Is it possible to have artistic creation without rejection of previous forms? It seems that that is all we ever learn about. The so-and-sos didn't like such-and-such, so in a bout of artistic rejection, they created this form. In Theatre History and Art History, this is all we ever hear, week after week. This form is a rejection of some previous form. If I create without rejecting something, then does my work come off as juvenile? "Well, obviously he hasn't been looking at what has been done before, because this is wholly new." "True true, if he had been looking at what has already been done, he would have rejected something by now instead of creating this unprecedentedly new work." I talk about this subject quite a bit, but it seems to me that that art and theatre can't be all about the rejection of previous forms. Or is this just the subjectivity of my professors? Or is it that something wholly new is still a rejection if you set out not to reject anything in particular. Have you, in essence, rejected everything? Perhaps only innocence can bring creation without rejection. Children don't set out to do this because they didn't like that. Children create out of love.