Written by Jonathan Letham, “The Ecstasy of Influence”, explores the relationship between ‘inspiration’ and ‘plagiarism’. Letham summaries his views that arts are created by inspirations. If we consider inspirations as plagiarism, we are limiting ourselves to these different art forms whether it is movie, cartoons, writings. and etc. I think this sentence ultimately sums up Letham’s view regarding people who claims the wrongs on those artists who are inspired, “[they] are attacking the next generation of creators for the crime of being influenced and by doing so they make the world smaller, betraying what seems to me the primary motivation for participating in the world of culture in the first place: to make the world larger” (65).
He then provide many different examples to prove to us how artists are inspired by different things that allow them to create the art they created. He claims that if we are not suppose to be influenced by any other things that already exist, the arts we have today wouldn’t exist.
After reading this article, I feel like I totally agree. I really like his approach to of influences by arts rather than the art plagiarism. I realize it is so true that when I create art, I need to be inspired by something. Without being inspired, I wouldn’t have the motivation to create a masterpiece. I feel like even if something feels very original and unique, there are elements within that existed and were made base upon an inspired element made by someone else.
However, after reading the two assigned readings, I am wondering to which extent would an artwork exceed the level of inspiration and into the level of plagiarism. Since art is always repeated and recreated, how do we view plagiarism? Does plagiarism became less of the concern in the world of arts?