Jonathan Lethem offers an interesting perspective on the authenticity of artistic originality. Lethem notes what we consider to originality could often times be considered plagiarism. However, despite the negative connotation associated implied from ‘plagiarisms’ there are actually many benefits of the phenomenon of borrowing ideas. For example, works from Shakespeare were drawn from Plutarch’s life of Marc Antony, without the creation of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, there would not have been Lenard Berstein’s West Side Story. These creations, as well as many others, exhibit the benign and even positive nature of gaining inspiration and borrowing from other authors’ works.
However, this makes it difficult to distinguish inspiration from plagiarism and blurs the lines of what originality truly is. Seeing the benefits that ‘plagiarized’ pieces have provided to society, it seems counterproductive to diminish the value of certain work simply because it draws from themes of prior works. If an author creates something that is inspired by the works done by older authors, I see this as more of an extrapolation of a concept than a form of plagiarism. It may not be considered original in its entirety, but there are still new and original aspects of the piece.
I like how Lethem compares the world of art to that of a public commons, explaining that “the world of art and culture is a vast commons.” I feel like there are certain universal themes, emotions, and topics that people will always draw upon — such as love, death, good vs. evil, coming of age, power and corruption, etc. It is the kind of shared human experience that brings people together through the arts and communication, especially in relation to these complex themes. It does not make something unoriginal for utilizing universal themes because no one has a monopoly on them.