Originality

In a completely digital world can there be such a thing as an original? If something can be copied perfectly, can it be considered special? While the work can no doubt inspire, does the lack of individualism devalue it as a whole? If every person can have the same picture at the same level of quality is it worth anything?

Does mass production and mass distribution make something drastically, even exponentially shorter lived. If one could take a picture, capture on memory card, something that summarized the entire human experience does it change anything if everyone has complete and total access to recreate the image anytime they want. Art - be it music, painting, photography, et al - derives much of its value from not only the quality, but in part from its rarity. You have to travel to the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa, even though you can go online and look at a copy anytime you want. If there is an original that cannot be copied it makes the desire for the original stronger.

Because of this will we see the value of canvas, live theater, and other original forms increase in value? This argument include the assertion of quality, obviously bad theater will always be around, and disappoint generations to come.

This is not to say that the artist or creator won’t (or shouldn’t) become wealthy for their talents. I am not discussing this at an individual, or even momentary level, I am talking about the effects to come. No what I am postulating is more on society as a whole. Using popular music might be the most apropos example to illustrate this. It would seem that an individual song is worth approximately $0.99 on the free market. It would also seem that music has moved into the realm of mass production, becoming a streamlined process giving musicians access to their audience quicker and more efficiently than in the past, and making everyone involved richer. The musicians, record companies, marketers, venues, et al gain financially and the fans gain (hopefully) spiritually (if that can be used in a nonreligious manner) and emotionally.

What this brings me to is could there ever be another Beatles, or Elvis? Bands or Artists (not just musicians) so memorable that they become part of the collective conscience, known or unknown. Will a large percentage of my child’s friends know any artist that was popular when I was younger or even as I became older. If someone like Nickelback has a reunion tour (assuming they break up) or is still touring when I am 60 (I am 25 now) and I went to the show would it all be people who were young adults in the 90s and early part of the millennium? Will there be anyone under the age of 30 at the show?

This is not to say that change is bad and should be resisted. By and large change is good. No, this is more of an interior monologue assessing and preparing for the major changes that are sure to come. Regardless of how much the RIAA and MPAA fight it, there is a major change coming that will differ so vastly from what the generations before knew that the past will have to explained at length for the future to understand how it was.

Back to the original point. Anything that is created in a digital medium is necessarily not an original. That does not mean the creator does not have rights over what has been created, it means that if something can be copied with 100% accuracy the word copy cannot be used. That is the easy part, the more important part is the effect of this notion on society as a whole. If a song is created or a digital photograph taken and duplicates of the original file sold to every person in the world (price is irrelevant.) Lets say our theoretical photo is the height of human achievement, summarizes a single emotion at every level. The ability to produce this photo is sold to every person in the world what becomes of it, is it marveled at for ages to come or, more likely, does it become a phenomena for a month and is then forgotten. Resigned to a VH-1 special about the decade in which it was popular, future failed and B-level celebrities and comedians waxing nostalgic about what they were doing when it was vogue. The important thought left is this: Can anything be great and eternal in a digital world?