Every musician should watch this. This video deals with a particular six second clip of a drum beat from a song written decades ago, which is still very much in use today. Also it presents an thought provoking dilemma, what is originality? In art where every piece has either reality or another work as inspiration, how do we as artist claim authorship of our works? Does this right of authorship encompass keeping complete and exclusive rights to its use?
I'm not sure, I know as a artist that every piece of work one makes is a piece of an artist mind and self. To think that anyone else can just take that, which is part of me and claim it, drives my blood to boil. But then again as an artist I know that everything is fair game and inspiration should not be ignored for it is rare. Further more when most of these ownership uses surface is when a third party which has an economical interest in the artist work takes some sort of legal action.
This irritates me since big business should, always, as a rule of thumb keep its disgusting dirty clutches the hell away from art. For whenever art is capitalized on it loses all value. For art is a reflection of humanity, human nature, soul, emotion, and most of all human individuality. So to mass produce it kills the essence and the art itself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This video really made me think on a number of topics. What stood out was the very strong organization and how it cleanly led watchers from the opening introduction of the beat, to demonstrating the number of songs it had been in, and made us think for ourselves of just how many songs are based off of other songs or artists work? How much truly unique art or creative work is there out there? The more I think on it, the more pieces in any media seem to have been inspired by some other piece and resemble it, but did not copy the original directly. Isn't this the nature of art, to start from some other work or idea and stretch to something new and unique? So why do people become so jealously guarding of every idea, every nuance of their work, when they probably were just as inspired by someone else?
ReplyDeleteWell, my definition of art is taking some media and presenting it in such a manner so that it expresses your self or maybe a concept you as an artist wanted to get across. Art though just as English has its own sort of grammar. You have rules so that the person viewing your work will understand it and so that the work itself will be pleasing to the eye. Color theory, spatial organization ect.
ReplyDeleteMusic has even more defined rules in music theory and its more than all others in the sense that one cannot make music outside those rules. there's no such thing as abstract music that would just be noise. It is very hard to be original and make a harmonious sounding song. At some point we as humans came up with every combination of sounds.
Now artists feel that there is no longer a way of making new sounds. Rather taking old sounds and rearranging them in such a way to achieve their artist representation. This naturally cause a great conflict since the person who made it did not want his art to represent anything else but what he originally had in mind.