Reynolds 2-16-11

Debord & Bourriaud Blog

Social theorist and Situational International founder Guy-Ernst Debord’s heady and intellectual in depth essay Methods of Detournement was challenging. It was necessary to research his ideas to understand his theories. The dictionary defines Detournement as, “a variation on a previous media work, in which the newly created media work has a meaning antagonistic or antithetical to the original. The original work that is detourmed must be somewhat familiar to the target audience, so that it can appreciate the opposition of the new message. The artist making the variation can reuse only some of the characteristics of the originating work.” In English the word means “turnabout” or “derailment”. After reading this definition what came to mind first were memes and Culture jamming. Memes can be antagonist to their prototype and in a round about way socially motivating, but not always. Culture jamming is definitely derailing and cultural activism, and activism was precisely Debord’s goal. Debord’s Situationalist work is Marxesque and serious, with intent to wake-up the capitalist public from being duped by government or large corporations propaganda through their use of the “power of the image to persuade”. He felt as human beings and individuals we just watched these images of supposed truth as spectators, then as good consumers just swallowed. He felt that the obedient public, the spectators, should take “control of the images” and use them as a counterattack.

In his essay he defined the usage of minor detournements and deceptive detournements. Minor detournements are factors that are not necessarily considered important by themselves: press clippings or a picture taken from a camera however used in a new context they can be effective in changing peoples minds. Deceptive detournement utilizes already significant factors such a well know political text, famous art work or literature which become even more powerful in a new context.

Watching the black and white 1973 film clip of The Society of Spectacle was eerie and fascinating. It was strange to go back in time and feel the energy of the 70’s perspective. Listening to the French language lent it more authenticity. It seemed so automatized and stylized, at times staccato then flat. It felt unreal, superficial, and the essence of blind consumerism, the consumer is being consumed. You are what you eat, you are what you buy and its all twisted together to form another reality.

Postproduction. Culture as Screenplay: How Art Reprograms the World is an essay by French writer and curator Nicolas Bourriaud. Basically, Bourriaud’s essay is about remixing, alterations in multidisciplinary media. He says because of the tremendous amount of artistic material it is almost exponential as far as the creation of new media art. In this following website I found a very concise and easier to understand synthesis of some of his thoughts regarding Dadaism, Marxism and philosophy.

http://dada2data.blogspot.com/2008/01/nicolas-bourriaud-postproduction-page.html

He comments on the art of DJing and how the mixing of music is like the mixing of artistic expression.

Reynolds 2-9-10

According to Wikipedia and simplistically abbreviated by me, “open content” allows for an alternative to the use of copyright which translates to monopolies vs. a monopoly and the “democratization of knowledge.” “Open source” means “practices in production and development that promote access to the end product's source materials.

The advantage of an open source/open content approach for those who experiment with the art of remixing is having endless sources of material to tap from with reduced legal restrictions, at least at this point anyway. In many instances an abundance of wildly expressive creativity has been born, or should I say reborn? Remixing borrows, blends, adds, subtracts, and in the end the artist makes it his/her own. Is it appropriation, or does remixing create something brand new? Lawrence Lessing refers to remix culture as: “a rich, diverse outpouring of creativity based on creativity.”

http://www.oreillynet.com/policy/2005/02/24/lessig.html

Remixing is everywhere and the Internet has been a catalyst. It’s in all disciplines across the board and consumer culture seems to be eating it up. It wouldn’t be everywhere if people weren’t interested. Free culture is important to some extent, but in the big picture,there has to be a balance between protecting ones “original” creative output versus the “collective” freely accessible use of original work.

Umberto Eco wrote in “The Poetics of the Open Work,” “Openness is an interpretive freedom. Openness is a fundamental part of perception. We can observe and interpret, but essentially never exhaust.” http://www.altx.com/remix/eco.pdf. There does seem to be an inexhaustible supply of artistic remixed sites. In the first part of his article he talks about contemporary avant-garde pieces of music that differ from classical works by leaving considerable autonomy of the performer in the way he/she chooses to play the work. The following is an example of this as seen on YouTube, in b flat, http://inbflat.net/ “a collaborative music and spoken word project conceived by Darren Solomon from Sciece for Girls.” This site is a variety of people playing music from different mediums simultaneously resulting in an extraordinarily innovative and creative remix exemplifying Eco’s point above.

Yes, the idea of copyright and intellectual property becomes more obsolete in the digital/networking culture. It would be extremely difficult to fight intellectual property laws regarding cyberspace because part of the nature of digital technology is to remix and reconstruct existing art, and that it is itself, is a creative endeavor.

Like Lessig I believe that amateur remix free from regulation encourages inventiveness and innovation. Some of the rigid copy right laws need to be modified and changed in this new technological society. Intellectual property becomes somewhat blurred as well, and again in need of amendment and revision. However, it seems if an amateur remixed an original copy and started making money on this art work that the original creator should be monetarily compensated because the amateur is no longer an amateur.

I personally value the media art of Paul Miller’s AKA Spooky that Subliminal kid.

http://www.djspooky.com/ His website and his book is a perfect example of remixing at its best. His AKA Spooky that Subliminal Kid started out as a conceptual Art project. The name Spooky refers to the eerie sounds of hip-hop, technology, and ambient music, a style of instrumental music with electronic texture and no persistent beat -used to create a mood or atmosphere. He is a DJ and he writes about being a DJ. He writes like a DJ using mixing, remixing and sometimes scrambling to express his ideas about culture and digital art. In his work he asks questions evoking thoughts such as, “Who speaks through you?” “Who owns memory?” The final result of his remixing is unifying and it became and originally creative endeavor. At what risk? It’s questionable because it’s still a part of the philosophical debate.

I recently sampled and remixed source material from the general culture into an assignment that became an original. I remixed some of Yael Kanarek’s material from the “World of Awe” http://www.worldofawe.net/ in another class project with some of my personal and philosophical beliefs. My project in itself was original, but I also used her original work from the “World of Awe” to illustrate one my philosophical thoughts, which is a remix.

“The questions Umberto Eco raises, and the answers he suggests, are intertwined in the continuing debate on literature, art, and culture in general.” In other words, in all realms of culture everyone is remixing. Remixing is everywhere and it’s hard to discern where exactly the thread began.

Reynolds 2-2-11

http://jackiereynolds.com/flusserremix/