香港獨立媒體 - Comments for "12.4遊行海報抄襲ipod nano海報?"

'不少人根本害怕簡潔'

Exactly the point. When I learnt 'graphic design', I was also very concerned and even afraid that my 'graphics' were not intense and attractive enough.

If the design (diagram, etc.) itself is not strong enough, people tend to need a lot of words to explain it, and that's the problem, whether if it is 'copied' or not (well, not the focus here, haha.).

about appropriation (is it mere copying???)

sorry, have to write in english. since i write a lot slower in chinese. and i am very very busy and i can't afford to write in chinese. yet, really want to share something to the idea of appropriation.

there are many deflated arguments (especially those personal attacks on sidekick) that i don't want to go into. i have left message in sidekick's blog and express my view on that.

i just want to concentrate to discuss on the idea of copying or appropriation.

there are always a lot of appropriations going on, especially on the art activism.

i want to raise a couple of things here:
1) the poster of course infringes the rights of the ipod adv. but some people may intentionally do so.
2) whether it is effective is another issue (little west discussed about it already)
3) again, as we talked a lot before in inmedia already, the existing copy rights law are unfair and problematic. they privatize and capitalize creative works to a crazy standard (see disney). and they don't concern the idea of fair use and non-commerical realm. this is why and what creative commons have been working on.
3) back in the 60's, the situationist international raised the idea of Detournement (in english they translate it as diversion) means appropriation. check out what is SI here:http://www.nothingness.org/
this is something i want to share with you all here.

i almost forgot i did give a lecture on detournement and i think it is good to share the notes that i have written. it is VERY rough as it is my own notes. but i think it is good to share. sorry, i have no time to work that all in chinese.

it is not to directly make a comment to the ipod case but as reference of what appropriation (and also art for political actions and activism) can be discussed and (re)-considered.

thanks.

take good care,
ahsun
--
麥海珊 anson mak
生活在生活本身。

徘徊於單行道 BI-The-Way, Tarrying...
web site/blog: http://www.aahsun.com
sound blog: http://www.soundmarking.net
-----------------------------------------

Lecture on Detournement (diversion) (##it is just part of the original notes i think is related, as there are other parts on letterism and sound poetry and a video work i showed in class for discussions but i took them out)

General explanation:

A method that you can use in making art, or in activism, or doing any kind of activities to involve in everyday life.

how?
In detournement, we can use ready-made objects, footage, press clippings, advs, to re-manipulate, to re-appropriate so to make new meanings.

Why is this method important?
it changes the meanings of the original source, and the ways of making meanings in a culture so it also changes culture in which these meanings are derived.

** i will start the discussion about detournement that related to Dada.
** It’s a method that the Dadaists used in the first place.

“rather than create entirely new forms, the lettrists wanted to take already existing elements and rearrange them. To this appropriative technique, derived in part from Dadaist collage, in part form a kind of distorted quotation…”

Anti-art, they aimed to destroy culture and therefore war. Anti-institutions, and rules.
They made art so to destroy art, destroy culture, wars and even the identities of artists.

Essentially, they aimed at Devaluing (on art especially on “high” art, on rules and on everything).

But Debord and the situationists did not agree with the ways that the dadaists used.
They thought that it was not meaningful just to devalue, to destroy but to revalue and rebuild in the re-manipulation and the re-appropriation.

Debord, Wolman sought to go beyond the pure negativity of Dada.

SI's comments on Duhamp’s painting:
“Duchamp’s drawing of a mustache on the Mona Lisa is no more interesting than the original version of that painting. We must now push this process to the point of negating the negation… we have to go beyond them.” Just like the dadists, they were anti everything, negated everything, but for Debord and the siuationists, they thought that they had to go beyond them by negating the total negative negation of this kind of art.

Two main points in my lecture:
1) why the SI thinks that it is a good method? 2) how to use this method

read Debord, Wolman wrote “methods of detournement” http://library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/display/3

(all the quotes and most of the following arguments come from this essay)

-- re-use and “adapt” the original elements in a “new context."

-- any element, no matter where they are taken from, can serve in making new combinations. in other words, it is about how the used materials and the ready made objects are being organized and being put together. the discoveries of modern poetry regarding the analogical structure of images demonstrate that when two objects are brought together, no matter how far apart their original contexts may be, a relationship is (that is how the used materials and the ready made objects are put together so to make new meanings within a certain relationship) always formed.

-- challenge “the bourgeois cult of originality of art and private ownership of art and thought.” when we talk about the commercial art, it must involve originality of art. It turns art into a community and it is a private owned thing. and it must involve a system of knowledge to decide the originality of art and the values, what is good art or what is bad art. they also wanted to challenge this system.

-- materials are cheap, or even free of charge, and accessible, democratization of art. everyone can do art. Everyone can get hold of materials, it is no longer a professional practice, it is not something that only the experts can do, no need to use much money…

-- “not only leads to discovery of new aspects of talent, but also clashing with all social and legal conventions, it cannot fail to be a powerful cultural weapon in the service of ‘a real class struggle.’ The cheapness of its products is the heavy artillery means of proletarian education, the first step towards a literary communism.” It works with their notion of free time and request for less work and making art in which art as a process of creativity and an experiment that change everyday live.
**It also explains the point on their ideas of creativity and making art, as a tool for change in the society.

two main categories of detoured elements:

1) minor detournement

the detournement of an element which has no importance in itself and which thus draws all its meaning from the new context in which it has been placed. e.g. a common place photographs, a neutral phrase, or a coat, a tree…
(the material being used do not have inbuilt meanings.)

2) deceptive detournement

the detournement with an intrinsically significant element, which derives a different scope from the new context. e.g. a tv commerical, a popular slogan, a sequence from Eisenstein's films, image of Hitler, Babie Doll and GI Joe doll in BLO Nightly News...

You don’t have to use either one. For an extended detourned works, they can be usually composed of one or more sequences of deceptive and minor detournement

Ways of doing detournement (Debord and Wolman’s views and you don't have to agree):

-- do not deform completely the original materials, it must be recognizable, as it depends on our “memory” of the original source so to “produce” the detoured effects.

-- The importance of collective memory e.g. Japanese cartoons to us, a theme song from a TV series. The contexts of the original materials sometimes are vital in building the new meanings. For instance the song: under the lion rock, it does not merely remind us of our personal memory but also a collective memory of a generation and serve as a ground to make critical comment o hk identity. So it involves different layers of meanings here.

-- The more distance the diversion, the more effective -- the simple reversal is always the most direct but the least effective, for instance, simply switch the roles of a beggar and a rich person. It is easy but for the siuationists, it is the least effective

(ahsun adds today: maybe it is related to the ipod case and why it is not effective. and i also think of why siu o's blogpoly is so sucessful. check it out here: http://www.littleoslo.com/cnt/home/index.php?cat=6
in fact, if anyone here is interested in DJ culture, s/he may know dj sampling is a method of apporpriation as well. DJ Spooky did write a lot about this in his new book and i wrote a post about it 2 months ago named DJ Spooky and sampled culture. check it out if you are interesed
http://aahsun.com/wpblog/?p=679)

-- New meanings made by the new combinations should not be so obvious… leave rooms for multi-interpretations. Not too straight forward. It may be a distortion, an irony, a mix, a critique of the original context but it has to give multi-layers meanings.

-- Titles are a basic element of detournement. This follows from two general observations: (1) that all titles are interchangeable and that they have a determinant importance in several genres. All the detective stories in the “Serie Noir’ are extremely similar. (2) title contributes strongly to a work, but here is an inevitable counteraction of the work on the title. This once can make extensive use of specific titles taken from scientific publications, or even many phrase found in illustrated children’s books.

中!!

小鬼：都係你明我想提一個乜問題。

視覺傳達

er…小西提出的是視覺傳達的問題，但在整個討論中卻沒甚麼人關心。

小西，我覺得有些事情是不能太怪政府和教育的，大概是每個人都有責任吧。你的帖子一出，即有回應來保護設計者，說他/她只是學生；又有回應指攪社運的沒資源沒時間沒$，所以不能請 “專業設計師”，所以包容一下吧；亦有指出因為有好多人好多意見要妥協，所以現在這些設計已經好有創意。

問題正正就在這裡吧！首先，宣傳品所涉及的是整個宣傳策略，所以問題不只是設計者的責任。宣傳策略和傳遞手法不是兩個獨立的東西，而是二而一的。當大家說要包容設計者，實質上就是把責任歸到設計者身上，這對設計者甚不公平。如果“集體的意見”已定出所有的字、標題和圖象概念，我想就算交到“專業設計師”的手裡，一樣會做不好。

另一方面，這亦是自動放棄：我唔係“專業人士”，d水準係咁架啦。那麼是不是說，以後如果要把宣傳做得好，就一定要請pr公司？在我的印象中，社運人並不是這樣子的，而是“團結就是力量”地度slogan、做banner……但是為什麼到了“設計”就舉手投降？

小西所說的社運宣傳品特徵：“文字主導，畫面很擠，不夠簡潔有力”其實正是設計大忌。因為(街上的)宣傳品多數只有很短的時間在讀者眼前“飄過”，只有很少很少人會停下來“閱讀”，所以宣傳品要求的是一種即時的刺激、單一而有力的訊息，讓讀者可以立即接收。

間或會幫忙做少少這些宣傳品的設計，個人的觀察是：不少人根本在害怕簡潔！在設計的討論中不斷會有人善意的提議這樣那樣的畫蛇添足，不是為圖畫加上不必要的小節來打亂意義，就是要出一段又一段的文字，再不然就是同一個組織同一個event同時出兩款或以上完全不同意念的宣傳品放在一起互相搶鏡。整個討論就是在不斷解釋簡潔的重要和堅持簡潔。然而有時結果都是被回一句：但係我都係想咁咁咁呀，或者都係要尊重返“大家”的意見。重文字而輕圖象，畫公仔要畫出腸，寫字要寫到出晒面--這些心理包袱應該早早就已經放下了的吧。觀從前的政治運動，不是已經有很多很多很厲害、人所共知的好設計吧！就是中國的文革政治海報就夠照了吧(只就視覺傳達技巧而言)。看看這些設計，放心讓宣傳品帶出最重要的訊息，要詳談要解釋就用其他更有效的方法吧！

眾人皆醉? 誰獨醒?

嘿, 或許是眾人皆醒, 唯斯獨醉。

幫你的就是幫理, 不幫你的就是雙重標準, 應該『制止』? 我相信, 如果你做的是有道理的話, 總會有人站在你一邊的; 但當全世界都站在另一邊時, 或許也是時候放下*你的*『雙重標準』和陰謀論, 想想到底*自己*有甚麼問題。

我不滿的是

1. 社運界充斥著對自己友的雙重標準，當初網政廿一，以至王岸然這些人，公然作出有違事實的誹謗時，社運界中人有制止他們嗎？沒有，反而很樂於與人民廣播電台合作。Sidekick出陰招，我當眾篤爆，就來了一票這樣的言論，這樣誰會服氣。我透過我的blog揭破，而不是這裡的回應，已是很尊重這裡。阿藹要帶來這兒，我沒法阻止。

2. 這樣圈內圈外兩個標準，你不要指望有更多人會投身社運或民主運動。在七一後，好不容易才在一些本來不參與民主運動的人當中，找到一堆有為有心年青人幫手。結果不少都被這些「社運人」嚇跑了，如果不是一二四重要，我肯定有機會公開更多應被點名的所謂社運人，甚至政界攝石人。我做過學生會，算是半個圈內人，但現時我真不想與「社運界」有什麼關係。

3. 我一向不理形象，我寫東西也好，做什麼都好，我計算的是到底我還可以貢獻香港有多少。形象不值五毫子，因為我無意從政，亦不想出鋒頭。這次筆戰本來我可以置身事外，有些人觀點上自以為是尚可有辯論，政治抽水就很難容忍。

我要回應就是這樣多，到底大家要只得自己人的社運，因此繼續維護Sidekick這類人，還是大家會思考社運界雙標準的問題，不要趕跑好不辛苦才找到的群眾，自己判斷下。如果大家不是只打我搞人身攻擊，而不正視Sidekick扮中立的政治抽水行為，我很樂意讓這件事和平結束。但我看不出當中的可能性。

黃世澤﹐你的評論已流于人身攻擊

不要再這樣吧﹗畢竟大家各有不同見解﹐不同考慮。

你也想想吧﹐路人如在下跟兩人都不認識﹐只在這旁觀。你這次給人的感覺是太重私怨﹐貴為公眾人物﹐影響自己的形像﹐那又何苦﹖我只能說﹐就算他真的是公報私仇﹐又有何證據﹖為何要主動招惹批評﹖

你說有些人的理論不合理﹐發表時機不好(或不對)﹐都是對事件和文字的意見﹐大家能否同意和接受也好﹐均未離開‘討論’的範圍。可是﹐你對他人品跟作風的評論﹐恕‘不諳世事’的大家不知底蘊﹐無法理解。人身攻擊有用沒有﹐有意義沒有﹐有作用沒有﹐還要看大家對被攻擊者的人格有多認識﹐有多討厭。

我明白你受人到處攻擊﹐真的很難受﹐可是﹐你攻擊別人﹐算是報復還是甚麼呢﹖坦白說﹐對一個27歲的文化人或是專欄作者﹐本人的期望還是有的﹐希望你不要讓大家失望。

sidekick 並不是社運界中人

亦沒有任何人說要趕誰走.

如何去證明Sidekick公允？

1. 這件事，我講明除非證明Sidekick是公允，否則我不會道歉，如果這兒的編輯要趕走我，自便。

2. 到底派別仇殺誰挑出來？我只感覺社運界的互相護短程度，比想像中嚴重得多。我只是一個有心人，並不懂去扮中立然後暗箭傷人，或扮blog界領袖。那最初我被人不公地插得滿身是箭，誰幫口？不要怪不少人不願投身社運，志願之士的通宵心血，就被人這樣抽水。

3. 如果Sidekick要證明她是公允。請她講明兩點：

a. 在124前，為何寧幫一個不知來歷的Cantong？

b. 她對網政廿一中人運用誹謗手法對付異己的看法。

還有，Cantong不要用「事實」這兩字就以為可以溜掉，死雞撐飯蓋是不能久撐。

算把啦...

黃生,事實証明閣下所想的並非是絕對真理, 我也不想再跟你討論這個問題.

ps. 本人的確是無名無姓無地位, 只是對於人們以政治之名義隨意挪用別人的東西深感不滿罷了. 對於事件竟然造成sidekick的困擾, 本人深感遺憾及歉意.

又一個iPod nano 廣告的parody

http://www.macgrass.com/permalink/846

不談抄襲，談萌

嘻嘻！又一個iPod nano 廣告的parody，萌單nano set 又十分明顯地借用iPod nano 廣告【圖】，萌單nano set 的開本是正常漫畫書的三分之一，攜帶方便不過抱歉未能保證文字是否易於閱讀。萌～

於 sidekick 的留言

想不到這裡的討論結果會變成針對 sidekick 的攻擊, 其實 sidekick 曾對 inmedia 作出善意的批評, 尤其是我們於博客精選中引用其他博客文章的做法, 其後編輯部接受她的批評, 於標題加了作者的名字, 又加link, 對不相熟的bloggers會以留言或 e-mail知會. 這些做法都是一些由互動發展出來的 ethics, 而不是律法. 而大家都在學習如何更有建議性地互動和討論.

以下是對 sidekick 的攻擊 (轉貼自http://sidekick.myblog.hk/archives/2005/12/02/700/):

黃世澤先生，於2005年12月2日，發表了“Sidekick，不要扮懵”一文：

先看這條link
http://sidekick.myblog.hk/archives/2005/12/02/699/

Sidekick小姐，你與網政廿一關係良好，眾所周知。不要扮讀書不多，就可以乘機抽水不負責任。我未想過要在blog公開對罵，但這次要。要抽水，請手段高明一點。

我再畫公仔畫出腸，呢個Sidekick幫ep21幫友公報私仇，夠未？你在blog界扮野的行為，難道你當別人是盲？

以下是我於sidekick中的回應:

兩人我均認識, 這次深感黃的做法很過份, 為什麼非要把個人的討論變成團體派別的仇殺? 即使 sidekick 真的與網政的人相識, 不等於她的言論不公允. 其實 sidekick 在過去幾個月, 對版權的思考一直有在變化, 正如她所說, 大家都在學習. 而一直以來她所給的意見都很有建設性, inmedia 的編輯實受益不少. 希望 sidekick你能保持自己的作風.

我都贊成依家慳番啖氣宣傳124

一個不知由那個水泡泡出來的人，要來扮人格高尚，再加一個自以為乜乜界代表的，乘機政治抽水的回應，這樣的討論不可能有共識，亦不會有結果，只會得個嘈字。

這次我可以講，我對某些香港人的愚昧反智，缺乏反思，以為守法係一定要死守法律的看法大開眼界。極權社會，簡直是這些人的天堂。

Save our energy for 124!!!!!

Agree with frostig.

But -- I want to say, maybe we shall save our energy from debating this topic until after 124? Right now, the most important issue is to fight for democracy on 124, not whether this is copyright infringement or not. We can put more energy here and discuss about copyright later whenever we want!!!!!!!

要比人認出!!! (比 is a wrong word here, please note your Chinese also,

That is exactly the point, if your 're-creation' or 'play' with the 'original' is easily recognised, and you deliberately mean to use the 'original' to indicate something, it is the correct purpose. I agree that this poster this time is really not good, as I can't see anything related to I-Pod can be implied in this situation or just the poster. However, like Hello Kitty, you can have a Hello Kitty product whenever you like, as long as you can pay. Then, if you want to use it in a play (or say a drama), maybe to show that the character is a Kidult, and (s)he likes Hello Kitty a lot (whether or not it means anything further), even this is not exactly a very typical 're-creation', this type of interpretation is more than reasonable and logical '''Lor'''!!!

If you copy somebody's idea, and hide it, then that is more likely to be 'stealing'. Think about it, if you steal something, would you show it around?