Thursday, 18 February 2010
Mash my mashup right up
A cursory glance over our previous posts will be enough evidence anyone could need that the word "mashup" is overused. We are clearly guilty of this, but its abuse is widespread and is a result of a once niche trend becoming mainstream, without the language catching up. In fact it may describe the dominant way people use the internet now. The lack of a proper definition means it is in danger of losing all meaning, and you have to fear that we start calling Chefs, creators of "food mashups" and artists; "paint mashups".
That said however, we will allow ourselves to use it once more in relation to this interesting video on the evolution of mashups (via the fantastic AltNyttErFarlig and Threebillion). He argues that remixes are becoming a platform for collective expression. This certainly seems true, though it is also clear that certain platforms are more appropriate for this creativity.
This was true of the David Cameron posters, which themselves were not created to be endlessly copied and remixed, but became so when placed in the context of the mydavidcameron site, and their creation was made simple. It is also true for perhaps the most successful internet meme of all time, and a growing obsession of mine- Lolcats. Their seemingly inexplicable popularity becomes understandable once you see them as a framework for individual creativity and collective collaboration.
Here are a few examples:
Lolcats- weird, surreal, but getting 1.5. million hits a day
MyDavidCameron- Mainstream mashup
Bubble Project- One of the simplest platforms, consisting only of a speech bubble.
Know your meme- The encyclopedic collection of memes
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
hi tom,
matt and i were discussing something pretty similar to this over in these two places. would be good to get your thoughts...
matts thing - http://infomagination.typepad.com/blog/
and my response - http://hughdewinton.blogspot.com/2010/02/remixing.html
Hi Hugh, thanks for the comment. I have left one on your blog but thought I'd add some thoughts here too.
I think there are a number of interesting subjects around how content is reused and recontextualised. By ripping it from its original context it gains new meaning- becoming a new piece of work in itself. Musicians have long understood the ability to create something from samples which stands alone as a piece of music in its own right, but the internet seems to be allowing this learning to be applied to all content- from text (slash fiction) and pictures (photoshopping) to video (remixing like the above) and technology (map mashups). But regardless of the form, what always seems true is that in every remix the meaning is changed slightly by its creators. The long running mashups, like those featured in the video above, are a record of every individual’s impact on it. They become understandable on their own as something new, but also part of a broader story which started with that first video.
Clearly there’s a lot of complexity to it, which probably explains why many brands can be a bit naïve about “creating a viral”. When you understand the multiple layers you realise it is about much more than making something a bit weird, and becomes more about creating something in which people can see themselves, and can use as a form of self-expression.
Very unformed ideas here- clearly, but good to slurge them somewhere.
I think you’re touching on semiotics here, but I think you’re right Tom! If you rip something out of the context it was created in, it changes its meaning…but it’s built upon its previous meaning. We have to remember that it is a survivor of history, and it should be interpreted in combination of two time periods, then (the original) and now (the remix). We as viewers will try to interpret it recalling the history and the background of it and then try and understand the new ‘remixed’ version. So we need to understand the original context to fully comprehend.
But from here on you get into all sorts of complicated things – Each individual ‘re-mixer’ has different life experiences, different cultures, causing every individual to have their own personal understanding of the original. Then each re-mixer projects themselves into their own re-mix. The cycle then can begin again. Something could have countless amount of meanings. But semiotics always makes things more complicated than they need to be.
Cadbury revived and re-made their own caramel bunny, which I’ve mentioned in my blog: http://marcommbombs.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment