and interdependent; they are practically synonymous. Culture is the
embodiment of the novelty of human life in all possible dimensions.
For example, we noted earlier that an author creates not only a work
but also a new alter ego and a new audience. If this novelty were to
stop, all the culture that has developed thus far would immediately
turn into forms of mere behavior and, as I said, essentially would
not differ from some complicated forms of animal life. Likewise, if
thinking were to stop, speech would lose any sense and would not
differ from animal communication.
We can summarize all the above in a paradoxical way (the only right way to do so): culture is the creation of culture.
One more fundamental dimension in the culture-creativity tandem bears repeating: author-to-audience relations. Remember, a single piece of art represents culture in general when it serves as a medium for dialogue, provoking an act of free human will when it is read, watched, listened to, empathized with, feared, thought of, discussed, etc. This means that culture presumes, encourages, promotes, develops, and depends upon a creative audience.
Who Owes Whom?
Creator and Audience
We remember that a work of art is a message, that it is a form of
communication. A work of art develops a new way of free human
communication or dialogue and vice versa. Dialogue is a creative
process. Many of us can recall times when ideas popped up in a
friendly conversation or in an unfriendly quarrel totally unexpectedly,
out of nothing. The question is: Who owes whom in that case? The
same thing happens in inner dialogue, whether a person is arguing
with oneself, or with another person in one's mind. And the same
question pertains to that case: Who owes whom?
The fact that thinking is actually a dialogue is especially evident when an outer conversation transitions into an inner one. Two people may have a conversation or an argument and continue pondering it long after the conversation is over. They continue discussing and arguing
