This puts the problem with the remix and prosumer culture into the correct perspective. And not even from a musical viewpoint but from looking at it in the startup and innovation world.
Thank you for putting into words what I’ve been thinking for about a year and a half now!
No, it was their means that repelled me. The way so many were going about their job of fitting those puzzle pieces together. Instead of working diligently to assemble something truly worthwhile (a subjective judgment, to be sure, and I am calloused from long exposure, but let us be honest), they took two or three of the nearest pieces, or the latest ones to fall on the table, and mashed them into each other — making them “fit” the way a toddler might. Now, random recombination is a great way for evolution to occur over millions of years, but intelligent design it ain’t. It is depressing and distressing to see grown men and women approaching problems with such an unsophisticated and, frankly, opportunistic method.
After reading the comment section on an article in the SpiegelOnline today about the everyday situation of a punk musician in Germany I have to get one thought out of my head:
When did a whole flock of people start to feel nothing but hate, envy and dis-contempt for musicians and their situation? And why on earth are they voicing their hate of the lifestyle and income of (insert random successful artist here) on someone who makes 1/3 of the average income in Germany?
Are you guys feeling anything anymore? I guess not. I’m saddened.
Auf der Tagesschau Seite ist heute ein Interview mit Herrn Stadler (Dozent für die Theorie der Mediengesellschaft an der Zürcher Hochschule der Künste), bei dem mal wieder so getan wird, als wäre eine Verwertungsgesellschaft für etwas anderes da als eingenommene Gelder nutzungsgerecht abzurechnen.
Lieber Herr Stadler
Wer wenig gespielt/aufgeführt/vervielfältigt wird, bekommt auch wenig, das ist doch ganz normal! Dass dieser Knoten nicht endlich mal aus den Köpfen rausgeht?? Eine Verwertungsgesellschaft ist kein Fördertopf sondern ein wirtschaftlicher Zusammenschluss für das Inkasso für die Nutzungen und Tarifverhandlung mit Geschäftspartnern. Das sollte ein Medientheoretiker eigentlich richtig auseinander halten und darstellen können. Und wenn er das nicht kann, dann muss man eben auch den Rest, den er erzählt anzweifeln.
Nachtrag: auf seiner eigenen Seite klingt seine Berufsbezeichnung übrigens deutlich anders:
You’ve probably come across this video of Joshua Bell busking in the Washington subway during rush hour.
To me, this video and article shows several things: first of all, people just don’t recognize greatness even if it is in front of them in the size of a mountain. But second, and this I find even more important, here is a chance to enjoy something for free, no strings attached at a level of performance that is unrivaled in the world. And yet, no one stops to listen.
Here’s my thought: what about all those people claiming that every artist should put out his/her work for free as it helps to get exposure and exposure and reaching people is what matters? It seems to me that if something is free, won’t even stop to take a closer look. So free seems to equate “not interesting enough to check out”.
Now on the other hand, if there is something with a value attached to it, suddenly the argument is: no, no, no, no, I can’t possibly be expected to pay for something. I’ll just grab it from my friend and be done with it. Does anyone else see the terribly destructive hypocrisy in this?
So please, all you people out there who claim to wanting to help creators by forcing them to just give away their work for free: think again. And for yourself this time without the “screaming free industry” (I’m looking at you, Lawrence Lessig) yelling in your ear about how modern that attitude supposedly is.