Reynolds 3-2-11 (Wed)

My theory on remixing is that it is a technological method and medium for “sampling,” “re-pairing,” “blending,” and “recontextualizing,” cultural images, music, literature, belief, concepts, visual art, and thoughts into new forms, based on the personal preferences of the mixer. Cultural pattens, both past and present, have a subliminal and universal connection conveyed on the global sea of collective unconsciousness and now they are also carried via technology, the Internet.

Paul Miller , Dj Spooky, AKA that Subliminal Kid uses the art of DJing in his book Rhythm Science as a means of communicating his cultural ideas and issues regarding remixing in this digital age. Technology is the instrument and the vast and almost limitless information and choices on the web can be altered or added to by any artist’s design. Spooky considers literature, digital art, and music, out pourings of interpersonal interaction and cultural multiplex. In his book he sites many sources of classic and definitive artistic and philosophical works, and personal heros that have influenced his theory of remixing. His CD, a musical remix prototype is comprehensive, it captures the essence of multiplicity of sound, thought, and feeling.

There are themes and issues that arise over theories of remixing. Again, Miller directly and sometimes indirectly folds and recontextualizing these themes and issues into a remix. One basic and controversial theme of remixing that Miller addresses is that of “Who owns memory?” We all own our own memory but we share thoughts and build on others ideas, adding too and taking away. Our cells are filled with retrievable feelings that are the same feelings or thoughts others have but because we are unique we put our own spin on it, we add individual genetic and conceptual responses to create a new memory. “How does property intervene in the flow of information between the material and the ethereal?” Technologies allow us to access almost anyones culturally produced ideas and then the ability to remix them to define our own tastes. This creative exchange of information may or may not acknowledge the “original” creators contributions. Legal concerns regarding ownership of “original” material then become moral and ethical questions for debate. Is there anything that is truly “original?” Probably there is a beginning kernel of thought, a novel idea maybe like the pearl oyster. “In nature, pearl oysters produce natural pearls by covering a minute invading parasite with nacre, not by ingesting a grain of sand. Over the years, the irritating object is covered with enough layers of nacre to form what is known as a pearl. There are many different types, colors and shapes of pearl; these qualities depend on the natural pigment of the nacre, and the shape of the original irritant.” To me, like the pearl, in the purest sense, remixing and recontextualizing of materials creates a new entity or body of work. I still think there are instances where we need to acknowledge and give credit to other’s imaginative creations.