Very different 'Skinny Love' piano-cover I just came across.

America's Funniest Remix.

While laughing today I had an epiphany. I realized that AFV aka  America's funniest home videos is a remix. AFV uses editing techniques like cut and paste, and also samples videos, piecing them together for the audience. Most of the times these remixs are titled things like "cats" or "falls" or whatever content seem to be similar through-out all.
   Does this really constitute a remix though? Or is this just the nature of digital media?

 However, it is argued that remix is supposed to do something fundamentally new - does AFV fit into this definition? Possibly. Home media such as the camcorder is generally not broadcast to a mass audience. It transforms the use of the media, which is typically personal or private and makes it public. The goal here is to take the personal moments and see them as funny.
      This means the people watching may not understand particular referents as those who crafted the original video. Those who made the video may understand the geography, history or the general aura of the videos. The massive reproduction across millions of screens takes that original and changes it because it changes the meaning of the video to merely entertainment. The people within the videos are depersonalized.
     The fragmentation of the original juxtaposed with a bunch of other samples is why I would constitute the nature of this show to be remix. However, it is open to interpretation.

The Red Tape of The Red Project

The MoMA worked with high school students in developing the Red Project. Aimed at educating people about art, artists the processes of the museum the project offers a series of online activities and videos.

            One particular aspect gives people the ability to make a collage out of a few pieces of the Museum. It gives you the opportunity to pick a picture, take samples of it and layer it on top of other ones, which have different styles, color schemes etc.

 I noticed however they are very few samples to choose from. I found it kind of boring because the choices in pictures where limited – however, if given more material I feel it could be a very interesting way to engage with Modern Art of the museum.

It describes remix as a collage. This use of remix is primarily educational. It allows students to take hands on approach to learning. The remix has been appropriated by the museum and you can save you own piece, however I wonder what kind of ownership issues are behind the scenes of the red project. From what I gathered during the Participate presentation, Museums have a lot of red tape.

The educational license may be the loop hole in the copyright agreements. However, I did not find it an effective way to engage with the art, it was merely entertaining.

Check it out for yourself. http://redstudio.moma.org/interactives/remix/index_f.html

As our blogging session draws to a close here, I'm left to wonder if anyone here will ever end up reading what I'm saying. Fligwit! Nawrton! Floot! See, I just remixed the English language past the point of referential understanding! Hahahaha!

Okay, I'm done abusing my assumed individual authorial privilege. What I had intended to share and remark upon was a video I came across today that is sure to make anyone with a soul tear up.

What I found made this video more noteworthy than the average fan-made mash-up is its being situated through John Lasseter's opening quotation, "Animation is the one type of movie that really does play for the entire audience". Along such a trajectory, the video suggests a conflation of the typical Pixar narrative structure, encapsulating a standard narrative formula, from an "odd coupling", to a "quest narrative" to a tearjerking climax which ends on a laugh - thus, making the video literally convey a condensed version of the emotional arcs a Pixar film would yield.

As such, the video demonstrates the potential of a remix text to transition from juxtaposing referents to actually providing a self-reflexive comment on the referent itself. Assembling copious footage from multiple Pixar texts for the sake of identifying story trends would normally function as a criticism in remix, but here, the editing artist uses it to articulate Pixar's process of "playing to the entire audience" as a positive (because, let's face it: few could likely find it in their hearts to criticize Pixar). In this sense, the video actually remixes one of the more common remix practices itself (critique through re-editing), which, although I may be spitballing, suggested to me the idea of a remixed response to traditional remix discourses - a celebratory, non-mocking reassembling of referents for the sake of both elucidating and championing the referents. Rather than attempting to forge a new narrative or artistic idea out of recognizable elements, the editor reassembles the recognizable elements for the sake of exposing how and why the referents themselves work.

I like the thought of closing our term's worth of tense discourses over the ethics and morality of remix by positing that remix can, as in this example, ultimately just serve to comment on how and why individuals are drawn to such referential texts in the first place. Farewell everyone, and thanks for a fun and stimulating term!

Remix as Art: Bon Iver Remixed

After presenting our group remix project on Monday, I felt it was important to discuss the process of creating our remixes further, as the process influence and shaped our finished remix products.

For me, the most significant part of the process of creating the first remix was sitting down and working with the producer who helped us and experiencing first hand some of the barriers that DJs and producers face on a regular basis. Initailly, Maddalen wanted to remix a classic rock artist, like Bob Dylan or The Beatles, only to find out that, unless we had the money to pay to access the separated tracks (drums, bass, vocals, harmony, etc.), which are also known as stems, we could not do so. As a musician, I knew that a song was made up of different layers, but I had never considered the resources you would need to access them, especially with the availability of digital music online. Our solution was for me to cover the vocals of the song we chose, and from that, the producer would build up an entirely new track from scratch using only my vocals. For me, this was the epitome of what we were trying to prove with our music remix, that DJs and producers are talented and creative musicians who create music, and do not just add a "tacky drum loop" to an existing song. We worked with the producer to try to decide what we wanted to remix to sound like which he interpreted and used to create an entirely new song, which only shared the lyrics with the original.

After deciding to remix "Skinny Love" by Bon Iver, which would provide a stark contrast between the original and our remix, as it featured female vocals, a new tempo and a different genre of music altogether. We wanted to turn it into a dubstep remix, because, not only does it create an entirely different emotional vibe and feeling, it has become increasingly popular with DJs and producers and in mainstream music, which presents the possibility of appealing to a new audience.

I am very proud of the music remixes we created and believe they strongly exemplify remix as a valued artistic and creative expression. Enjoy!

"Heavy Love (Bon Iver Remix)" by DJ ft. Kristine Lippett by kristinelippett

"Heavy Love(less) (Bon Iver Remix)" by Mix Master Matt ft. Kristine Lippett by kristinelippett

The People vs. George Lucas: Stars Wars Fans Strike Back!

When it comes to thinking about fan culture, no discussion would be complete without talking about Star Wars and its fans. Other films and television shows like Star Trek and Buffy the Vampire Slayer have all garnered a large cult following who create reenactments, parodies, fan fiction and other fan texts, but none really compares to cultural products of the love/hate relationship that Star Wars fans have with its creator, George Lucas.

Star Wars fans have been interacting and reworking the films since they came out, but one of the most popular fan videos to first gain mainstream attention was George Lucas in Love, a short independent film released in 1999 by Joe Nussbaum as a parody of Shakespeare in Love, which had been released the year before. The film received critical praise and attention and eventually officially premiered at the Toronto Film Festival in 1999 and went on to win several film awards. The film is available online, so check it out below!

However, while the film George Lucas in Love did help to make visible how millions of Star Wars fans were recreating and rewriting Star Wars into fan fiction, videos and images, it failed to really consider the fans themselves and why they were reworking Star Wars into something new in the first place.

Fast forward from 1999 to 2010 to the release of the film The People vs. George Lucas, which examines the ambivalent relationship that Star Wars fans have with its creator, George Lucas. The film looks at Star Wars controversies, like the introduction of the slightly racist character of Jar Jar Binks in Episode I: The Phantom Menace, and how fan culture has influenced and shaped the legacy of Star Wars. The director of the film, Alexandre Philipee, invited fans to send in their own footage, which Philipee sorted through and compiled to create the film, all 634 hours of it. The film comes across as a love/hate letter to George Lucas, highlighting the significance of fan culture and fan participation in the development of the Star Wars movie empire and legacy. The film The People vs. George Lucas most importantly explores the meaning of participatory and fan culture, asking the question of who culture really belongs to: the fans or the creator?

The People vs. George Lucas - Trailer #3 from The People vs. George Lucas on Vimeo.

Your move, George Lucas!

The Bible (2): A Priate has Stolen my Bible.

"A pirate has stolen my BIBLE!"

This phrase seems out of place within the 21st century, and just 'off' in general. Although, the colour pink turned my notion of the Bible's aura upside down, the remix did not stop there. My next thought was pirates.

     What if perchance, Church 2.0 formed from this remixed Bible? If this church made copies and sold it to their practioners for five dollars, or even for free would those religious leaders become priates? Despite the obvious hyptetical nature of this discussion, there are some very realistic problems underlying this situation. They are the complex issues of authorship and ownership within remix.

      Although Mr. Peterson may never have intended his novel to develop a religious following, the laws surrounding the ownership of his book prevent people from using this novel within a certain context. The problem arises from the copyright Eugene has on his novel and his words, these copyrights do not extend to an indiviuals personal beliefs only their practices. This predicament reminds me of the Manifesto in the documentary RIP! stating that current copyright laws control the freedoms of citizens to engage with particular (at times religious) objects.
     This contemporary Bible is the epitomy of capitalism. The Bible given it's history does not have a particular owner, similarly to the other cultural artifacts of today. Since this version of the Bible is copyrighted it prevents particular uses of it (unless there is profit). It becomes a question of capital in whether or not it is legal to form relgious followings based on this text or reuse this version to form another one. I think I fully understand that was meant when the Manifesto stated that the future is becoming less free. It is not only relevant in terms of digital commodities it has been extended to cultural artifacts in general. In this context when even relgious practice could be off limits due to the copyright laws on versions of the Bible. To the point where there may be a day that someone could legally claim a writer plagerised their Bible.
    To think someone could legally claim the Bible has been plagerised seems prposterous. However, with laws governeing ownership the reality is not far off.
    Although, copyright law may be trumped by religious freedoms this hyptheical circumstance highlights the complex intermingling of ownership, copyright and indiviual use. It provides a plethora of questions which "remix" the notion of authorship and ownership. Does Eugene H. Peterson really own his own Bible? Can he truly be considered an author?
    With copyright the practices of everyday life (for some) are complicated since they are limited in their ways of using items. A remix manifesto may have been right. If a new version of the Bible can turn a priest into a priate - maybe it has gone too far.

Forgive me for using such a charged issue such as religion, however, I feel as if the relgious culture behind the Bible is seperate of the practices of ownership and copyright. In the same way the intentions and creativity expressed by the people who engage in remix are separate from ownership and economy. The question remains is culture something you can own?

RIP: A Remix Man-I-Don't-Think-So (Manifesto)

The Remix Manifesto is:

            1. The future always builds on the past

            2. The past always tries to control the future

            3. The future is becoming less free.

            Upon seeing the Manifesto for the first time I was unconvinced. The manifesto seemed extreme. Although the first line in this argument rings completely true considering the history of borrowing within most musical styles and the practives which  have built up most of the large corporations we know today (thank-you Piracy notes); The second statement of the argument had me baffled. Does the past actively try to “control” the future? I can’t imagine a singer/songwriter deviously plotting  how their songs will control the ways of life in history. It seemed unrealistic that figures of the past had intentions within their work to control the future.

               It was only after watching the movie that I realized… it was not individuals or pieces of work themselves which were responsible for this kind of control mentality.

It was the evil corporations (Enter thundercrashing sound effects here).

Or more accurately the copyright and intellectural property laws which have been put into place to safeguard the earning potential of their ‘property,' thus finally like a sheep lead to water I could rest. The film did all the hard mental work for me making a very convincing argument in the Micheal Moore-esque documentary style.

For viewers who are not nessecarily cultural studies majors or directly engaging with the discource around remix and the issues of authorship and ownership I believe it was a very well done film. The theorectical and popular culture blend was refreshing, and well done. It incorporated Lawerence Lessig himself and his work, as well as popular culture figures. It also gave clear defintiions of terms like remix, and demonstrated the techniques it uses such as: sampling and mash-ups.

        It even went to far as to bring back gutenberg and a small lesson on the history of technology and copyright (I emphasize SMALL). Although it may present one side a little heavily (as arguments in documentaries tend to do), I believe the discussion of copyright and the issues of freedom and financial gain which are at stake within the laws are made easily digestible to a broad audience. It opens a window to what is behind the concern with piracy, downloading while showing how essential it is in the media saturated environment. Since studying this topic, I believe the arguments were effective within the video and that it did a great job of grounding itself in the debates of remix and remix culture.

My Verdict: Watch it with friends from another Facultly and see what they think.
http://films.nfb.ca/rip-a-remix-manifesto/

Remix Video: From Geese to Axe Murderers

For anybody who was interested (and now even for those who weren't! bwhahaha!), I thought it might be worth my briefly touching upon what I was thinking when I came up with my messed up music video accompaniment to Matt's remix of Kristine and Maddalene's remix of Bon Iver's "Skinny Love" (phew!).

First off, if I freaked anybody, I wholeheartedly apologize. I did work in some disturbing images, but I did so for a purpose. As I said, without having heard the song I collected a whole bunch of footage, which I only edited into a video accompaniment after listening to Matt's "Skinny Love" remix, so I filmed all that stuff without realizing what it was going to turn into. Nonetheless, my own guiding artistic intent (or 'referent') for what I filmed was largely reactionary towards widespread criticisms of remix practices.

While I know a lot of artists (see Matt's "To Glee or not to Glee" debate) might be somewhat resistant of other people remixing or appropriating their texts, which I am sympathetic to, I did find the hostility and fury generated by a lot of people towards having their works rejigged to be a bit alarming. It struck me that more dialogue between producers and consumers of media works seems the only viable reconciliation of the two perspectives, and it similarly struck me that this would hardly be too difficult to achieve.

Nonetheless, it was in light of the ferocity generated by this debate, as well as the lack of conclusive moral stances on it that inspired me to film the footage I had. Many of the striking images I acquired (Christian Bale with an axe, for one - *warning: violence, and 80s music!*) seemed to me to somehow echo sentiments of this debate over remix - 'hacking up' or 'chopping up' the texts beyond recognition for one, or the amoral 'violence' found to be associated with it. I framed my video through all the footage of the boy and his authoritative teacher (from The 400 Blows) as a commentary of how anyone growing up in today's culture could become incriminated in such debates, and all of a sudden find themselves being branded a monstrous criminal just for "copying". I got a lot of footage of nature and driving for the sake of alluding to the 'naturalism' (or lack thereof) of remix as a practice, as well as suggesting some kind of 'journey' from my child figure - but is he trying to escape remix as a practice, or run towards it, thereby embracing it? This, I thought, should be left up to the viewer to decide.

I know everyone only saw it the once (I've never tired uploading a video to youtube, but I might try to if I can get my creaky old computer working), but did anyone else have any thoughts and perspectives on the video I did? I'd love to hear them, if so!

Congratulations again to everyone for their roster of incredibly impressive and intelligent remix projects!

Philoso-Remix

In my spare time, I like ridin the web wave, surfing for quotes, pictures, songs, inspirational and collaborative websites. I have a blog with my roomates where we share our findings with, (you can check it out here if you want). In my stumbles, I found a couple quotes that have been chilling here on my desktop sticky note for months now in hopes that I would find more to share on this blog. But it's just nearing the end of the week and I figured I should share the ones I do have now before it's too late:

"I can do things you cannot, you can do things I cannot; together we can do great things."
— Mother Teresa

"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation" - Oscar Wilde


I feel that these quotes comment on remix culture even though they may not have necessarily meant to when they were said. I mean, I am sure Mother Teresa was not expecting to make it onto a remix blog in 2011, but I feel like she speaks wise words that has a lot to do with the remix nature of our culture today. This one relates to the controversies that surround music remixes I feel. Mashup artists and music producers perhaps cannot sing or play a traditional instrument, but they certainly can mix and produce beats to make something else... "great things" that would only be possible through collaboration of different talents.

Oscar Wilde's quote seemed to be an obvious one, relating to the idea that we are all a collaboration of other people's ideas, words, thoughts, stories and emotions, making each of us a remix of our surroundings. It is what makes us all different - we all experience/read/watch/listen to and learn a different combination of other people's creations. No one is alone or pure in thoughts. We all build off of what we see and hear, creating our own thoughts based on our surroundings, even if we don't realize it. I know I live my life based on the quotes I have read or the advice someone has given me... the knowledge and real experience of others. I believe that we all do this, and I believe this is what the basis of remix culture is all about.

La Ti Di, La Di Da

With the amount of iPhone users that have joined Apple's bandwagon, they have to keep their app's trendy in order to not loose their clientèle's interest. La-Di-Da is a fun app for all of the singer song writers out there that uses a great deal of remix. For those of you who have never used this app before it is TONS of fun. 


La-Di-Da can augment your voice with matching music to make your very own interesting and original songs, like a remixed song. The results are not always perfect but I bet many remix artists products aren't always perfect right off the bat. Songs can be shared by email or on Facebook when you’re done and it's a great way to start your singing career. ;) 


Take a look at this video for further explanations on how to use the app. http://www.appsafari.com/utilities/10243/ladida/

Culture Jam: The Film

I recently watched a film on culture jamming entitled “Culture Jam: The Film”, directed by Jill Sharpe and Lynn Booth. It was an informative movie, but also was entertaining to watch. The film contains interviews from a number of various culture jammers, including infamous Reverend Billy, and follows them as they commit culture jamming acts. Whether protesting in front of the Disney Store (Reverend Billy is hilarious), placing stickers on Toronto subway advertisements, or large illegal acts of vandalism on billboards, the acts contained in the film are extremely intriguing and interesting. I knew that culture jamming was becoming a large phenomenon (with the growing strength of corporations and conglomerations), but I did not know it was such a serious offense. Wearing bandanas the entire movie, the billboard jammers are very 'mission impossible' when it comes to making a cunning plan and carrying it out. If you can get your hands on the movie, I'd recommend it! If not, watch the trailer at the website:

http://www.culturejamthefilm.com/trailer.php

Enjoy!

Girl Talk talks the Talk

Girl Talk, one of musics new hottest DJ is a computer artist that combines a number of artists songs together to compose a new song. After yesterdays's presentations I realized and felt what it was like to be an author of something that actually means something to you, something that you have put time and effort into and is tangible. Unlike essays and written assignments I felt like a remixed author as I along with the rest of the class had taken something and made it new. Similar to Gregg Gillis (Girl Talk) he has started with material that has been created and remixed it into a new song. Here is an example of one of his songs Can't Stop- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPZvZO3PAGE&feature=related

Check out an interview done with Girl Talk here. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/28/one-on-one-girl-talk-computer-musician/

You music is made up of other people’s music. Have you faced any copyright issues?
I put my music out there and hope for the best. It is clearly in a gray area but I believe it should fall into fair use under copyright law. I feel like people are not listening to my music instead of buying a CD or album of an artist I feature. Instead, people find new musicians because of a sample on one of my records.


I found that this was a very interesting quote referring to authorship and copyright issues that we have discussed as a class and throughout our blog. 

What's All the Hype?

Remix culture is a phenomenon and I’ve seen remix used to hype up a business. One business in particular that uses remix to hype up events in their business is the NFL. During last year's season, the NFL used remix to promote the league. Their most notable remixes were making songs out of statements and sayings said by players to hype up specific events happening in the NFL.

Randy Moss’ “One Clap”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmJcUlrkMNg

The reason why this remixed was released, along with being one of the most dramatic receivers in the NFL, Randy just got traded from the New England Patriots to where his career started and blossomed, the Minnesota Vikings. This remix was released prior to Moss’ debut as a Viking because not only was he going back to the roots of his career; Brett Favre was there to throw him the ball (Which ended up not working out). At this point in time this was a big deal for fans and the NFL and that is why this remixed was released.

Payton and Eli Manning’s “That’s My Brother”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_jNGruJDi4

This remix was released to hype up the “Manning Bowl” of last season. The Manning Bowl is when these two Quarterback brothers; Payton Manning of the Indianapolis Colts and Eli Manning of the New York Giants go head-to-head with the biggest sibling rivalries in the NFL. This remix was released prior to when the game started and again this event was a big deal for NFL fans and is the reason why this remix was released.