Page:Culture.vs.Copyright 01.pdf/43

 with their absent opponents; however, if we observe them, we can see that they are actually talking to themselves. Who owes whom in this case?

This is what happens with a creator. His inner and outer interlocutors are always clandestine coauthors in any work of art. Once more, who owes whom?

The author is as much a contributor as a recipient in both the outer and inner dialogues. In fact, the hidden interlocutor is representative of the audience in general. The author and the audience have equal positions in the creation of the artwork. The more creative a work is, the more it implements others’ ideas. Over and over—who owes whom? Each owes the other.

Creator and Culture So mankind and the creator are on par. This means the creator and culture are on par, and this tells us something about both.

Richness of culture is not measured by the quantity of the works produced. On the contrary, it is first and foremost measured by the different voices presented. This is an obvious assertion now, based on the fact that the universal mechanism in the development of culture is dialogue. Interlocutors bearing different views have something to tell each other and, in doing so, develop their views. For example, it was crucial for the Antiquity to produce Plato and Aristotle, who were radically different in their approaches to philosophy. Because of this difference, they caused tremendous advancement in the ancient Greek and other cultures. Naturally, it would not be nearly as beneficial to the development of culture if there were many “Platos” and no Aristotle.

On the other hand, if they are so tremendously different, what does it mean that their contributions belong to the same culture? We have encountered this paradox a few times already. We know that there are some ideas and thought patterns that are specific to a certain culture. We also know that these ideas are represented by works within this culture. However, we know that these ideas do not coincide with these works. In Antiquity, for example, we can point out one such mainstream idea or thought pattern: “What is true? That which is beautiful. What is