IDM Mailing Archive

quoted 3 lines I think as we begin to see more collaborations such as the things bjork

> I think as we begin to see more collaborations such as the things bjork > has been doing we're going to be having to deal with these questions of > authorship and who is really responsible for the music more and more.

Hey I'm back after weeks of moping around and to get things started I'm gonna set my sights right for Gonzi. You seem to have a beef with artists who contract out parts of their labors, and you laud artists who do every last thing themselves (right down to the rephlex squad doing their cover art and such). I think we pretty much have to get used to the fact that the vast majority of the western world's artistic/media production is collaborative. If you were a historian in the 22nd century and you had to name 10 of the most important works of art of the late 20th century, you'd be hard pressed to find anything that wasn't a film or a building or a machine. Okay, I guess maybe there would be some books. But besides writers (and london-flat knob-twiddling musicians), there are very few cultural producers of any importance these days who don't work extensively with other artists to produce their work. Even sculptors (which is my background) have their fabricators to build their works from conceptual sketches. Gonzi - you are a film studies person, no? You must be experienced in discussing filmmakers and their masterworks, fully understanding the crucial and often underrated role played by the cinematographer, screenwriter, producer, art director, soundtracker, actors, etc. Yet we still call directors geniuses. Why? Because we cling to the idea of the Individual Genius, the lone artisan driven by a sacred muse. We can do that because we know that the director is the person who is *responsible* for the film, but we don't for a second pretend that she/he did all the work. Don't get me wrong - I have a great deal of respect for artists who insist on doing everything themselves. If I could do that, that's how I'd work. But for some art forms and some kinds of projects, it's just impossible. If you are an artist who has ideas for styles and media beyond your skillset, you will need collaborate to get it right. This is not buying talent, it's normal, everyday late 20th century artistic production. I am a video game designer - I *try* to do everything myself, but when it comes time to program I have to get outside help; if I need animations, I get outside help. I give them credit, but dammit I'm the auteur here. As an art school grad, I would love to do it all myself. But the ambitious, broad range of projects I want to make in my lifetime require me to get assistance and collaboration. It's not the glory I'm after, it's the thrill of seeing/hearing/using the finished product. I get the feeling this is what drives people like Bjork, too. Once upon a time there was no such thing as a "producer". Later, producers would essentially do nothing but manage the money for artistic projects. Now, they can themselves be called artists in a Warholian sense. (Lately, I'm beginning to realize that if you don't get and appreciate Warhol, then you are not ready for the 21st century.) Evaluating artistic products by the number of people who made it or how many hours they worked is retarded. I think I have a pretty good understanding of what Bjork does on her records - she doesn't do the *same* stuff as someone like TJ, but only a doofus would think that she does. Who cares who did what? If the album's great and it's got her name on it (and she doesn't lie about who did what), then she's great, end of story. -Chris "renegade genius" Fahey