An Artistic Remix

Paul “DJ Spooky” Miller, in his TEDxAustin talk, wants to help redefine traditional methods of creation and art for the digital age.  According to Miller, creation, and the formula behind it, is in the midst of a paradigm shift and has been for quite some time.  He proposes that this shift reflects widespread changes from an outdated model of mass production to a more modern one which he terms “mass customization.”  His idea behind mass customization stems from the availability of digital copies, something that reflects changes in the way artistic expression is approached and works are created — in his case, changes in the creation of music.  Having digital copies from countless different mediums, available at any given time, has changed the way that artists conceptualize creation and this, as a result, has popularized what many academics call the “remix culture”: an entire generation of emerging and established artists that create art by reworking older, established works and making them their own. However, to some this raises an important question: can something that borrows from something else, something that is remixed, still be original? Can it still be art? Before attempting to answer those questions, it’s helpful to understand what is meant by the word remix.

A remix, as explored by Lessig in his TED Talks “Reexamining the Remix,” is, at its essence, something that borrows from something older to create something new.  Contrary to my former understanding, a remix is not something limited strictly to music; remixes can be found almost everywhere. For example: in his talk, Lessig uses Walt Disney’s 1928 cartoon Steamboat Willie as an example of a remix, and shows us that the concept was originally from the silent film Steamboat Bill but had been reimagined using animation. Steamboat Willie is the first ever Mickey Mouse cartoon, without question a piece of art that introduced one of the most recognizable characters in the world—it was a remix. Lessig goes on to show a handful of Disney creations that follow this same method with equally successful results: taking a familiar concept and reworking it to create something new.  So, with a working definition of a remix in place (again: something created by borrowing from other sources), it’s now time to address the question of originality.

The idea of originality in artistic expression has turned into something of a target for my jaded generation, one that apathetically cries out on their collective Tumblr “why bother trying? Nothing is original anymore!” To an extent, they're correct: very few things are original; however, as Lessig points out, it’s not an isolated incident. Earlier in this entry I touched on Miller’s theory that our society is moving away from a culture of mass production, a cultural model, as Miller explains, which gave rise to Picasso, Andy Warhol, and other recognizable artists.  In this past model, the title of artist was given to the exalted few with enough talent to do a particular something (ie. paint, write, compose) well enough that people wanted to pay for it.  The rise of digital media has changed that.  Miller’s culture of mass customization is the proverbial nod to people that can create by “analyzing existing structures” and exploring them on a deeper level in an attempt to create an entirely new structure that can exist on its own.  The structures Miller refers to are creative works.  He’s saying that, within the current creative movement, artists are effectively exploring different ways to remix works and thus manage to create brilliant new works that still have a “trace or memory” of the previous, recognizable work.

It’s about time the definitions of creativity, originality, and art caught up to the current movement happening all around us.  If something so obviously remixed as Steamboat Willie can be called art, why can’t something a DJ engineers to be original be placed on the same pedestal? Why can't a videogame be considered art?  The idea of “scarcity versus ubiquity,” where a work's cultural value is defined by people’s access to it, is one that is losing traction as more people discover and accept the emerging mediums.  Older art will always be considered as such, but the digital generation needs to make sure that new  interpretations and forms of expression are always encouraged.

To conclude this blog post on a musical note, here is mashup artist Girl Talk who, in this clip, combines digital samples of Michael Jackson's 1992 hit "Remember The Time" with Daft Punk's 2013 song "Get Lucky":

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqY-6IBV1YM&w=560&h=315]

—Goodnight, folks!

In Defense of the (English) Major

source: forlackofabettercomic.com

You may not be aware of this but, English, as a major area of study, is under constant scrutiny from outsiders who believe that it's a waste of time and money.  At least once a week I am subject to a line of questioning that begins with my major and almost immediately ends or shifts to another topic.  The normal, “so what do you want to do with that degree?” question doesn’t seem to apply to those interested in studying English.  In a world full of technology, and a country full of capitalism, no one can seem comprehend why someone would want to devote their life to the study of books and essay writing. The reason that they can’t understand is because they have been misinformed. The major no longer begins and end with the pedagogical arts.  Nor does it rise and fall at the whim of the creative writers. Owing much to structural changes in outdated curriculums, English majors have now countless opportunities in front of them — far greater than most graduates from other areas of study— they just have to recognize and seize the opportunity from the competition.

Former National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) president Kathleen Blake Yancey first spoke of two major structural changes in English in 2005, during her presidential address at the CCCC, “Made Not Only in Words: Composition in a New Key.” In this address, Yancey stated that “literacy today is in the midst of a tectonic change.” The change referenced is an ongoing, systematic rewriting of how we think about the major, brought on by a re-envisioning of literacy to account for advances in communication technologies.  What this means is, unlike whatever graphs and marketing strategies business majors will forever be studying, English majors will now be specializing in the new, revised definition of literacy: a process involving the creation and conveyance of meaning. Yancey is talking about improving the flow of information in a technological society meaning. She’s addressing the refinement of communication techniques meaning. 

But she doesn’t stop there. Yancey is also advocating a new definition of composition–one for the twenty-first century that includes “[those who] compose words and images and create audio files on Web logs (blogs), in word processors, with video editors and Web editors and in e-mail and on presentation software and in instant messaging . . . in whatever genre will emerge in the next ten minutes.”  In short: if it is created, it should be considered composition and thus be included in the curriculum. Unlike the current model of composition (thankfully on its way out), Yancey’s master of composition will be a multi-headed beast who can tackle pen-and-paper assignments, emails, text messages, and a presentation all while correcting a coworker’s laughable grammatical errors (because who messes up their and there?).  All of this is good for marketability in a competitive world.  Think of it this way: where a business or history major may struggle with how to keep a complex proposal under 400 words, an English major has already submitted a succinct 399-word proposal-presentation hybrid to the boss on paper and backed it up with a digital copy, which was then emailed to all of the executives so the company could save money on prints. Wow, even I’m impressed by this renaissance man.

All of this isn’t to say we aren’t marketable in our current form.  In his Huffington Post article “Why I Hire English Majors,” author and small business expert Steve Strauss confesses that hiring English majors is something he loves to do.  He explains that they are “the type of teammate who can make us all better,” and goes on to say that “they are taught to think critically . . . they know how to think, to think for themselves, and how to analyze a problem,” whereas business majors are “preoccupied with theory . . . and doing it ‘right’.”

It’s great that English is finally getting some of the respect it deserves through modern revisions, but, until the day that those revisions are finally recognized, we shouldn’t sell ourselves short.  We are a group of intelligent individuals brought together by our love of the English language and our rise to power will mark a new era of intelligence throughout the world.