I think it is important to start out by acknowledging that without open source, this class (Remix Culture) and therefore this blog, would not be written today. Remixing would not be acknowledged as a practice, even though the practice of remixing has taken place (arguably) since the beginning of time. From one idea comes another, comes another, and another, and another all building off of each other, mutating and forming into different/better/new things. This is where “open content” comes into play. “Open content describes thus any kind of creative work, or content, published under an open content license that explicitly allows copying and modifying of its information by anyone, not excessively by a single organization, firm or individual,” (Wikipedia). When asked why anyone might want to copy or modify original information, we look to the past. As stated previously, it is easy to find glitches within information (facts, architecture, science, etc...) that you believe could be made better, newer, or just different. When thinking why I personally might want to change pre-existing information, the main reason I came up with, was to gain a clearer understanding of that information.
I am a studio art major (though I am most interested in the creative/artsy side of advertising more than anything else), and sometimes I believe this puts me at a disadvantage. I have truly come to appreciate art, but since this is not my first passion, I have a hard time (as most people I suspect do) understanding where artist’s are coming from, and thus fall flat on the works purpose and meaning. For instance, I have always thought Henri Matisse’s painting have been unexplainable beautiful. The bright colors and loose brush strokes have always appealed to my eye, yet I have never really been able to explain why. I suppose most people might feel that way about paintings - and thus it is important to give it your own meaning.
Last semester in my Digital Art 1 class, we were told to choose a work of art, and remix it into our own. I chose Matisse’s “Odalisque”. I have no idea what Matisse was thinking or feeling when he painted this, but when I remixed it in order to apply to my own life, giving it my own special meaning, the painting finally made sense to me. It is like Umberto Eco says in The Poetics of the Open Work, “A work in this sense is undoubtably endowed with a measure of ‘openness.’ The reader of the text knows that every sentence and every trope is ‘open’ to a multiplicity of meanings which he must hunt for and find.”
This idea of remixing in order to understand, leaves people feeling content. After last classes discussion on “Towards A Philosophy of Photography” by Vilem Flusser, I have become confident that remixing and open content are ways of controlling the “apparatus.” The apparatus, without understanding, leaves you on the outside looking in; you are surrounded by ideas, art, inventions, etc., but without understanding, there is no way of interpreting what’s going on, and thus the viewer cannot make sense of it. And what is the point in creating anything if no one can understand it?
Take the sayings “ditto” and “right back at ya” for instance. The saying “ditto” is the apparatus, and the “right back at ya” is another way of phrasing/interpreting/making sense of the apparatus. With this new understanding you can make sense of the original saying. What is so important about this, is the freedom you gain, (this goes for any “apparatus” situation).
I know there is plenty about open content that I have not even thought to cover, so it is hard to give a 100% stance on whether or not I believe there is a need for “free culture.” As far as what I have touched on I think there should be. It is important to remix as a way of understanding, and with or without permission varying forms of this are going to continue, purposefully and unconsciously. I will say however, that I do believe there should be some balance in protecting an artist’s labor. I am not sure where the balance would be because I am sure every artist has a different opinion on this - it is hard to say. Perhaps a good rule of thumb may be: it must be clear that the person remixing was ONLY remixing/post-producing/reconfiguring the original source material, and should give credit/acknowledge the original source, as not to steal.
No comments:
Post a Comment