Regressive and Reflexive Mashups in Sampling Culture, 2010 revision by Eduardo Navas
In this article Eduardo Navas talks about the importance of remixing, sampling and ‘mash-ups’ in the current, post-modern media environment. Navas wrote of remix cultures as being ‘a global activity consisting of the creative and efficient exchange of information made possible by digital technologies’ as well as defining the activity of sampling is ‘taking pre-existing materials’ in order to create new texts’. Though Navas talked about the roots of sampling in the music industry spawning from DJ’s and producers in the 1970’s in the genre of hip-hop and disco, he takes the ideas and the purpose that spawns from creating music in this way (sampling) and generalises them to media as a whole, in specific social networking sites and the web which serve as platforms for sampling and constant give and take creation.
A minor critique I have on this article is its ambiguity, Navas wastes sentences and doesn’t signify his main points explicitly enough, so when I was reading this I had to decipher between all the different roles remixing, sampling and mash-ups are playing in the current media environment.
Something I enjoyed however were the two types of mash-ups which Navas defined by their functionality: The first is regressive, which is common in music and is used to mash-up two juxtaposing acts. These mash-ups lead to new/interesting music. An example of this would be sampling Lady Gaga vocals over a quintessential Arctic Monkey’s rhythm. The second type of mashup is Regenerative Remix a ‘combination of content and form’ that allows the source using the form of a Remix to Specifically Communicate an idea in the current media environment. Regenerative remix can only stay relevant if it continues to adapt and change in accordance to the media environment. An example of this would be Google News. If Google news doesn’t adapt stories and media artefacts by mixing them and creating a brand new, coherent news video or article, Google News as a source doesn’t stay relevant. In today’s day and age Navas contends that regenerative remix’s are vital, he uses the ‘possibility of watching a video on an iPhone while text messaging’- a common occurrence in today’s day and age as an example. Apple are mixing the Content (the text writing that constitutes the text messages, the various ideas being communicated and the Form the Iphone and the Video application, to create not only a new medium and new ideas but a whole new experience for the consumer.
Navas also talked about how sampling and remixing influenced post-modernist thought, which I thought was quite interesting. Some people believe the sheer amount of intertextuality in media lead into a ‘suspension or collapse of history’, as if new content can no longer be created. This links into a bit of research I did the other day after watching a Ted Talk on sampling, I looked into ‘Rockists’ who believe sampling (taking previously recorded music and re-contextualising it) is a form of low-art and is highly unoriginal. The Grammys also adopt this train of thought- an artist can’t win song of the year or record of the year if it is an album based on sampling. However, many believe sampling and remixing to be the future of music and impact music in a similar nature to the way it has impacted social media and the internet. Mark Ronson described sampling as inserting yourself into the life of the song, in other words-h believes sampling regenerates it, turns it into something new. Navas agrees that regenerating offers a ‘great challenge’ and understands its legal and conceptual difficulties but goes on to state that is fine if you ‘do justice to intellectual property’.
I believe Sampling is the future of art and that intertextuality is not something that should be frowned upon-but endorsed. Some of the best shows of the all time, such as The Simpsons heavily depend on past sources to create new, humorous and original ideas.
A thought I had the other day, in regards to copyright and intertextuality, was that each musician should nominate certain songs (5% of there catalogue) to be used in media and independent films, royalty free.
Obviously, this is not a great deal for the musicians, a way around this could be if a media company earns over a certain threshold (lets say $500,000 dollars), they have to pay copyright regardless of if they use a nominated track or not.
Everything is a Remix
Even though 74/100 Hollywood movies a year a adaptations of pre-existing texts, ‘original’ films constantly use conventions of their genre, sub-genre and past texts (specifically in the medium of film) to produce the film. Star Wars here was a classic case study, and what was eye-opening was just how phenomenally intertextual it was! I was pretty impressed by how it adapted and effectively used shots from previously released (some even little known) films. I also really enjoyed the quote ‘I have seen further by standing on the shoulders of giants’ that pretty much sums up the power of adaptation, remixing and intertextuality.
Personally I think the best films are where the templates of specific genres are subverted and transformed into a wholly original and unique text.
Another quote that I thought was interesting was ‘creation requires influence’.