In chapter 8 of Intelligence Reframed, Gardner talked about intelligence versus creativity. They are different. One can be intelligent but not necessarily creative. However, one who is intelligent can be creative because creative artwork has to be ?initially novel but is eventually accepted in one or more cultural settings? (p.116) and the acceptance has to be evaluated over time with many different experts. ???? This made me think about artists like Duchamp and Mondrian. Duchamp is the one who exhibited toilet as a piece of artwork. He also presented a bicycle wheel and a chair combined as a piece of artwork. Mondrian painted a bunch of lines and colors in rectangles. They challenged how people think about art and in general even till now. Those pieces convey messages to the viewer rather than providing pleasant scenery. In my art class, I ask my art students about their artwork. Students often tell me that they can do a better job. They might be true in terms of skill but I ask them ?what is the use if you paint exactly the same as Mondrian did if you are not the first one who painted that?? Then I ask them. ?What makes these artists famous?? ?If you were to paint a red dot in the middle of white canvas and present it in the world now, could you be famous as Mondrian?? They say ?no.? Their reasoning is this. Mondrian already presented realistic paintings and Duchamp already showed paintings that excel in skill before they presented something different to the world. People pay attention because people think that they are worth looking based on their previous achievement as a whole. Without foundation (which Gardner would say ?intelligence?), it is hard to determine creativity.