Reuse Case: Unsolicited Collaboration: Difference between revisions
(Created page with "<p style="background-color: #5FB404;font-family:'Georgia'; font-size:24px;line-height:32px; padding: 2em; "> In the course of a longterm project on cultural piracy, with a focus on book piracy, one of the artist researchers, inspired by Daniel Alarcon's articles in Gratnta Magazine "Life among Pirates" visited pirate book markets in Lima, Peru. Leaving the markets with a big bag full of pirate copies they started to compare the pirate versions to the official copies....") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<p style="background-color: #5FB404;font-family:'Georgia'; font-size:24px;line-height:32px; padding: 2em; "> | <p style="background-color: #5FB404;font-family:'Georgia'; font-size:24px;line-height:32px; padding: 2em; "> | ||
In the course of a longterm project | In the course of a longterm project on book piracy, the artist researchers, inspired by Daniel Alarcon's articles in Granta Magazine "Life among Pirates" visited pirate book markets in Lima, Peru. Leaving the markets with a big bag full of pirate copies they started to compare the pirate versions with the official copies. It seemed the pirates not only took control over the objects but also the content: One of the pirate copies has had two extra chapters secretly and anonymously added to an autobiographical novel by a wellknown Peruvian journalist and TV presenter. The extra chapters are good, good enough to pass undetected by a reader. Somebody had borrowed the official author's voice and sneaked in two more fictionalized chapters about the author's life without asking for authorization from the author or publisher. Should this act of infiltrating the author's voice be seen as a critique of normalised concept of individual authorship as something proprietary and stable? Is this as an unsolicited collaboration proposing authorship as dialogical and participative? What is the motivation behind inhabiting someone elses voice? There is no cultural capital, nor financial gain, since the pirate author remains anonymous. Buyers dont want to read a chapter by an anonymous author, when they buy a book, say from a well known author. Afterall, friends in Peru were extremely surprised and slightly unsettled to see altered books. How many modified books have they been reading over the years? | ||
<p/> | <p/> | ||
[[Category: Cases]] | [[Category: Cases]] | ||
Revision as of 15:58, 26 July 2024
In the course of a longterm project on book piracy, the artist researchers, inspired by Daniel Alarcon's articles in Granta Magazine "Life among Pirates" visited pirate book markets in Lima, Peru. Leaving the markets with a big bag full of pirate copies they started to compare the pirate versions with the official copies. It seemed the pirates not only took control over the objects but also the content: One of the pirate copies has had two extra chapters secretly and anonymously added to an autobiographical novel by a wellknown Peruvian journalist and TV presenter. The extra chapters are good, good enough to pass undetected by a reader. Somebody had borrowed the official author's voice and sneaked in two more fictionalized chapters about the author's life without asking for authorization from the author or publisher. Should this act of infiltrating the author's voice be seen as a critique of normalised concept of individual authorship as something proprietary and stable? Is this as an unsolicited collaboration proposing authorship as dialogical and participative? What is the motivation behind inhabiting someone elses voice? There is no cultural capital, nor financial gain, since the pirate author remains anonymous. Buyers dont want to read a chapter by an anonymous author, when they buy a book, say from a well known author. Afterall, friends in Peru were extremely surprised and slightly unsettled to see altered books. How many modified books have they been reading over the years?
