Background This piece doesn't have a whole lot in terms of background. Mostly, it is how Wallace's informational claim of Mackey making quotes is really an interpretative claim. I have full intention to discuss quoting versus stealing at some point in my essay, perhaps as a pair of "key terms" paragraphs and a synthesis paragraph.

Theory/Technique Mackey uses what he refers to as a "damn bright ending" to finish a piece about the coming of the goddess of light. Mackey takes Holst's chord and adds a new layer of meaning to it. This is much like how an individual writing the persuasive essay would write it (perhaps not with the quote at the end but the general concept follows).

Exhibit I'm using this piece as an exhibition source. The piece of music that these program notes are in reference to does a phenomenal job of quoting and recontextualizing (indulge me if that isn't a word) music from other (relatively) famous musicians. The program notes even address these quotations and break it down on a much more musically inclined level (which, for this level of writing, I will likely disregard).

Argument They say that composers using others work is stealing. I say (with the appropriate rules and guidelines being followed, that is) that it is quotation.

Motive So what? Well, a lot of people know about U2. Furthermore, I'd be willing to bet that an immense amount more of people have heard of "Where the Streets Have No Name" than have heard of "First Suite in Eb". As this goes to show, this is a much more relevant topic than ripping off some old and dead Baroque composer (or should I say, de-composer?).

This ties back into the Sykes article about how the court defined de minimis to read along the lines that sampling doesn’t matter if most of the intended audience won’t understand the quote.

Holst was a phenomenal composer and Mackey uses Holst's work in order to commemorate and celebrate his genius.

This is interesting. Perhaps Jake Wallace wasn't aware that he was taking a side on the whole quoting vs. stealing debate. However, I completely agree with his phrasing.

This would be useful to my argument concerning cover artists' authenticity in general and on youtube specifically because here, Cayari begins to talk about a specific artist on youtube who started small and used his musical talent and relations to gain exposure by making both covers of original songs and his own pieces of music. He ended up being well known for who he is, not the artists' who's songs he covered, which establishes his own authenticity.

Here, Cayari is summarizing and utilizing a source to show one way young kids are encouraged to make music and show their creative work in a world where auto tuned musical recordings make amateur songs sound poorly. He then goes on to connect this argument with the advancement of technology when it comes to music and learning.

The "phonograph" started the trend of recording and later being able to listen to live music.

The impact of modern day technology regarding visual art. Back in the day, one could only experience a live show by actually being there while it is performed and now the same kind of shows can be experienced online.

Shows youtube's immense popularity in the U.S.

Youtube is not only important to the lives of those making music to share on it, but also impacts the way the modern day teacher conducts their classes and allows them to show and provide specific examples to their class about a vast variety of things.

Things like phones and computers are no longer just separate media and technology for teens, they have become a way of life.

Shields summarizes this source to describe an interesting concept concerning marketing and connection. The artist releases free music, which in turn grabs the attention of the listeners who choose to buy the music the artist later puts on sale.

A phenomenon thats all too common in the modern world. Social media such as Facebook and now, twitter, give people a place where they can illustrate themselves in any way they want and not by shy about it.

Music has gotten less and less unique, songs start to resemble one another and become less authentic.

The author here starts writing with a different style of vocabulary, one that seems less academic maybe.

Shows authenticity does not necessarily equal success, as the DJ's borrowing musician's work got more attention than the creators themselves.

Shows the power of "relatability", it won Obama the election.

This reminds me of a fairly new (published 2009) piece entitled Aurora Awakes by John Mackey. In it, Mackey unapologetically uses the guitar riff from U2's "Where the Streets Have No Name" as a marimba ostinato (where a musical phrase is continuously repeated). The driving feel with a lighter tambre (instrument sound and color) helps push the theme (daylight arising from a cold and dark night) forward.

Furthermore, Mackey also takes Holst's final chord from the Chaconne of his First Suite in Eb and (after adding crotales, which had only been around for about 30 years at the time that First Suite was released and they weren't all too popular as a result) uses that as his final chord for Aurora Awakes.

Doing something with intention and the chances of it coming off as a mistake have an inversely proportional relationship.

In classical music, the cadenza is very similar to this. In instrumental solos, there is occasionally a part where the accompaniment (usu. piano) almost, if not completely, drops out and the soloist is left a sequence of notes on the page that he/she is free to play how he/she wishes. One of the pedagogical approaches to executing a cadenza is to never play it the same way twice.

A very bold claim to make here. Wasn't there a previous reading that stated something is similar. "Parody is crime"?

Outlining the difference here between "borrowing" and "stealing"... Perhaps the difference lies in whether or not the poet asks the individual(s) from whom he/she is taking. In other words, the knowledge (or lack thereof) of someone using your work helps define the border between borrowing and stealing.

What precisely does genius borrow? Does it borrow the thoughts, skills, techniques, prowess, etc. of others?