A Few More Thoughts on Mix Tapes

After frustrations with the original concept, my mix tape evolved into “Tunes for Traveling.” As you may have surmised, this was basically a roadtrip CD. I decided I wanted to make just such a tape for summer vacations. My friends and I pile into a car and drive somewhere at least once a summer, and these tracks were meant to capture and enhance that feeling.

It turns out making a good mix tape is far more difficult than just tossing songs onto a CD. I was frustrated several times when I finally admitted to myself a few songs just weren’t going to make the cut. Some rubbed against the theme, others just didn’t have quite the right feel (since I had to buy most of them ahead of time in order to figure out where they fit I was even more reluctant to toss them out). Anyway, I wasn’t exactly satisfied with the order/contents of my final product. I think I needed a team of music experts to assemble the perfect list of driving songs. During my meager existence I feel like I haven’t had the proper exposure or time to specialize in any such mix. I was also irritated with my tools. I kept trying to fix the fade and overlap between songs, and in the end the CD burned differently than the playlist suggested on my computer. Photoshop further annoyed me as I worked on the cover. The booklet was tricky too; figuring out how to do it on the computer proved too much. Even after the simple cutting and pasting I was still faced with a stapler that couldn’t reach far enough to put the staples in the right places!

The plan was to try making my mix tape as much like a tape as possible. I decided to create an A- and B-Side, with a switch-up in between to cement the change. The A-Side was meant to represent the excitement and potential for adventure of the ride out. The B-Side was meant for the more reflective, slow ride home. I was frustrated that I couldn’t balance out the two sides like on a real mix tape (I just couldn’t find enough that I liked for the B-Side). I also tried to make the liner notes look a little more like an actual mix tape, writing some of it by hand. I think some of my liner notes came close to what I was hoping to do; there are jokes that anyone outside of Hortonville would miss.

Don’t get me wrong, the mix tape has been my favorite project so far. The thing is I’m a perfectionist when it comes to stuff I really like, as well as creative work like this one. While I have a hard time looking past a few things I would like to change now, other people have said they thought it turned out well. This project has inspired me to continue the process of creating mix tapes, although I think it will take longer in the future. Maybe someday I’ll perfect the techniques of transition and flow, then I can complain about kids and how nobody makes a good mix anymore.

Mix Tape Reflection

Although I’m tempted to say the mix tape project was our most unusual foray into authorship so far, I just can’t; that honor belongs to the plagiarism experience. However the mix tape may have given me the most radically new conception of what it means to be an author.

Mix tapes seem really straight-forward: you take songs you like and toss ‘em onto a tape or CD. To the untrained eye, perhaps that’s true, but to those who studied under Jack Tripper there’s a great deal more. Somehow taking songs which you never wrote, recorded, performed, purchased, sang anywhere outside of the shower, or even learned the real lyrics to becomes a new form of writing. There is almost an art in selecting the tracks and arranging them on the tape. The only thing I can really compare it to is when we did cut-ups. Mix tapes sample a huge selection of songs and sounds to create a new composition. They combine this “newer” understanding of authorship with “original” liner notes written by the person assembling the tracks. While the liner notes usually have some kind of song information, they are very open to creativity. They’re a place for thoughts and plans as well as poetry, jokes, and dreams. For people reading mine, and I’m guessing there will be a few since I’ll leave it on the floor of my car, the liner notes are probably going to come off a little strange. That’s alright, the guys on the roadtrip will know what I’m talking about.

I think a mix tape, or at least those made subscribing to the formula we studied, can say a lot about a relationship. Everything from song selection and liner notes to the cover hints at a lot that can be conveyed. As I continue on from this point, granted more slowly, I think it will be interesting to see what else comes out from mix tape making. This was a relatively light-hearted project, so it should be interesting getting into some heavier stuff.

Some Thoughts on Cut-Up

Cut-ups are done by taking magazines, newspapers, personal writings, etc. and totally reassembling them. As far as I can tell there is no set technique for doing this; some cut pages into blocks and randomly assemble them, others search for specific lines and thoughts which they order in such a way as to create something new. The "author" could approach this with no vision for the finished product at all, only randomly taking and pasting parts, or he might take a more active role in selecting and ordering, even inserting or changing the text to a certain degree.
As I see it, Cut-ups are a strange concept which somehow manages nonetheless to construct an original product. How this is possible when using only other people's work, I'm not really sure. There almost seems to be some magical moment, between the cutting and the gluing, where the Muses breath life into the Cut-up and it begins to stand and walk on its own. I don't know exactly how Cut-ups have been used in the past but I think they have a lot of potential. I don't necessarily think a traditional book could survive a Cut-up, but I think there are certainly other areas that might be interesting to experiment with. I wonder how far the Cut-up method has been taken; into photography, film, art?
My Cut-up is below. I took all the parts from the November 16th, 2007 edition of the Isthmus. The first version is what I imagine a cut-up would look like if you were to unknowingly encounter it. As you read, ask yourself whether you could believe it had been intentionally written word-for-word like it is now. The second one I have color-coded to each article I borrowed from. I just include it because it may be fun to check your suspicions against.

Cut-Up

Isthmus

Whenever a youth is ascertained to possess talents meriting an education which his parents cannot afford, he should be carried forward at the public expense. I know for a fact there is no evidence to connect what the school teaches with any kind of atrocities.

Kids will enlist, but they’ll probably be black-and brown-skinned kids, or Hmong, and blue-collar kids who aren’t laser-focused. You escape by slaying people in dark alleys and grungy buildings. If the sons and daughters of the elite and professional classes were clad in olive drab and routinely being blown up in IED booby traps, the killing can feel a bit like a one-trick pony; hide in a shadow, sneak, kill, repeat. Gangster life is our cultural paradigm, played out as big business by the powerful, as crime by the powerless. In an era of gated communities, privatized public services, Blackwater mercenaries and revived left wing suspicion of the military: savages…eager to glut their savage thirst with the blood of the vanquished.

Murders, torture and other atrocities carried out by soldiers trained at the School of the Americas; I feel this is my right under the law of man and the law of God. Its graduates have committed human rights abuses throughout Latin America, including the murder of nuns and priests. It hands out scary literature to little kids at fast-food restaurants. It seeks total animal liberation: no meat or dairy in people’s diets, no hunting or fishing, no use of animals in medical research. Even seeing-eye dogs don’t make the cut. The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.

Isthmus II (colors indicate different articles)

Whenever a youth is ascertained to possess talents meriting an education which his parents cannot afford, he should be carried forward at the public expense. I know for a fact there is no evidence to connect what the school teaches with any kind of atrocities.

Kids will enlist, but they’ll probably be black-and brown-skinned kids, or Hmong, and blue-collar kids who aren’t laser-focused. You escape by slaying people in dark alleys and grungy buildings. If the sons and daughters of the elite and professional classes were clad in olive drab and routinely being blown up in IED booby traps, the killing can feel a bit like a one-trick pony; hide in a shadow, sneak, kill, repeat. Gangster life is our cultural paradigm, played out as big business by the powerful, as crime by the powerless. In an era of gated communities, privatized public services, Blackwater mercenaries and revived left wing suspicion of the military: savages…eager to glut their savage thirst with the blood of the vanquished.

Murders, torture and other atrocities carried out by soldiers trained at the School of the Americas; I feel this is my right under the law of man and the law of God. Its graduates have committed human rights abuses throughout Latin America, including the murder of nuns and priests. It hands out scary literature to little kids at fast-food restaurants. It seeks total animal liberation: no meat or dairy in people’s diets, no hunting or fishing, no use of animals in medical research. Even seeing-eye dogs don’t make the cut. The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted.

Assorted Thoughts on "Rhythm Science"

DJ Spooky’s “Rhythm Science” sparked new thoughts and questions through surprising means. The writing is really only a part of the argument; the book’s design and execution adds more to the way in which Spooky speaks to us.

The most immediately obvious feature of the book is the hole right in the center. We discussed this fairly thoroughly in class so I’ll only briefly comment. The hole as the first and most logical conclusion is part of the mixing board on the cover and every text page that follows. It penetrates straight through an otherwise solid object, all the way to the “C” side. In a sense turning the pages becomes an act of selecting a record or CD, a degree of control and empowerment is returned to the reader. I liked the comment of one classmate who said that there is no central or definite meaning, only the nothingness it all swirls around (I think Spooky says several times that he’s trying to play around his points, so that seems right on). My thought on the issue is essentially spoken on page 13: “But I’m more concerned with praxis—how to foster a milieu where dialog about culture becomes a way to move into the pictures we describe with words, text, sounds…” It seems to me the hole is an open doorway inside a potentially intimidating work.

The alternating pages are a subject of study. One spread is white and rough while the next is green and smooth. On the white pages comes the expected text of a book, albeit a text interrupted by the hole. The green pages present an illustration and a few words from the previous page (which I only noticed later are also on the white pages). This art is strange but possesses a sort of flow. The quotes are a continuation of the previous page, once written in the narrative and once in the background, next leaping onto the green. The drawings continue this flow to some degree. I notice in most if not all of the drawings there is an element taken from the previous fold. The exact construction of these pages is less clear to me. I think we all grasp the meaning of the “spooky” ghost, but several of the others are a little less clear. The one I saw repeated a lot was the Playboy bunny icon. I didn’t understand why at all until I came to the B-Side. I’m guessing the bunny is “the prostitute” although I’m not sure I understand the full-impact of this. The prostitute seems to be a major part of the argument, so much so that it holds down its own side and encroaches on the other.

A few stray thoughts floating around: I’m still trying to understand the reasons for the scientific terminology that’s so prevalent throughout the book. I know it’s called “Rhythm SCIENCE” but I’m sure there’s more to it than that. There’s also the musician’s terminology—many groups I’ve never heard of. I wonder how it reads to someone inside DJ culture.

As for the C-Side, I haven’t finished listening to the entire thing yet but as I do I’m trying to determine how it’s a continuation of A and B. I think the music could make for a very effective story telling technique because of its power to take us places and make us feel things, while at the same time remaining fairly subjective. In fact I’ve been trying to read the book more like listening to a CD. When I read the first section I wasn’t in the right mindset. I decided to go back later and get in the mood for it. What I found was that the read was far more enjoyable and hit the right note, if you will, when I had the right attitude to go with it. Other than that, I think it’s pretty obvious that the C-Side has crept into A and B. Portions of the text fly away and become musical with just a little beat behind them.

In summary, DJ Spooky’s “Rhythm Science” makes its case in a very strange and multi-dimensional way unusual to the average reader. In building a multi-faceted creation, I think Spooky transcends the constraints of paper and ink and gives his words a life beyond the cover not frequently found in print.

Further Thoughts on Sampling

As I wrote in my Reflection (below), I enjoyed Sampling the most of all the projects thus far. I think Plagiarism, even as an assignment, was still too morally murky for me to really have fun with. Ghostwriting was entertaining because of the creative challenge inherent to it, but I was also frustrated trying to match a style of poetry that was less developed, maybe, than what I'm used to reading. Sampling, however, left me with a genuine feeling of authorship. Even the Sampling derived largely of copyrighted images felt like a new creation that I had made. I think the process of Sampling is a creative one, and that taking those elements and assembling them into something new is as valid a form of authorship as any.
That said, I'm curious how everyone went about their Sampling. I tried using the Creative Commons Search Engine (http://search.creativecommons.org/), however I had trouble getting anything of substance with it. Maybe I was looking for the wrong things, but I didn't find it especially helpful. I know Joe said the Directory is a more effective way to go about a search. In the end I basically gave up and just used a bunch of things I drew by hand.
I'm also curious how everyone planned their arguments. I basically brainstormed some thoughts on authorship (no author is entirely free of influence, the author is not limited to the written word, there is a legal battle frequently pitting large established groups against individuals over the future of what can be used, etc.). From there I chose recognizable images that could convey those thoughts, which proved fairly easy. In my Sampling every piece is intentionally placed (for example, the moon and snow are part of the second Sampling for a reason despite looking like filler). I tried to make the overall appearance part of my argument as well, taking space and positions into account. It might take some thought but I believe there are reasons for everything. How did you all do your Sampling?

A Reflection on Sampling

Sampling involves taking an array of images and words, typically from popular culture, and recombining them in a novel fashion so as to create an argument. Although I was familiar with the idea of Sampling in the abstract, I didn't realize Sampling was considered an important part of creativity, particularly one threatened by extensive copyright restrictions.
While I'm still uncertain what Sampling sounds like in the context of music, I learned that Sampling can be quite effective in making a statement or an argument. Sampling is typically an appeal to the eye, and is therefore made as aesthetically pleasing as possible (something I struggled with as I worked on my Sampling). Sampling can be done relatively quickly, and can carry considerable weight. As I reflected I thought it similar to the old saying: "a picture is worth a thousand words." When an author makes his appeal in the form of Sampling, he engages his audience (I'm not sure the appropriate term) by asking them to read into the work. He encourages them to search, to interpret, to engage the medium in a way that is different from an essay or article.
As I underwent the transformation into Sampler, I quickly realized free access to many resources trumps free access to limited resources. For a Sampling to be effective (in my humble opinion), the Sampler has to connect with his audience on a certain level. The ability to take well-known images from the popular culture can create a more meaningful argument by sheer virtue of recognition. The Sampler's work is understood at a variety of levels because of the cultural subconscious. While an argument made with permissible material can be very effective, it is certainly more difficult for the Sampler to articulate his argument while tip-toeing around legal repercussions. I believe we as a society have universally recognized symbols, many of which are under the ownership of a select few. A Sampling may find ways around the control of these powers and retain the spirit of the argument, but it may lose the power of its message by restraints placed on instantly recognizable images.
Regarding my work, I felt the argument that ripped and reused without concern for legality created a more effective statement. The possibilities were easily more plentiful and I felt I could make the Sampling richer through certain well-known images. I am unfortunately new to Photoshop and similar software, and with time constraints, I ended up making my Sampling by hand. As I thought about that I realized just how much more digital Sampling can do. In that way I felt increasing respect for Samplers. To me they are just as much an author as the individuals who created the elements incorporated in the Sampling. There is a definite creativity, a very clear innovation and alteration, which makes Sampling unique. I think Sampling is the most accurate picture of creation and authorship we have. As has long been known, there is almost nothing written completely uniquely. No author is an island; he is influenced and draws on the work of humanity's greats. It is his manipulation, his tweaking and shifting, his imagination, his new angle, that truly represents authorship.

Free Culture Reflection

Lawrence Lessig's book "Free Culture" was a considerable divergence from my normal reading habits. I came into the book with next to no knowledge about copyright or the war on free culture. By the time I left, I'd like to think I know a little bit more.

The idea behind "Free Culture" didn’t hold me at first. I believed, erroneously, that the only thing at stake was the online world of piracy. To be honest, I didn’t particularly care if people were no longer able to steal music, movies, books, etc. online. I would have said, “okay, make it impossible and put it back to the way things were. I don’t care.” Lessig woke me from the happy misconception that only the bad guys were at their end and showed me a world teetering on the illogical and bizarre.

I think Lessig presented a powerful case. His examples are numerous and frequently infuriating. In case after case people are crushed by insensitive corporations for the sole purpose of profit. What makes the danger more severe is the threat to the creative future and potential hindrances to advancing our society, both through our culture and technology. I’m not all that naïve about government, but I was nonetheless shocked to hear how the law had been manipulated by the few.

As was suggested in class, I think this is a powerful read because of the passion Lessig brings to the narrative. He is clearly wounded from the Eldred decision, and this as his chance to make things right is not wasted.

For my part I will be sure to listen more closely when news of the legal status of creativity comes up. As a person maybe that’s all you can really do—be aware, I mean, so that when the cue comes up in conversation you can share the truth as best any of us can know it (unless you’re on a date, in which case I would think your company most likely to be disinterested in the nuances of publishing and ownership). In any case I’m grateful for having had the chance to read the book.

PS

My first reaction was to boycott Disney and the other groups operating like gangsters. The problem is that doesn’t really work, because I couldn’t care less about them right now. However once one has children, I imagine it is the “bad” parent who prohibits them from partaking in the 5-year-olds only real culture. Is there any alternative to this, sort of writing and illustrating one’s own line of bedtime stories?

Free Culture II

In Lawrence Lessig's chapter on Piracy he says the courts rejected Napster technology capable of blocking 99.4% of copyright infringing material. From this he concludes that we are witnessing "a war on file-sharing technologies, not a war on copyright infringement. There is no way to assure that a p2p system is used 100 percent of the time in compliance with the law, any more than there is a way to assure that 100 percent of VCRs or 100 percent of Xerox machines or 100 percent of handguns are used in compliance with the law."
As I was considering this my thoughts reflected something Lessig had written earlier in the same chapter: "...the vast majority of it (type C sharing) is unavailable solely because the publisher or the distributor has decided it no longer makes economic sense to the company to make it available." P2P systems are exactly what do not make sense to the company. They are a potentially world-wide distribution system operated under the direction of an individual. Their existence began as outside the control of the corporate powers, and they offered the potential to do away with or substantially downsize an established system. Any competition, no matter how slight, is crushed according to sound business practice. The corporate giants are obviously looking to do just that to squash or control their competition. Despite many benefits of p2p, the record companies and others cannot allow it to flourish because it does not make sense to them. The way things currently are mean the p2p-users are helpless against the company will. The established powers have the capital and resources to take-on anyone they deem in violation of the law. Even if they lose it doesn't mean much to them; they are simply interested in profits and are willing to pursue anyone that may be cutting into them. I think it's fairly obvious this is not a war on copyright infringement but on p2p. The problem with this is an unfair fight; their is only one group who has any real ability to speak. The companies have everything at their disposal from lobbies to friendly media; the p2p world is a collection of individuals relatively silent on the level of communication the companies are capable of (they have great potential but that is all). If not watched, the corporations will eliminate or radically restrict a valuable technology not in public interest but their own. Dictating the development of technology and resources based on that alone is utter madness. Any thoughts on what's to be done about it?

Free Culture I

In Free Culture Lawrence Lessig addresses blogs (Chapter 2: "Mere Copyists"). He equates the blog with a purer form of Democracy because it is truly ruled by the people. What seems to interest Lessig in blogging is the potential to return to "deliberation." He appears to relish their unregulated power to voice any kind of view (as compared to the mainstream media). What I found interesting was the wistful tone of his description; when he talked about the Trent Lott affair and the tireless efforts of bloggers he sounded firmly in the blogging camp. However the blog is clearly not a news source for any responsible individual, something which he does not take time to address. The blog is unregulated and more importantly unverified--we have no knowledge of the credentials of the writer. While this blog could be quickly transformed into a bugle for satanic Nazi anarchism, whose to say I'm actually the person voicing those (misguided) views? Furthermore there is no fact checking or code of journalist responsibility which is so important in keeping the news from devolving into strictly matters of opinion and slant (granted it seems to be happening in some places--cough, Fox News v. MSNBC--but I believe blogs are nearly entirely this sort of opinion column writing). Lessig says the primary news providers are driven by the need to keep the publics fickle attention. This is, of course, absolutely true. However he then goes on to applaud blogs for their ability to "obsess," etc. Does it sound like a bad thing that a blog story should begin dictating the coverage of traditional news providers? The example of Lott's "exposed" prejudice would seem to clearly contest. However consider another example: the 2004 case of John Kerry and the Swift Boat Veterans. The story appeared early on the news, and then was quickly forgotten as almost every serious journalist understood it to be tripe. However our nation's valuable bloggers (and I cringe as I am now one of them) managed to carry on the search. In what unfolded, they managed to cause such an unwarranted stir they forced the issue back upon the media. This of course became a point of distraction from real and valuable campaign questions, and may have contributed to the re-election of George W. Bush.
Now I don't mean to say blogs should be forbidden from looking at politics and matters of importance greater than whether the blogger likes Frosted Flakes or Rice Krispies. All I'm trying to say is the incredibly vast majority of bloggers are "amateurs." I would like Lessig to prove that the number of trained, competent individuals with access to the means of explaining world events is not a negligible percentage of the blogging whole. How many conspiracy theorists pop up every single day? How many angry partisans simply say a known fact is wrong, allowing some other individual to be comforted in his own view and add weight to his narrow-minded conviction? I think the blog has awesome potential for sharing, thinking out loud, and reasoning through our own beliefs. It is when we trust blogs frequented only by like-minded individuals for our information that we get into trouble. The last thing the country needs is to believe it's us or them. What we need is truth that will challenge and shape where we stand by sole virtue of being truth.

PS
A quick note on Chapter 3. As I was reading the encounter between Jesse Jordan and the RIAA I couldn't help but feel a call to arms similar to the revolutionary. What impressed me was the completeness of the story: an innocent youth looking to do service for the people is grossly and unjustly assailed by the godless institution. The man is defeated by the simple thought of the beast--an illustration of oppression and corruption so clear I struggle to understand how even the very lawyers could miss it (unless they really are soulless). The RIAA juggernaut stole everything the man had, but in the end they only created an enemy. An activist was born from the crimes of the system. My hope is only that it doesn't take a direct encounter with injustice for us to wake up from our apathy and stand behind something other than ourselves. Like every hopeful idealist before me, I don't think the corporations are lobbies are bigger than the people. If we built them, so we should be able to unmake them.

Plagiarism Experience Reflection

For me the plagiarism experience came in three distinct emotional stages: first excitement and enthusiasm, then a certain bitterness, and finally a strange acceptance and empathy for the plagiarist.

When we began discussing the project I was really eager to do it. I thought it would be fun and I had quite a few ideas floating around. My goal was to “rip-off” an incredible number of sources and blend them into one seamless paper. I wanted to borrow from everywhere--Calvin and Hobbes, books I’d read years ago with passages still standing out brilliantly in memory, the dilapidated ancient texts of Helen C. White, you name it. I wanted to make my plagiarism epic, on the scale of Ben-hur or the D-Day invasion.

Thus I had several things in consideration format-wise. My original thought was to write a short story. I really enjoy writing creative work and I thought this would be a golden opportunity to try out a scenario with pieces drawn from the work of favorite authors. However as I thought about it I realized there was almost nothing I would want to use word-for-word. I wanted to change things drastically from their original forms, and it became more like I was alluding or making a veiled reference than actually plagiarizing. It certainly wasn’t 25% plagiarized, so I thought about just dropping in the chunks verbatim. The problem with that was just how obvious it was. I realized that because the class would be searching for pieces plagiarized I had no chance of pulling it off (I think maybe with an instructor grading dozens of papers and not aware something has been plagiarized I could have slipped it past). Anyway I also didn’t feel right about doing it, which gradually led to the resentful stage. As Emily commented in class, plagiarizing creative writing is most offensive. Be it pride or something else, I hated the concept that what I was writing wasn’t mine. I decided to bag the entire effort, largely out of annoyance and frustration.

Of course these are midterm weeks and the assignment wasn’t a central focus for most of my time. Over the weekend I went to Iowa for a conference, and didn’t get back until Sunday night. It was then that I gained disturbing insight into the mind of a plagiarist. I’d like to say I purposely waited until 11:30 Sunday night to write the paper in order to feel as a plagiarist feels, however that would be a lie. In fact I was very busy studying for my other classes, all the while remembering the paper was due at 8:50 the next morning. Now for many of you that doesn’t sound all that bad, but I’m a guy that likes going to bed early. In other words, I think I sufficiently experienced the panic, stress, and desperation of a plagiarist. Luckily I had been thinking about the paper while I should have been doing other things all week, so I had some idea what to write. I still had to actually put it down on paper, though. I think this truly reflected the hastiness of plagiarized papers; I wasn’t particularly satisfied with the way it turned out, but there was no other option and no more time. Of course most plagiarists probably don’t lovingly dote over their stolen creations. When I was done I didn’t feel anything except relief that it was over. I didn’t give thought to anything except going to sleep. I imagine were this real the emotions would quickly kick back in after I had turned it in and realized it was now in the position to ruin my academic reputation. Luckily I don’t have to endure that particular fear. My only worry now is whether I’ll win the prize for best plagiarist among my group.

If I didn’t know better I’d say this whole thing was meant to teach a lesson. On the one hand I experienced how guilty i felt plagiarizing someone else’s work. I realized I like the sense of satisfaction I get from making it on my own steam, even if it isn’t regarded particularly highly by an instructor. I also discovered something very unexpected. While I would have originally called plagiarists a variety of negative things, I now have some insight into the humanity of academia’s “them.” They probably aren’t plotting creeps with some bizarre sense of right and wrong; they’re probably very real people with extenuating circumstances. At least that was my story. If this newfound wisdom has inspired me to ask one thing of an instructor, it would be to ask a few questions before offering a plagiarist up to the wrathful gods of higher-education academic honesty. Chances are that person isn’t as much a monster as we’d all like to believe. If we pause for a moment, we might become uncomfortably understanding of someone we've been taught to despise. Chances are, if we look deep enough, there’s a little plagiarist in all of us.

Ghostwriting Reflection

My ghostwriting experience was for a friend in an English course here at the UW. She writes poetry for the class and so it was my job to create a poem using her voice, style, etc.

I really didn't have too much trouble getting into the mentality of writing in a distinctive voice other than my own. I sort of imagined that I was writing a character, in this case my friend, and had to speak the way she would. I didn't have too hard of a time writing the poem either; I've taken a lot of English and am experienced with the conventions and forms of poetry.

The most difficult part of the process for me was mimicking her particular style. She writes very differently from me; our styles of poetry have almost no similarity. I wanted to rhyme and use meter while her style was totally free verse. Thus I was surprised by just how much she had to say when she looked over my original draft. I didn't really expect her to say much, but she pointed out different things she said would never come from her. One of the biggest things she pointed out was that I had let myself as ghostwriter come into the writing. I had used recurring symbols particular to myself to mimic what she had done, but as she informed me, they were completely alien to her.

I really didn't have a moral crisis as I worked on writing "her" poem, but I think that was because I knew all along she wouldn't be turning it in for credit or actually claiming it as her own. At the same time, ridiculous as this will sound, I didn't like the kind of poem that I had to write so I wasn't really concerned about not being credited for it. Maybe if I were really proud of my work, and then knew everyone would always credit it to someone else, I would be upset. I learned that I’m alright with bending the rules because I knew it was pretend. We’ll see if the same holds true for the plagiarism experience, which should be far more extreme.

I think my experience was fairly typical; my author described what she wanted and then told me to fix what she didn’t like. I think more extensive ghostwriting, on say a book length scale, would be far more challenging. Although it was kind of fun this time around, I would never want to do that in the “real” world.

My relationship with the author is intact; actually she was flattered I asked her to do it. In the world of professional ghostwriting I'd guess you're just a tool to be utilized, so this by comparison was a positive experience.

More on Ghostwriting

"Write something for someone else's signature or credit, to their specifications and satisfaction. Make sure your “author” won't get in trouble for having you do this." And with that the Ghostwriting project is off!
While many of my peers are taking on short academic papers and speeches (perhaps even a resume or two), I'll be heading out into more disreputable waters. Like Vincent Lardo assisting the deceased Lawrence Sanders in writing "his" novel McNally's Dilemma, I too am venturing into the world of creative ghostwriting. The main difference between Lardo and myself is that my author is still among the living. My particular ghostwriting will follow her current authorship activities; that is to say I will be assuming the guise of a struggling female poet in the cruel, post-modernist conurbation of Madison, Wisconsin. Can I mimic the syntax and intuition of an up-and-coming young bard? Can I assume the unique voice of this generation and fool even the most learned of literary critics? Will I win the Pulitzer Prize for poetry (which would really be irksome, considering I expect to come in eighty-seventh on the list of people thanked in my author’s glorious anthology)? Am "I" the greatest rhymester of all-time?!? Tune in next week and find out when “Ghostwriting! A Tale of Poverty, Exploitation, and Soap…” (or PES) airs! Same time! Same channel!

(This, kids, is what we in the radio/movie industry call a ‘teaser trailer.’ Can you say that? Very good! These ‘trailers’ build-up hype to the highly anticipated release of something that inevitably flops; case in point, Snakes on a Plane. Anyway, if you’d like to share your personal ghostwriting experiences here in equally dramatic fashion, I’d love to read about them. We’re ghostwriters united! Our stories must be told!)

Artful Deception

"Artful Deception" by Gregory Baruch of the Washington Post was my first serious exposure to the phenomena of ghostwriting. His article contrasts widely agreed upon examples of fraud with the ghostwriting practices of the publishing industry. Baruch cites examples of dishonored historians, expelled students, deceptive advertisements, and even cheating musicians getting caught and condemned by the public. The rest of the article deals with the widespread use of ghostwriting and its mysterious immunity to any charges similar to the above. Many books today allegedly from the pen of celebrity authors are truthfully the work of nearly invisible writers. Frequently it takes considerable searching to find evidence of such arrangements, the actual author being nothing more than a passing name listed at the back of the book. Occasionally ghostwriting takes on a ridiculous quality, books coming out after their "authors" have died. Yet the practice continues virtually unchallenged. Why?
I understand the necessity of ghostwriting in areas such as politics and business. However even then I feel the individual delivering the text has a responsibility to have considerable input and final say in the writing. The public is not aware of the extent of ghostwriting, as the defense goes. People do not want to read autobiographies written by someone else. In that case the reader is buying a lie; he is not reading the words of the man on the cover but those of someone who may never have spoken with the individual. The reader would then have just as much incentive to purchase a biography or a fiction novel as the lie perpetrated upon them. I find it offensive. To me authorship is a trust between reader and writer, one which ghostwriting grossly violates. This dishonesty even further irritates me when I consider that the ghostwriter receives a pittance for his work, while the "author" rakes in serious sums. I don't think anyone is completely innocent in this practice, the ghostwriter is the enabler to the whole operation. I know I will be very careful about the books I buy that claim to be written by a well-known persona. I don't intend to buy anything that has been ghostwritten. My money will go to the person that has it coming to them.

Walter Benjamin

Today in class we discussed Walter Benjamin's essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction." Benjamin writes of the new place of art post development of film. In wake of mass communication technology, much of the cult aura surrounding masterworks is shattered. Benjamin postulates that in this new world art would assume a central role, crucial to the very heart of politics.
What I found particularly fascinating was the impact of time and place in understanding Benjamin's writing. When I first began reading the article I had been under impression that the piece was first written in 1968. Thus when presented with talk of Marx (and especially Fascism at a later point) I began wondering how relevant the essay could have been even in its day. However I soon realized I had made a vital error in approaching Benjamin, and had to adjust to understand the time that had produced it.
The next hurdle to understanding came with knowing something about Benjamin himself. Walter Benjamin was a German literary critic. More specifically, he was a Marxist and a Jewish mysticist during a period of history when either could mean death in Nazi Germany. He would have thus had a naturally critical eye for Nazi activity during the 1930s. So we see the impact of place too on the author's writing.
As Benjamin came to realize, Fascism was a political movement that had fallen in love with technology. Hitler often rode in a Mercedes-Benz, the armies of Fascist nations paraded the most state-of-the-art weaponry, and Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will was the pinnacle of what mechanical reproduction could accomplish. It is from this last one that Benjamin undoubtedly came to understand the Fascist desire to aestheticize politics for the purpose of control. His arguments on mechanical reproduction are entirely shaped by his particular experiences. How do you think Barthes would respond to this assumption? What about Foucault?

Authors in Popular Media (Assignment 1)

For the first project of semester we will each choose a film that deals with authorship. The paper should explain the general storyline of the film and describe the way in which the author is portrayed. The goal, of course, is to compare this representation with the philosophical and academic probing of authorship which we have been exploring in class. Having looked at Barthes, Foucault, and Benjamin we should have ample material to draw on.
After considering several options I am now more or less set on using the 2005 film "Capote." The movie follows a popular writer from the "New Yorker" to Kansas and the scene of grisly murders. Capote becomes deeply involved in the small town of Holcomb and, through extensive interviews, begins to feel a sort of compassion for the prisoners. He faces several unique situations, including a conflict between his own feelings and the desire for the proper ending to his book--an execution. The unusual position of feeling for his subjects as he does and being actively involved in their unfolding stories, a sort of new character himself, is a strange blurring of the author-subject relationship. In short I believe "Capote" will prove both entertaining in preparation for the paper as well as the source of excellent material. Any thoughts?

We're up and running...

So it seems we've got a Blog on our hands.

The purpose of this particular Blog is to gather and share information with my classmates throughout the Fall '07 semester. I'll be posting at least once a week, often responding to another user's comments or expanding on something discussed during class time. In addition to course material I'll try to bring in other outside examples to keep things fresh. I'll also experiment with links to other things. Any suggestions are appreciated. Enjoy!

Note:
The course website is...
https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/rsbarnett/web/eng201_authorship/index.html