I was concentrating on the verbal ‘Edit’ used in jimmy’s article when reading it. Rather than to answer for his questions, I wanted to ask for myself that how much I/we have missed my/our originality or properties by editing them with other things.
I guess that we have already performed digital handicraft based on cutting-edge technology environment since DWB, Bauhaus or even further. Information can be changed anytime, anywhere by designing its body. And also, we are going to edit our genome to make a kind of monster<?>. Is this might be Convergence Culture or Editing Culture?
We can see many synonyms of “Edit” in a thesaurus dictionary like revise, improve, correct, polish, adapt, rewrite, condense, redraft, and so on. I guess the synonyms are based on different background and culture. They could be different methods to organize the background and culture.
In my opinion, designing interaction is also to edit the interaction context between human being and computing environment. How do I edit the context? How do you edit it?
My incorrect<?>answer is that I am just trying to open my five modalities to this world in order to obtain many opportunities to be edited, losting my originality.
I am late .. sorry
Interaction Culture 
Permalink
I think there are some excellent questions in this post. What is the role of “editing” in creativity? We often think about creativity as something that happens from scratch–I start with a blank canvas and I mix colors, and then I paint on it. Or I start with an empty page and I start composing my novel on it. But increasingly, our creative acts are so supported by technological tools that we are doing “editing” as much as “creating from scratch.”
Does this diminish our creative achievements? Does it enable even greater creative achievements? How do we know?
Here again film theory could help us a lot. In addition to providing a detailed language describing how we set up shots–the camera, actors, and props–there is also a detailed language describing how we edit shots together. I read recently that the film Apocalypse Now had over 200 hours of original footage, which was edited down to the 2 hours that we see in the theatre. That’s a 100-1 ratio! Because there is so much meaning-making in editing, it clearly is a major aspect of creativity with film.
Permalink
By the way, what is “DWB”? Sorry I don’t know that term. 🙂
Permalink
Great insights, gimhyewon.
Some of the most original stuff out there is derrivative.