Blog Post 8: Creative vs Original

In terms of the creativity/ originality requirment, I think that two works or subjects can be claimed to be relatively original as long as they posses a certain amount of differences. They can be very similar but as long as it's clear that the works are different then I feel that both can be called original.  As for my work in the class, I feel that isn't copyrightable. I'm just writing  down facts that I learned from my sources; my own conjecture doesn't change these facts and what these sources that I'm using are. I suppose if some part of my work were to be copyrighted it would be my own position that none of my sources really take because they were all created seperatly. My sources are about technology in astronomy. Some sources are about the pros of technology and some about the cons of it. None of my sources take my position that technology is largely positive but has it's drawbacks; that's the part I feel would be copyrighted. If someone just blatantly copied and pasted my work, I gotta say I would be pretty upset but I think I would get over it.


OK, now that the prompt questions are out of the way I want to get back to the idea of Creative vs Original. As an avid comic book fan, this sort of issue comes up when discussing certain characters and whether one company just ripped off the other's character. One of my favorite examples involves one of my favorite comic book characters: DEATHSTROKE!

DC's character Deathstroke is a mercenary named Slade WIlson who wears a sort of ninja mask, uses sords and guns, and is super-human. Marvel then created what is now one of their most popular characters; Deadpool. Deadpool is a mercenary named Wade Wilson who wears a sort of ninja mask, uses swords and guns, and is super-human. Based on the name alone, it's clear that Deadpool is based on Deathstroke, but between them they also share more than a few differences such as personalities and family relationships, and having more than one eye. The question is, is an unoriginal character unable to be a creative character? Speaking on the characters' differences, I personallysay no. The lesson in all this is that there's nothing new under the sun.

5 thoughts on “Blog Post 8: Creative vs Original”

  1. Two works that are similar in ideas have occurred a lot through media and entertainment as well as books. For my multimodal annotated bibliography and my literature review, the information that I incorporated into both papers was derived from other sources depicting other peoples’ ideas and quotes. Therefore I cannot copyright the information that I derived from these sources. Going back to the topic of the similarities in the ideas of some movies, characters, and books, this is completely okay and does not cause the new idea to lack originality if they possess a certain amount of differences, like you said. I really liked your example about the depiction of two characters that are very similar to one another. However, in my opinion, since both characters are very similar to one another in terms of physical appearance, marvel did lack some originality when creating the character Deadpool. Even though this character was unoriginal, I agree with the point that you made when you said that it does not lack creativity. Creativity can be expressed in many different ways, not only based on the physical appearance of the character.

  2. I like the pictures you used as it makes it so much easier to understand the difference between originality and creativity. As you said “there’s nothing new under the sun.” Most of us get inspiration from somewhere so originality may lack. However as Dr. Wharton said, if you have two books where you change the name of the characters and have some similarities or a sequel can be considered unoriginal but creative, so it could be protected under the Copyright Act.

  3. I agree, that if two things are similar to an extent then they can still be considered original, because even though they came from a big idea they still have their own set of originality and creativity. Sometimes an idea or a thing that is created is so good that some feel as if they have no choice but to take from that great idea.

  4. Copyright is so controversial right? You can have an idea put into words or a drawling and if it has a lot of view it is then your own. To me that is just weird. There is only so many ideas that people can come up with before they start becoming extremely similar, like the two characters you posted. But at the same time you do not spend time creating something just for some to use it as there own. I guess when work is based of another is where the difference lies though. Like with my own work I am doing, I some of my ideas do come from the research but some of it I don’t get from the research and happens to be in the research. I know I can not copyright it as my, I do not want to, but it was my own just used before by someone else.

  5. This was a very interesting perspective you brought upon me. I never saw the correlatation that creativity could have with being unoriginal and after reading through your post I do agree with you to a certain extent. Yes, with the character of Deadpool, he is similar to Deathstroke, yet a parody of him, which is where the creative side comes out through. But if everyone kept ripping off of everyone’s ideas and copyrights what actual creativity could come of that? So there are still questions to be addressed about the blurred line that separates creativity and originality.

Leave a Reply