original content 2

[Anyone]

guys,

I'm starting a new thread cuz the old one is too long for me to be certain I'm 100% on topic, and also I want to introduce somewhat of a lateral angle to the whole idea of originality.

I come from a visual arts background, and if you look at this field historically, the whole concept of originality has gone full circle...

From the dawn of time all artists have worked on more or less the same grand themes (from hunting expeditions to fertility goddesses, from mythological mosaics to religious paintings, from portraits to landscapes...)

It was only from the modern era and particularly Beaudelaire, the French poet, who from the mid 19th century introduced the idea of doing things "that have never been done".

But now we are entering another era that is, for lack of a better word "Post-modern", where originality is but one of many creative options, other options include styling, remixing, sampling, appropriation and the remake.

This movement is not just present in the visual arts, it is embeded in the whole global society. Just look at the music and cinema industries. We are at a pivotal point in recent history where the film and musical remakes outnumber the original ones...

But is that wrong? The notion of originality is somewhat a recent one, if you look at the bigger picture.

VJing is just part of a larger field of visual products, operating under more or less the same rules or at least under the same movements...

dont you agree?
Ne1

[wellREDman]

as i said a bit more wordily on the re: original content thread,
all the artists that history has come to regard as " great" are the ones who have followed their muse, who have made the art they were driven to make rather than what was expected/required of them or what the consensus view said would be succesful.


go create.....however you must.

[che67]

Yeah, well I too come form a visual arts background, Fine Art/(Time-Based Media) to be precise ? and though throughout arts history images, sounds, text or objects have been appropriated/re-used, the message in the medium is usually one of subversion of the status quo. The classic example is Duchamp making a work of art out of an upside-down toilette, bringing an everyday object out of its regular ?context? and changing it?s function to that of an object of art. The VJ who is ?remaking? is doing something not too dissimilar, as long as the content is sufficiently transformed into the context of the event or performance.

I agree with your comments that we are now living remake/post-modern society - a Karaoke-Culture, everything is shamelessly remade, usually without any artistic integrity ? though it?s something that?s being addressed by contemporary artists interested in deconstructing the modes and language of cinema. Ie. Douglous Gordons 24hr Psycho, or even the current so-called ?controversial? Turner Prize work by Fiona Banner.

Though saying that, it?s also useful if you?re just starting out to have access to that kind of imagery. But ultimately it is more important to establish an individual-visual-style that can be associated directly to you, the artist - it does no one any favours in this fledgling industry if we?re all using the same footage!!

For me personally, it?s also important to consider the format of the medium, as example, the Structural Materialist filmmakers of the 60?s/70?s concerns were that of the analogue properties of film ? ie ? grain/speed/lighting/setting as well as those of the equipment, camera, tripod..etc. The VJ should also consider those properties of the digital medium ? bit rates/codecs/software/hardware, as well as those issues of appropriation, which are ingrained within digital aural/visual culture ? the bottom line is, if you?re going to ?remake?, attempt to bring the imagery out of it?s original framework?I guess.

Che