Guest
Unregistered
|
|
Posted: Jan. 20 2006, 20:59 |
|
Quote (Groovy Granny @ Jan. 18 2006, 15:31) | Quite often some really nice music drifts into/from my imagination,but perhaps part of the sounds might come from subconcious and be from existing music heard before,even if not recognised at the time. |
I think the term for this is "cryptomnesia" - you recall it, but don't recall where it came from and, naturally enough, take it to be an original idea. Probably happens all the time. Another example from L+S is the intro-proper to Tears of an Angel where Bruce Springsteen's "Philadelphia" comes immediately to mind and this has been commented on in some of the reviews I've seen - possibly all of them...I don't remember Rocky (0:0:26 to 0:0:32) also reminds me of a tune from Shrek 1.
Frustrating for producers, to be sure. Where it becomes more interesting to me is in answering two questions that might arise from a grievance over the originality of a piece of music: at what point does a musician feel strongly enough to take action against a perceived copier and how is that action resolved? There you have all the dynamics of human behaviour (motivation, negotiation etc) which may not be sufficiently consistent for a musician to feel confident in releasing her work to an audience.
I'm thinking more along the lines of commercial releases where there may be a strong motivation to legally protect works. But I suspect your thoughts are more to do with a musician's reaction to discovering that the time and effort put into producing something thought to be original was in fact just to re-present someone else's work in a somewhat modified form. "Bugger! I thought I was being creative, when in fact I was not. Plus I feel like a goose for not seeing it at the time! Am I creative at all?? I'm not so sure now..."
I see no way around it. The new can't come unless the old is cleared away, so anyone interested in creativity needs to find out whether that can happen. I think you've raised a very important issue here.
|