There seems to be this bias everywhere. That is, all clichés are bad. But are clichés really that big of a deal? I think not.
Sooner or later, everything is a cliché.
What is the word cliché even mean? If we study the etymology of the word cliché in French, it literally means copy, stereotype. The sound cliché is literally the sound of mechanical print clacking. Even a stereotype the notion of a copy.
But ultimately, everything is a copy. Even children are copies of their parents, with their DNA being reconfigured and tell the different ways. Even when I look at the face of Seneca, his nose and mouth is a copy of his moms, and his eyes and face is a copy of mine.
Iterations or simply slightly remixes copies
So what is our goal as artists, creators, and innovators? It isn’t to make totally brand new things, but rather, take what we’re given and slightly create it in different ways. To remix. To up cycle. Just lightly iterate on what has been done in the past.
If you think about biology, specifically human biology, no child is born totally carte blanche or a blank slate. Certainly their physiology in their morphological physical features is a copy of their parents. In certain imprinting of the personality I’m sure is also a copy and a subtle reconfiguration of their parents.
But this is where society is the most interesting human technology, because society and socialization is what reconfigures the personality of a child and human being.
Artistic or creative or photography clichés
There is this huge impediment to artists and photographers: that is, the fear of being cliché or creating a cliché photo. But why is it such a big deal? I don’t think it is. My theory is the anti-cliché sentiment is from overzealous artistic nerds who want to flex their art history prowess, rather than to truly judge the authenticity or the love imputed into an artwork.