Madeleine: Larry Lessig Talk

I think Larry Lessig brings up some important issues with the debate over art and plagiarism in the digital world, but I think an even clearer distinction can be made between the practices of adaptation and appropriation. Basically, Lessig advocates for a world which does not criminalize artistic invention which builds upon (or is based entirely upon) old media. I think that this idea has a lot of merit, because in many ways art is inherently referential--I don't mean that original art doesn't exist, merely that the definition of "original" is a little bit more complicated than most people allow for. In many senses, all art is an adaptation of our experience, and that being said it would be impossible to prove the originality or legality of one person's adaptation of another's work. I think appropriation is an attempted adaptation in which the appropriator fails to produce something new from the conglomerate of ideas and materials. This distinction is admittedly hazy, but I think it could serve as a useful guide when evaluating the artistic intention and sincerity behind someone's work--is it an adaptation? Did the artist refer to cultural/societal influences which are inescapable and build upon them to form a unique work of art? Or did he or she merely hodge-podge together a group of other works without really creating anything new? I think art which refers to existing art or other work is inescapable, especially in a society which is so pervasively digital, but I do think that it is imperative to maintain this distinction.