In today’s lecture we looked at the art of the remix. I thoroughly enjoyed this lecture as it is was dealing with a topic that I have a particular interest in. There were many aspects of the lecture Dan gave that I enjoyed – the analysis of Eduardo Navas’s work, the documentary clip on remixing and sampling we watched, the Girl Talk activity (my ability to pick snippets of popular songs was not was sharp as I thought it would be, but at least I was able to guess around 5-7 songs), the history of disk-jockeys through the 1960’s and 1970’s, in particular Francis Greco and the rise of beat-matching, slip-queuing, the mash-up etc., and the information about glitch art. I find all this very interesting as I have been a participant in this culture as both a facilitator and audience member.
The segment on glitch I found particularly interesting, because I commissioned an art piece once that was purely glitch and data moshing. I commissioned my friend and film-maker Lee to edit a piece for me to project on the wall as a performance installation at a gig I organised.
I love this piece of work, and still have it on my computer. Occasionally I still watch it while listening to music and relaxing, the patterns in the footage and edits are really special. I’ve included some screenshots in this blog post.

I found this lecture very interesting, and enjoyed dissecting the notion of creative ownership, and whether there are any original ideas, and if the act of sampling a snippet of someone else’s work is grounds for intellectual property theft.

I have to agree with what Dan was leaning towards when he spoke of the act of recontextualising other people’s work, and that it was what you did what content not necessarily who created the initial content that matters.