I found Ellen Dissanayake’s article to be extremely deep in concept and word, but comparatively shallow in fact and scientific proof, particularly concerning the origin of artistic impulses. She regularly observes evolution as the derivation of the entire human species. I will not make a speech in the name of Christianity or any other topics of spiritual nature, in order to avoid any indignation among readers, but I would like to make a small argument in the name of critical thinking. If humans did in fact originate from a process of evolution, then such a phenomenon should still be happening today. Instead we see distinct species of plants and animals, none of which can be naturally merged or morphed to create new species as depicted in the idea of evolution. However, everything must have an origin, which exposes a second omission in Dissanayake’s text. She repeatedly states that we need to “look inside ourselves” in order to find inspiration and identity, however, none of us have anything exclusively original to offer the world, and therefore, cannot really “create” anything. Each of us, from the moment we are born, are exposed to thousands of objects, people, ideas, and elements. We all interpret these in different ways, creating a distinction …show more content…
Art provides and outlet where we can spill our soul. It provides a relief from the world; a relief of anxiety, stress, or responsibility. If humans didn’t possess this ability to express themselves we would be completely overwhelmed and have no way to communicate. Speech in itself is a form of art. Creating and rearranging words to express feelings or opinions. If music, dancing, building, sewing, drawing, photography, poetry, literature, and talking were completely removed from humanity, evolution would be far easier to accept. If art did not exist, we would hardly have any distinction from animals at