According to the definition that our
class came up with, a remix is when you are presented with an idea, transform
the idea, and combine with another tangible idea or perspective to create
something that has yet to be thought of.
Instead of referring to what the rest of the world calls a remix,
Johnson-Eilola and Selber take the remix notion one-step further and apply the
assemblage component. Johnson-Eilola and
Selber define assemblage as “texts built primarily and explicitly from existing
texts in order to solve a writing or communication problem in a new
context.”
Assemblage can range anywhere from
Patchwriting to web design templates.
However, society deems assemblage as practicality a remix of
plagiarism. You are taking multiple
sources of information, changing a few elements of each source, and claiming
that it is your own. A remix and
assemblage, although both vaguely similar, are close to polar opposites on the
originality spectrum, given their current definitions. Society accepts a remix more willing than
they do with assemblage. The vehicle for
which a remix or assemblage is also an important factor. People will be more willing to accept remixes
for music and more willing to accept assemblages for web designs and
Parchwriting.
After reading the article, the line
between plagiarism and originality is porous.
When your sources are concealed, all of your writing is copied word for
word and you are not doing it as part of Patchwriting, your idea does not have
originality and is plagiarism. Yet originality
can be plagiarized by means of assemblage.
The entire gambit of remix and assemblage is all a matter of perspective
and should be used based on the audience you are trying to communicate with.
The only part of the article that was
rather confusing was the times the authors went in depth with their examples of
remix and assemblages. The authors
jumped around a lot and made it difficult to follow along at parts.
No comments:
Post a Comment