There are many facets to the world of plagiarism. We are taught
from young ages to never plagiarize and that if we do so, the consequences are
immense. Even now if caught plagiarizing we can be asked to resign out studentship.
But, this article leaves me thinking, where would our society today be without “readymades,
collage, found art or found text, intertexts, combines, detournment, and
appropriation?” In art especially where would ideas spurn from if not from
others. What should we call inspiration if not plagiarism. We are shifting
meaning from one known object to a new idea. Duchamp is the best known artistic
plagiarist. Turning a useful everyday bathroom accessory into a meaningful
statue. His idea may have been original and unique but the production of his
piece is completely taken from another.
This article first and foremost, was
very interesting to read. It has shown a new light on the double side to
plagiarism. Completely taking some ones idea with no changes should be the
number one definition of plagiarism. This being said however, if someone is
trying to learn a new concept and does not understand the original, but
understands a recreation of the original, then that knowledge is just being
shared in a more interactive and adaptable manner. “Plagiarism is useful in
aiding the distribution of ideas.” Would we still consider this plagiarism, if
it improved something else? How should we look at consumer products? Should
technology companies be “kicked out of school” when they all make some version
of the same idea (i.e. ipad, tablet, etc.)? “Under such conditions, plagiarism
fulfills the requirements of economy of representation, without stifling
invention. If invention occurs when a new perception or idea is brought out—by
intersecting two or more formally disparate systems—then recombinant
methodologies are desirable.”
In the digital realm, appropriation
acts under the same rules as any other form of art. It may seem obvious that
one video was not made by the artist; such as it is obvious that Duchamp did
not make any of his readymades. I think in terms of the digital realm alone we
must ask ourselves, does the message change from the original to make it
unique, or does it improve the originals meaning? If we consider social media,
a repost or re-tweet can’t be considered original or improved ideas, therefore
are not appropriations and always are cited by the original author. Art in
general, including digital art, falls under the same rule of appropriation.
No comments:
Post a Comment