[ad_1]
Considered the creative writing class at Stanford focused on science fiction.
As a non-religious person, I’ve written quite a bit of science fiction that blends the religious beliefs of my characters and society at large into the fray of plot and genre. I find this to be a nice way to teach the reader to think in “what if” and question their own belief system. A strongly devout religious person will surely come to the same conclusion, maybe someone on the fence could be reached and to a non-believer, well heck I’m just writing to the chorus so to speak.
Back then, there was an interesting video posted on YouTube titled; “Getting Creative” in which the professor explains a class he teaches. In the YouTube video the description explains; “The opportunities for students to be creative outside of art classes are few. In Professor Hester Gelber’s class, students pursue religious studies by creating their own short stories. They read science fiction and fantasy novels to explore our vision modern day of religion”.
This is an interesting concept, for example consider L. Ron Hubbard, the science fiction writer and creator of Scientology (a religion now with millions of followers, including a very famous actor – Tom Cruise). Obviously, his writings were inspired by religion, how it worked, why it worked, and the flaws he saw in it, as well as contradictions with modern science, especially if you try to evaluate these older religions through their literal and literal interpretation .
I wonder with the PC (politically correct) shift of professors, if a student who is less than PC or SC (socially correct) could expect to get a decent grade? I’m somewhat disturbed by her willingness to project her views even in this video. After all, true creativity would be a divergence from current society, otherwise it is imitating the current paradigm and taking current trends and focusing them forward.
Many of the science fiction writers of the past were completely critical of their time or the perception of the era in which they lived. Can this professor be impartial in his evaluation? I wonder, even if it helps the student think things through, so inherently, meaningfully or otherwise, the student imagines the future or the professor’s opinions. I think true creativity and pushing the envelope of society, has to shake it to the core, therefore, trend lines today have to be shown for their errors in many respects. See my points?
Is it really creativity to bring up the same arguments about religion over and over again? Not really, is my answer. Will these students invent new genres as they learn to be creative using this methodology? Maybe, but probably not, what do you think?