A question of Originality

Originality is a complex issue in this age of postmodernism, irony and intentional pastiche. Culture seems to be divided into two camps: those for whom "uniqueness" is the ultimate goal of any creative endeavour, and those who believe, like M.C. Escher, that "Originality is merely an illusion". Some might even say that all the big ideas and universal human themes were recognised by the Greeks 3,000 years ago and western culture has been rehashing them ever since, albeit in different forms and with more and more advanced technology.
What does it mean for a work of art/literature/invention to be "original", anyway? Does it even matter? Painters of old concentrated on making their works conform to their audience's requirements - they were mainly concerned with technical proficiency and "correctness", not with cultivating a unique, personal style which would make their work stand out. Individualism is a relatively new concept born of contemporary occidental culture.
Even so, in today's field of modern design, and in this era of communication, it is rare to meet an artist who denies any outside influence whatsoever. In the 18th century, Benjamin Franklin rather cynically claimed that "Originality is the art of concealing your sources", but modern culture frequently recognises and even celebrates the inescapable presence of all that has come before. A designer/writer/whatever may pay homage to his influences directly or in more subtle ways. "Don't be afraid to borrow", wrote John Sloan in "The Gist of Art" (London: Dover Publications, 1977), adding, "Assimilate all you can from tradition and then say things in your own way". For those who subscribe to this school of thought, it is important to have a knowledge of old conventions before we can establish our own language. As Robert Henri wrote in "The Art Spirit" (Westview Press, 1984), "All the past can help you".

All the ideas I've explored so far are developed on the assumption that we look outward for inspiration, not within. But where do ideas come from, anyway? The current popular cultural emphasis is on individual psychology, with the assumption that our minds exist as personal, closed-off units. We say things like, "MY idea", "HIS work", believing the output of our psyche to be our own personal property. However, thinking about creativity through the theory of the "Collective Unconscious" (a term of psychology originally coined by Carl Jung) may bring even these basic assumptions into question. According to this idea, there exists a consciousness shared by everyone living now and everyone who has ever lived. It is "a reservoir of the experiences of our species".
Carl Jung believed that this universal mind is part of the reason why many cultures have the same characters and themes in their mythology despite being geographically isolated from one another. It may also be applied to the language of dreams: why do the same images occur in so many people's dreams which are not present in their waking reality?
So, going along with this theory, if we all share the same mind (or "Noosphere" - check out the Wikipedia entry for a nice description of this complex concept), is there really such a thing as an "original idea"? I doubt we will ever be able to say for sure how creativity comes about, but personally I suspect that originality does exist, yet not in the basic sense that we currently perceive it. Maybe if we relaxed our attitude to the "ownership" of our ideas we would open ourselves up to more exciting, distinctive yet universal concepts and images. Possibly.