IDM Mailing Archive

If you steal an entire song and release it as your own record, it could STILL be called original art even if it doesn't have anything at all added to it. Didn't the KLF do it to ABBA's Dancing Queen a long time ago? They just released it in it's entirety on a single... and got their asses sued. They don't call themselves the Kopyright Liberation Front for nothing you know. They were trying to bring attention to the stupidity of copyrights and to question the idea of originality. I think it's okay to do whatever you want, just so long as you don't claim to have done something you did not do. It's not like he calls himself "Composer Shadow". He's a DJ and playing other people's records in a cretive way is his art. Is Yo Yo Ma not an artist because he does not compose his own music? Why is a DJ different? Is a collage artist like Pablo Picasso, John Heartfeild, Terry Gilliam, Kurt Schwitters, or Hannah Hoch not really a creative person because they cut out magazine and newspaper photos? You are missing out with one of the most significant ideas of the EARLY 20th century, one which most civilized people should take for granted by now - that is that mass media has redefined the idea of what is original so much that it is practcally meaningless. Read "Art in the age of Mechnical Reproduction" (spoken of on the list before), a 50+ year old text which pretty much gave sampling legitimacy as an art form. Even the fogeys get this concept. Besides, to argue that an artist is bad because fans don't know how the music was made is really misguided. You shouldn't base your opinion on other people's problems - you might miss out on something important. -CF

quoted 50 lines -----Original Message-----

> -----Original Message----- > From: idm-owner@hyperreal.com [SMTP:idm-owner@hyperreal.com] On Behalf > Of basehead > Sent: Friday, April 18, 1997 3:52 PM > To: idm@hyperreal.com > Subject: (idm) Re: The Sun has got his hat on (was ugh) > > > > On Fri, 18 Apr 1997, Styrolene vaT wrote: > > > My my we do wear Rosy Spectacles dont we, what in the hell is the > > *Popular Electronica Movement*? Are you one of these people who sits > > around dreaming of Aphex Twin and Orbital and Autechre all sitting > around > > eating cakes and drinking tea together?, discussing 'the sexual > politics > > of electronica in the nineties' or perhaps the Alternative renegade > > faction *The Peoples Movement for Popular Electronica*...... > > actually i dont listen to orbital, autechre, and only a slight bit > of aphex twin. notice i put the 'popular electronica' in quotes.. as > in > it's the biggest hype these days. > > while i may not be into the aforementioned artists, i respect them > a fuck of a lot more than i do dj shadow! i hear him mentioned in the > same > breath and while i'm not defensive of groups i dont enjoy too much, i > still think it's rather sad. the thing you have to realize is that > most > people dont KNOW he doesnt write the music because most people have no > clue at all what goes into the production of a track. > > > When are you fools gonna drop the 'intelligent' tag it really wears > so thin > > now. If we really need to start *discussing* the > relevance/differentiation > > between DJ/Musician then this list is fucked. > > it's a valid point both philosophically, musically, and in the end > really, > financially.. when do we draw the line between what is an original > composition and what is stealing outright? if i sample an entire song > and release it as my own record, adding a drumbeat.. is it my song? > > im hardly a fool, you just took the 'electronica' comment wrong > > -dan >

Chris Fahey writes:

quoted 7 lines If you steal an entire song and release it as your own record,

> If you steal an entire song and release it as your own record, > it could STILL be called original art even if it doesn't have anything > at all added to it. Didn't the KLF do it to ABBA's Dancing Queen a long > time ago? They just released it in it's entirety on a single... and got > their asses sued. They don't call themselves the Kopyright Liberation > Front for nothing you know. They were trying to bring attention to the > stupidity of copyrights and to question the idea of originality.

oh dear dear dear.... first of all they weren't the klf then, they were the justified ancients of mumu (aka the jams). second, the song had large bits of abba in it but also had lots of original stuff. third, they weren't trying to prove anything at that point, they were just having fun with sampling and dance culture. trying to use the jams/klf to prove any point is like trying to nail jello. entertaining for a minute maybe, but ultimately futile.

quoted 2 lines Is Yo Yo Ma not an artist because

> Is Yo Yo Ma not an artist because > he does not compose his own music? Why is a DJ different?

it's only a problem if the dj claims to have written the music that he plays.

quoted 4 lines Besides, to argue that an artist is bad because fans don't know

> Besides, to argue that an artist is bad because fans don't know > how the music was made is really misguided. You shouldn't base your > opinion on other people's problems - you might miss out on something > important.

i'm not one to claim that artists should pay for their samples or even list them, but there's got to be a good faith effort to at least make something NEW out of what you appropriate. otherwise you're just doing "ice ice baby" again. and that would be bad. -- Jon Drukman jsd@gamespot.com SpotMedia Communications How the drunk and the maimed both are dragged forward out of the arena like a boneless Christ, one man under each arm, feet dragging, eyes on the aether. (David Foster Wallace/Infinite Jest)

C.F. wrote:

quoted 7 lines If you steal an entire song and release it as your own record,

> If you steal an entire song and release it as your own record, > it could STILL be called original art even if it doesn't have anything > at all added to it. Didn't the KLF do it to ABBA's Dancing Queen a long > time ago? They just released it in it's entirety on a single... and got > their asses sued. They don't call themselves the Kopyright Liberation > Front for nothing you know. They were trying to bring attention to the > stupidity of copyrights and to question the idea of originality.

Word up -- remember Sherrie Levine, hip visual artist from the '80s who rarely did anything more than take photographs of already famous photographs and paint "exact replicas" of modern "masterpieces?" It's all rather strange -- art used to be about "authenticity" (as *all* of the arguments concerning "real IDM" on the list serve to indicate) and "real meaning" -- but now the last recourse of testimonial to "authenticity" lies in the irreducible identity and singularity of the artist himself or herself -- his or her personality, which is seen as the guaranteeing agency backing up artworks with the referential authority they require in order to be recognized as "truly meaningful" objects. The main subject of art used to be "God." Now it's autobiography -- self as god. Hair snippets in an Aphex promo pack... Japanese collectors paying millions of yen for tissues that Lennon wiped his nose with...Jeff Koons injection-molding sculptures of he and Cicciolina in various copulative poses... All the competing *identities* on this list...why should we be immune from this cultural logic? It's a short distance from stepping on someone else's tastes to stepping on their "intellectual property rights" these days...I can't wait until people start suing one another for sampling samples of samples of samples.... what a wonderful drama all this "death of IDM" stuff has been - endearing as an ostentatiously "suicidal" teenager! One who grows up to be a world-famous artist, of course...at least for 15 minutes. just a few thoughts sr -- sd NP: DM 'ultra' (oh, and P.S. to those bothered a while back by my cluelessly hypothetical slagging off of Carl Cox - the 2nd deck has had his System 7 mixes in it for about a week now. I'm eating some crow, and loving every meaty beat of it.)