This week our tech task was to watch Brett Gaylor’s documentary about copyright and remix culture. The question I responded to was: Do you think you can argue creativity when it’s based on other people’s work?
This is what I have to say about it:
Personally I think that a person can argue their creativity when it’s based on someone else’s work. For example, I think it’s fair to say that Girl Talk is a pretty creative artist- his songs (although taken from other artists) become like no other- I mean seriously how can anyone say his work isn’t creative? Even the way he makes music is creative- mash ups are something relatively new and he seems to have mastered it pretty well. I also think that just by taking other peoples music and throwing it in his own, he is exposing people to who maybe wouldn’t have listened to that particular song in the first place to go out and look for it (and even like it). For example, when I first heard the Girl Talk song with Lisa Loeb’s song, “Stay” in it, I had never heard her song before but I really liked the way it sounded so I looked her up and started listening to the original song.
On the other side of this argument, I can kind of see why some artists might be against other people taking their original work and making something else out of it. I think if I had created a song, and someone else took it and made something else out of it and then became famous for that, I might feel like it was unfair. I still think a person can be creative with another person’s work, but I defiantly see the controversy around the argument.