We’ve been discussing at length the notion of originality as either being largely subjective, ‘dead’ or that a reconfiguring of the term relative to necessary prior influences is necessary. Bearing these issues at mind, I ran across yet another interesting clash between the notions of remix and originality.
It seems the “Best Original Score” category at the Academy Awards this year has been eliciting quite a bit of controversy in terms of what they’ve deemed eligible or inapplicable to be nominated. Many found composer Clint Mansell’s score for Black Swan and composer Carter Burwell’s True Grit score to be among the best musical offerings of the year, yet both were disqualified from being nominated due to their drawing “too extensively” on pre-existing music: Black Swan from Tchaikovsky’s Swan Lake, and True Grit.
Here's a good overview of the debate.
Is this a fair decision? Matt’s suggested that there are contexts where remixing a text should be considered less appropriate than others, which I agree with, but in this case, both pieces of music which are here remixed into cinematic scores are done so to reinforce poignant, artistic themes of their respective films (Mansell in particular twists and inverts Tchaikovsky for the sake of amplifying director Aronofsky’s ‘inversion’ of the practice of ballet into something familiar but sinister). Is his decision to do so through playing off associations with a known piece of music any less ‘original’ an idea than composing a score that had nothing to do with Swan Lake whatsoever?
In class we discussed the idea of ‘originality’ as more prescribed to the intent rather than outcome of a cultural product. In this particular instance I’d argue that the decision to remix a familiar piece of music was a far less orthodox (and thus ‘original’) artistic decision, but the academy’s exclusion of it from the awards ceremony suggests an underlying cultural aversion to remixed texts in favour of the elusive, romanticized notion of total originality.
Thoughts?
Yes! I'm so glad you mentioned the soundtracks of this year's Oscar nom pack. I truly think that they should drop the 'original' part of the 'best original score' nomination.
ReplyDeleteTruthfully, either way Mansell didn't do a great job of reinterpreting Tchaikovsky's score; I found that the result was more 'background music' than anything. With recognizable referents and keeping part of the theme only for two songs, I was unfazed by the soundtrack. Of course, Inception was nominated... so there goes to show a lack of actual 'objectivity' or bar setting in the Oscar nominatory process.
Inception's soundtrack was repetitive, irritating to a subwoofer and progressively cliche. A loud bass sound at every peak moment in the film made up for the ways the film lacked.
The Social Network, as I am a biased NIN fan, truly does deserve the oscar. As much as 127 Hours is the clear Best Picture winner to me, the soundtrack lacked standalone quality. Although Hall of the Mountain King was not original, and there was a Year Zero track in there somewhere, The Social Network is clearly an unexpected and 'original' (rather, more unique) take on movie soundtracks. I rewatch the movie infrequently, and enjoy the placement of the tracks moreso each time.
As the academy continues to demonstrate their aversion to the 'copy', time should be taken to realize that there really is no original. Inception was based off of a Donald Duck comic, as a lovely article circulating facebook as of late shows us. There truly is no reason to accept an 'original' over a 'copy'. It shouldn't matter... Mansell should have been given a chance: the fact the soundtrack has sold out everywhere in Waterloo shows that the fans at least like it.