Category: Leon Eckert

I actually really enjoyed reading this essay by Lethem. The way the piece was divided into detailed sub headings actually provided a lot of insight into the contents of the work. The one that really had me interested was the “Usermonopoly” piece. I didn’t really think about all the elements that go into a shot. 

For example, in a film scene, the characters are usually dressed, eating/drinking, at a destination, wearing accessories or engaging in some sort of activity. I recall seeing so many instances of film scenes where Apple computers or watches are used as a key component but never really consider all the legalities that went into enabling that product positioning to occur. All of those aspects require branding and the assurance of intellectual property as Lethem informs us. 

What Lethem continues to speak about is the fact that even in this “culture” everything has a “value”. It made me think that nothing is really able to be used without incurring some sort of fee or someone attempting to make profit of it. Lethem gives the example of Girl Scouts paying royalties for singing songs or shop owners coming under legal scrutiny for playing music in the background of their stores. 

Where did the time go where people could freely create for the purposes of pure enjoyment? Without the need to worry about others infringing on their own intellectual property? Without the need to be continually checking changing laws online to see if their actions are deemed illegal? 

I really feel for the artists themselves as it is so hard to mandate what exactly is “copyright” and “intellectual property” with so many barriers just to try and enter into the industry it is no surprise that individuals become deterred from pursing something that they really do have a passion for. 

As Lethem concludes this part of his essay with, “the loser is the community, including the living artists who might make splendid use of a healthy public domain” (6).

In “The Ecstasy of Influence” by Jonathan Letham, he discusses the fine line between “inspiration” and “plagiarism”. He argues that drawing inspiration from other art sources makes art thrive. And we should not consider this kind of borrowing ideas from other works as a kind of “plagiarism”. Provided with sufficient examples, Letham further explains that it is also related to a person’s ability to reference and  citations. 

I agree with Letham. I think art is built on what we have achieved before. Art is born from observations of the world, knowledge of all fields, and understanding of life. Whether it’s by observing the world, or other artists’ work, the artist could both draw inspiration. And there’s no essential difference between the two. By analyzing and borrowing ideas from previous work, the artist gets to elaborate on that and have a deeper or different perspective of the subject. It’s because of this that art flourishes.

I could recall one time I heard a musician talking about his inspirations of making music. He gave an example of one song in his new album. He said that this song was wrote when he was listening to Pink Floyd. He felt strongly connected when listening to “Breathe” by Pink Floyd and he then wrote a song about this. Similarly, in the modern art age, a famous singer and song-writer Halsey used Justin Timberlake’s 2002 hit “Cry Me a River”‘ lyrics in her latest hit “Without Me”, and she later admits that she was inspired by this song and she just felt that Without Me has a Cry Me a River vibe. Drawing inspirations from other people’s work is very common and I do think with proper citations and references, it should not be called “plagiarism”. 

After listening to the first episode of “Homecoming”, I have a brand new feeling. Personally, I rarely listen to podcast. But listening to this is such a unique experience. Audio is such a unique form of media. Unlike videos, the audio doesn’t contain any images, which allows you to imagine all the scenes yourself. It can connect your own experience to the story the audio is telling you. Unlike photography, the audio is a consist process. It gives you enough context to tell you a story and it is very distinctive. Every sound is different and vibrant. Thus making the audio very exuberant and engaging. 

In my personal opinion, the essence of art is opening to interpretation. I think art should be open to interpretation and imagination. And audio, which not only offers you enough context to relate, but also leaves you with enough room to imagine. And it is engaging as well. I’m intrigued and I think I’m going to keep learning the art of audio.