Today was a case of personal life meets academic theory. I was on a regular outing fulfilling my role as a consumer when I went into a book store chain. It was there I ran into a cultural artifact that demanded my attention.... and it was bound in a florescent pink gell cover.
Initially the color was what attracted my attention, however it was not just the color that remained significant in my mind.
The book was entitled "The Message //Remix 2.0 The Bible In Contemporary Language" by Eugene H Peterson.
I was very perplexed by the novel. Why is it bright pink? and more importantly, why did this irk me. Then I had another thought WWBT? As in what would Benjamin think? Although Walter Benjamin wrote in 1969 I feel his work was relevant to my predicament. I was potentially experiencing the “contemporary crisis” which resulted from the “shattering of tradition” that goes along with reproduction.
As explained by Benjamin “the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition" (Benjamin II). Since the bible has a long history tradition it’s removal from this ‘tradition’ affected its aura. The intermingling of religious tradition juxtaposed with 'contemporary' style and the term ‘remix’ may have diminished my original notion of aura.
It was not the bright pink color that threw me. The color is not entirely important, the ‘crisis’ stems from the reproduction of the artifact, “which removes it from the history which it has experienced. And what is really jeopardized when the historical testimony is affected is the authority of the object” (Benjamin II). It was the Remix’s removal from this context in space and time might have lead to my initial disturbance.
This left me with several questions about remix: What it’s goal? What role does the referent play if any? Why is this bible referred to as remix? Do other translations of the bible classify as remix as well?
I've never thought of the bible as a remix, although I guess in a sense it may be seen that way. I've seen the King James Version, The New International Version, Amplified Version etc. In each, I'm sure the 'aura' or the message that they're attempting to convey remain the same, despite the fact that the words within may be different from one book to the other. I've also seen some people get kind of defensive about 'which version is best' or 'most true to the original' which sounds like the kind of argument that two people might have over which remix of a song is better. So on reflection, I guess the bible can be remixed, in a sense. Hmm...
ReplyDeleteConsidering the amount of different versions of the Bible that I have come across in my own life (that includes 10 years of Catholic school), this example gives me a whole new perspective on the concept of remix.
ReplyDeleteIs the Old Testament the "original"? Is the New Testament a "remix" of that? Is it the combination of the two that forms our conception of the "original" from which "The Message //Remix 2.0 The Bible In Contemporary Language" springs?
Where does one even begin to trace the authorship of this book? Is it even significant to "the message"? Obviously the Bible serves as an example of collaboration and an early one in history. Interesting.