In 1906, John Phillips Sousa was lobbying Congress against the new technology referred to as "talking machines." Sousa declared the "infernal talking machines" might lead to the evolutionary loss of our vocal chords!
The reality, as Lessing interprets, is that Sousa worried the American family would no longer be "re-creators" of the daily music. Without recorded music, families would re-create the songs on the front porch or sitting room. The invention of the "talking machines" would mean music would simply be consumed (or "read only" in our digital language).
Although this talk was filmed in 2007, the big revolt Lessing is waiting for really hasn't happened yet. Small steps have, though. Lessing briefly mentions a solution involving artists being able to choose their own level of sharing (you'll see the CC fly across the screen). He's referring to the Creative Commons repository, which is now alive and thriving. (An additional small step: one no longer needs a $1500 computer to generate content...a $100 smart phone will do.)
Running time: 18:59
Points to Ponder:
- Do you agree with Lessing's idea that we are again in a read-write culture - similar in concept to the days (before recorded content) of sitting on the front porch and "singing the song of the day"?
- Can our read-write culture revive our vocal chords (that Sousa predicted would fall pray to evolution because of disuse)?
- How do you see the way our students (or your children if applicable) view content and content creation? How does this differ from the way you consumed content as a former student?
- Lessing talks about "People produce(ing) for the love of what they're doing" as the equivalent of the families of the early 1900s sitting on their porch singing songs. This concept is prevalent in things like open source software (ex. Moodle and Linex: both are open source...nobody makes a cent on licensing these softwares, yet they continue to be upgraded and widely used), Flickr photo pools, self-publishing websites and free music sites. Could the idea of 're-creating' be one of the standard past times for today's generation (just as singing on the porch, listening to the Lone Ranger on the radio, or watching Walter Cronkite at 6pm were for other generations?)
- What struck you as interesting, remarkable or insightful or short-sighted, neglectful or irrelevant about this talk?
I did not think he really made the connection for me. It seems that creativity has been around for a long time and will continue. Is the use of old tools used to make modern sculptures really much different? http://heartlessmachine.com/artwork/2415445_Big_Trouble.html
ReplyDeleteI was struck by the Jesus the Musical example he used. In my mind it raises questions about how political correctness stifles creativity. It seems that there are some critters that are more equal than others in that Salman Rushdie or Jyllands-Posten still have large numbers of people serious about wanting to kill them.
It made more sense to me after visiting The Creative Commons website.
I've seen this TED video before, and I spent most of it trying to figure out where. Most likely it was in a class on legal issues in libraries. Copyright law is a complicated beast that EVERYONE has crossed in this age of free flowing information. I think Lessig has a point when he says there is a prohibition like mentality when it comes to multimedia and copyright law. The old laws don't quite fit anymore and a new equilibrium, between creator and user, hasn't been struck yet. In the meantime it's hard not to break the law with-out divorcing yourself completely from the current information culture.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure why but I kept thinking about Pinterest during the talk. There is so much information on Pinterest. I would gather that most is posted without permission from the original source. However, it has started a revolution. People are cooking, painting, planning weddings and future nurseries like never before. They are taking ideas and making them their own. However, the originators are most likely not getting credit. Not getting any sort of income. However, is that a bad thing? Is it wrong that pallets that would before go to a landfill are now coffee tables and day beds and bookshelves? Is it wrong that new parents are finding tips quickly and easily to put their newborns to sleep? Maybe I would feel differently if I had posted an article about how to create the perfect wedding centerpiece and then saw my work recreated at my second cousin's wedding.....or maybe I would think, "How cool is that?"
ReplyDeleteI do think it interesting that Pinterest came to mind for you as there's already been a great deal of discussion on Pinterest and copyright on a variety of blogs that I follow. To some degree, I know that many blogs are enjoying more publicity than ever (cooking blogs, for example) due to recipes passing along thanks to beautiful photography. And many companies recognize the additional way that they gain essentially free advertising by their clothes and products popping up in someone's feed, and have made it as easy as possible for folks to pin images from their site. That being said, Pinterest has already had to revise their TOS as to who owns what in terms of the images posted therein, and your ability to be sue based upon what is posted.
DeleteI agree that this culture has the ability to MAKE more stuff because of digital technologies, and I like that. People can do far more writing now than they did pre-internet--emails, blogs, on-line journals, etc. This is so helpful for many students--and it give us (as teachers) so many more vehicles for having students do writing.
ReplyDeleteBut I wonder how the evolution of digital technologies affects things like WRITING. Students now text instead of emailing--texting is shorter, telegraphic, can't stand up to in-depth "conversation" as well as writing an email. Or can it?
The newest devices--like my Kindle--don't have keyboards, except virtual ones on a screen. It's not so much reading as scanning when i got to websites, and not so much writing as pointing and clicking and pushing things around the screen. If I want to do some real writing, I use my laptop instead of my Kindle. But I think the future is no keyboards . . . hmm. Will keyboards go the way handwriting has? And what kinds of "writing" will our new culture do, then?
(Note: Yes, I sidestepped issues about copyright in this post--I'm more interested in issues of the "write" culture.)
I love thinking about these things: I wonder if, after the Gutenberg press came into play, there were philosophers wondering how this technology would affect writing? Would they say people would become more frivolous in their writing because it was now too simple? As each new wave moves forth, do we relive the same worries and same debates?
DeleteI liked the part where he said that kids of today "make", while in years past we "watched." It is a whole new parental world in determining what boundaries to put in their "tools of creativity."
ReplyDeleteI find, that in classes that stress a good deal of reading, that the better students are able to understand and respond to what they've read in interesting/creative ways. I wouldn't expect that is true of most people today, though. So when Lessig describes the strange, alien world of "your kids" and their amazing technological wizardry, I'm thinking that (a) some of those "kids" can use old technologies, too; and (b) most kids are not being particularly creative or social in their use of technology.
ReplyDeleteWill the answer be found in law? Probably, despite its limitations. Listening to the glib and snarky Justice Antonin Scalia talk about how/why/when people buy health insurance, or comparing it to broccoli, fills me with despair that any practical solution can be found to this pervasive social problem that will pass court muster. As Lessig says, the law responds to influence first, and is slow to grasp changes or the practical implications of things (but hooray for Justice Douglas, back in the day... I can just imagine the various hypothetical projectiles Scalia would have had flying over those poor chickens). In the long run, it probably gets it right, though maybe more slowly than we would like.
I agree with Lessing but don't think we veered too far from that culture in the past. In being connected with so many independent musicians over the years I have heard them talk about how they got into music by creating remixes or their own sounds. I think recorded content has allowed more people to be creative.
ReplyDeleteI do think there is a lot of listening only going on currently, especially because people have access to whatever content they want and don't have to consume content they aren't comfortable with. However, rap and hip-hop developed during a time when recorded music was starting to boom and many other forms have thrived through the years.
Students are much less concerned with the origin and rights to created content. This is a problem when they try to use it and don't acknowledge the creator or use it improperly or inaccurately. I think they share things so freely they expect everyone else to as well. As a life-long student, I have changed in the way I consumed content. I made mixed tapes and was an early adopter in burning cds and downloading from Napster. I have now since created enough content that I wish to be acknowledged for it and therefore understand acknowledging others for their work.
I'm not sure this is getting at the question but I think one of the things that is so much easier to do today than before is to collaborate with others whom you don't even know and a willingness to forgo direct credit - working for something larger than yourself. In that past that mean serving in the military or working on the farm. Maybe now that means developing software or submitting newsworthy items?
I don't think we've lost the read-write culture. I think it has just changed from being in-person, familial, and necessary to more distant, diverse, and exploratory.
Lessing has a lot of interesting things to say, and I would like to hear more from him about Creative Commons.
ReplyDeleteLots gets said about "mash up culture" and that part of his lecture wasn't as interesting to me. Saying "that is how the youth think" seems a little reductive. I hope this is not the only youth culture or the only way that "youth" think. His example videos all seemed to come down to the same message: "Look at the funny juxtaposition!"
I think some of you above are correct that there is still a good deal of read-only culture, and that this isn't an issue that will be solved with our iphones....
We read a couple of Lessig's essays in the FYS classes that I taught on cyberethics. A quick Google search will turn up a number of links. It is clear from his writings that Lessig believes that the law must evolve to accommodate changes in technology. It clear that the millennial students view information shared digitally differently than those who impose a strict reading of current law. Not one of them would think twice about borrowing music to enhance a slide show. And remixes are here to stay.
ReplyDeleteThe idea that technology has made it possible for everyone (if we ignore the digital divide) in this generation to be more creative than their parents is an interesting take on the evolution that digital technology has brought.
Perhaps the "read" today is seen as a starting point to be expounded upon. The "write" is seeing the many interpretations that can be gleaned from the material that has been read and applying it in new ways. This takes the familiar and presents it in a way that makes others laugh, ponder the meaning of the words, or allow for more creativity by the reader in producing his/her own work.
ReplyDeleteMy first comment--watch out for that bus!..
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of sharing technology along with utilizing it in learning. It appears to me that today's student is looking for a hook, to be entertained rather that to explore and learn on their own. If we can use what others have created to enhance our delievery without copyright issues, it's a win-win
All of my reactions to this are skeptical. Most reports that the sky is falling are exaggerated. Recorded music did not stifle creativity, despite what Lessig seems to buy into. The supreme court may continue to fight its rear-guard battle on behalf of the old recording industry, but it's hard to discern much effect on artists themselves. We can certainly vouch that it's not having much effect on limiting students!
ReplyDeleteCreativity is changing. Recorded music today represents an entirely new level of creativity (one that I'll never have), but it certainly doesn't eliminate the creativity of the past (on the front porch singers), it enhances it, adds a new element! It may take away one aspect, but it certainly adds a new one. Think of the engineers of today, with their software and systems, and what they can accomplish versus figuring everything out with a pencil and paper not too long ago.
ReplyDeleteRe-creating I think is definitely part of today's generation's activities. I keep saying that you don't need to have any new ideas for movies anymore- the hottest movies of the recent years are either made from a book, recreations of older films (or not that old films that they just want to make better), sequels, etc. Very rarely are there brand new ideas out there- and that is exactly what people want! People flock to see new interpretations, new technology put into place, which is certainly all creative, but with a twist.