for religious freedom is to quite literally mock the First and Fourteenth amendments. Davis is not for religious freedom. She's for forcing people to live according to her own agenda. She's for spreading her own beliefs and disregarding everyone else's. She's only about your freedom to exercise religion, as long as it's hers too. It's beyond hypocritical--it's laughable. And by labeling her hateful fight as one for religious freedom, we're doing nothing but validating her nonsense.

How about Davis stops picking and choosing which aspects of her religious principles she'd like to follow and advocate for, and simply does the job she was paid to do?

What would have happened if Davis had married a gay couple? Would she then be gay, herself? Would she then be held accountable by God for the "disagreeable" actions of others? How would it have affected her in anyway but a paycheck? Imagine if vegetarian waiters refused to serve customers steak. Imagine if they somehow felt like they're right to not eat meat was infringed upon by someone else's right to enjoy it. Would we do anything but laugh at them?

And to those who believe the gay couples should have just traveled elsewhere to get married: you're missing the point. They should not have to. County clerks are elected in to serve the public. They did not choose her because they wanted her to lead them down the straight and narrow road to righteousness. That's not her job. Her job is to serve them.

Imagine all the groups who could potentially be oppressed if we allowed conservative Christians to discriminate like this: gay people, single mothers, the recently divorced, eaters of shellfish, anyone who practice any other religion, etc.

And lastly, please stop using your "religious beliefs" to justify bigotry. Beliefs can be homophobic. That's the nature of opinions. So yes, you're religious. But you're not in any way, shape, or form honoring God denying others their basic human rights.