nature of collaboration (was live performance)

[ndk <ndkent@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Performance strategy is based on the recognizability of most source 
> recordings. These range from spoken voice (William Burroughs, Noam 
> Chomsky, Alvin Lucier, James Joyce, et al.), to environmental sounds 
> (surf, rain, insects, short wave radio, etc.) to music (Satie, 
> Xenakis, the Who, Dick Dale, Conlon Nancarrow, Bach. et al.). 
> Juxtapositions of sounds are sometimes musically motivated and 
> sometimes theatrically motivated. The particular choice of material 
> can be haphazard or meaningful, depending on my mood, and the number 
> of different sources can vary from just two to a dozen or more. For 
> instance, my last performance was on the campus of UC Santa Cruz. 
> This is where I first heard a recording of Conlon Nancarrow's player 
> piano music (in Jim Tenney's computer music class) and it is also 
> where I met my violist partner of the past 16 years. I selected a 
> recording of one of her recitals, playing a Bach Cello suite, and I 
> chose a Nancarrow CD (Nancarrow happens also to have been influenced 
> by Bach).

Your work here seems very intriguing in that you mention utilizing,
selecting or re-contextualizing, I don't know the best term for the
sources (above) and you also have made substantial work with artists in
a more traditional collaborative context too. So your perspective might
be quite interesting if you care to ellaborate. 

Now maybe my question or concern here does not apply, so my appologies
if it doesn't. I'm making my statements below on the assumption that the
sources 

What concerns me, to focus the issue and importantly remove it from
debates on plagiarism or copyright issues, is the issue of where are the
lines drawn or where should the be drawn in utilizing the works of others?

For instance in a traditional collaboration there hopefully is a two way dialog.

But what about presenting artwork utilizing sourced material by someone
else without their given approval. Does the impulse to use such material
superseded the originator's rights to protect their work from not being
presented in a compromised manner? Does the recognizability or origin
mean it's "fair game"? Does random selection remove responisbility?

Maybe I'm answering my own question that some definition of creativity
has to come to bear if it is granted (or is it?) that the right to
utilize other's works supersedes the rights to preserve the intactness
of ones own works. Is it okay anytime or place or maybe it is just okay
if its made clear what is going on, like stating openly "I am utilizing
the work of this person and juxtaposing it".

But what really concerns me is if the attitude that ones right to
recontextualize works on a non mutual basis is acceptable just because
its sound and its in the uninhibited "out there". But then is it equally
fair game for pretty much anyone to censor, edit, remove aspects of or
tacitly misrepresent these works kinds of works too without the artist's
approval? 

nicholas d. kent

------------------------------