Week 8: Copyrighted.

     This week's reading had me a bit lost I must admit. The complexity of the legal system and the intricate steps involved in deejaying really threw me on my own spin.

     However, I did find the readings in That's the Joint! and the selection from Making Beats very interesting (from the sections I was able to understand).

     I liked how Forman first disclaimed how he did not view technology as the "sole driving force for the development of hip hop music" (389). There as so many other elements to creating the music - oftentimes the aspects of music we cannot measure such as the soul and heart put into the songs that I find much more important than the actual technological process. Though I must give credit to those who deejay and understand how rap music is linked to the cultural history of the African culture. With the creation of the turntable, mixer, and vinyl record came the introduction of great deejays such as Afrika Bambaataa, Kool DJ Herc, and Grandmaster Flash. Deejaying, developed in the late 1970's, included "breaks" which is a digital excision of a brief rhythm (390). These breaks/sampling is what gave hip hop nation it's push towards the mass audience. However, with the sampling of hip hop music there arose the question of if hip hop music is or is not authentic.

     I found a quote in chapter 30 of That's the Joint particularly interesting. This section focused on the art of digital sampling and how some experts viewed digital sampling as "holding music at gunpoint" (393). I can understand where they are coming from, music is art and as art should be creative and original. Subsequently, we must then ask ourselves what/who defines the originality of hip hop music. Also, as Schumacher put it, we must also look at the philosophical and common law viewpoints of hip hop music.

     He states that "copyrighted law is property law" and as such, must define the complex aspects of what is creative and original (IE what is authentic) (443). I agree with Schumacher that different cultures have different definition of originality and creativity and that we must encompass all of those aspects when defining the legality of hip hop music. There are also many definitions of "copying" and who is to determine what the absolute definition of it is. Are they musical experts? The audience? The producers? Or the artists? I agree that "absolute meanings require absolute knowledge" but I am still somewhat confused on how originality is perceived by different groups in society, surely we do not all perceive all things equally (Ryan, 1982:3). I hope I am not rambling, I just think that music is music. It is a part of my life that I have found to be inexplicable, or rather that I chose not to look for a definition. Music is how I feel. It inspires me and aids me in my day to day explorations. I dislike how we have "evolved" to the point that we are going back to the roots of music and picking, picking, picking at it to the point that someday we will lose the essence of the music - that is the heart an soul of the music, if we have not lost it already to the Benjamin's. Rap music was created because people got tired of trying to please everyone and for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, people became offended. When society becomes offended the legal structures of society must come in and define what is right and what is wrong.

I just don't feel like I fully get it just yet.