# data[].attributes.body
Creativity and artistic production are fundamentally built upon influence, borrowing, and appropriation rather than being purely original.

# data[].attributes.headline
Love and Theft (Art is Continous Inspiration)

# data[].attributes.subject
Love and Theft (Art is Continous Inspiration)

# data[].attributes.body
Claim:

All art is a product of influence and inspiration. Nothing is original.

Supporting Argument:

Any artist has taken inspiration from artists in the past for their creative products

The Western tradition is to develop previous stories continuously

Influence is a huge factor in the creation of art

Direct Quote:

“Most artists are brought to their vocation when their own nascent gifts are awakened by the work of a master” (Lethem, 235).

Example:

A huge inspiration for Bob Dylan's songs is from folk songs. He is still considered an original artist.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Love and Theft (Art is Continous Inspiration)

# data[].attributes.body
Claim:

Copyright only helps major industries and companies but does not benefit individual artists.

Supporting Argument:

Companies that promote copyright borrow ideas from the public domain, too.

The copyright law limits the act of creativity within an artist

Direct Quote:

“At the same time, copyright is revered by most established writers and artists as a birthright and bulwark, the source of nurture for their infinitely fragile practices in a rapacious world” (Lethem, 238).

Example:

Disney took inspiration from the public domain for their characters but placed an intense amount of protection on these characters.

# data[].attributes.body
Claim:

An open source is where artistic ideas are shared openly for creative use for artists

Supporting Argument:

Open source software allows artists to remix their music from old music such as folk songs and 20th century music.

Having an open source allows more ideas for artists to flow through smoothly rather than having restrictions.

Direct Quote:

“Blues and jazz musicians have long been enabled by a kind of 'open source' culture, in which pre-existing melodic fragments and larger musical frameworks are freely reworked. Technology has only multiplied the possibilities; musicians have gained the power to duplicate sounds literally rather than simply approximate them through allusion." (Lethem, 234).

Example:

Modern music nowadays relies on a lot of sampling and remixing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Undiscovered Public Knowledge (A Blocking Factor to Creativity)

# data[].attributes.subject
Undiscovered Public Knowledge (A Blocking Factor to Creativity)

# data[].attributes.body
Claim:

Copyright limits artists from accessing creative and cultural sources

Supporting Argument:

Copyright blocks a creator's use to build on from the past

Shakespeare's plays were often created through inspiration from the past, and it was expected.

Direct Quote:

“Contemporary copyright, trademark, and patent law is presently corrupted. The case for perpetual copyright is a denial of the essential gift-aspect of the creative act" (Lethem, 245).

Example:

Shakespeare took inspiration from historical and mythological stories, expecting no issues with copyright.

# data[].attributes.headline
Counterargument & Rebuttals 1 (Artists Should Get Credit)

# data[].attributes.subject
Counterargument & Rebuttals 1 (Artists Should Get Credit)

# data[].attributes.body
Counterargument:

Copyright allows artists to get paid.

Rebuttal:

Copyright usually benefits the company more than the artist.

Direct Quote:

“The cardinal difference between gift and commodity exchange is that a gift establishes a feeling-bond between two people, whereas the sale of a commodity leaves no necessary connection.” (Lethem, 242).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Counterargument & Rebuttals 1 (Artists Should Get Credit)

# data[].attributes.headline
Counterargument & Rebuttals 2 (Copyright Benefits Creativity)

# data[].attributes.subject
Counterargument & Rebuttals 2 (Copyright Benefits Creativity)

# data[].attributes.body
Counterargument:

If copyright didn't exist, artists would have no motivation to create.

Rebuttal:

Some artists create just to create and expect no pay.

Direct Quote:

“By doing so they make the world smaller, betraying what seems to me the primary motivation for participating in the world of culture in the first place: to make the world larger” (Lethem, 241).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Counterargument & Rebuttals 2 (Copyright Benefits Creativity)

# data[].attributes.headline
Counterargument & Rebuttals 3 (Plagiarism) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Counterargument & Rebuttals 3 (Plagiarism) 

# data[].attributes.body
Counterargument:

What is the difference between borrowing and being influenced?

Rebuttal:

Plagiarism is just wrong and dishonest, while influence is an act of being able to create.

Direct Quote:

“ For substantially all ideas are secondhand, consciously and unconsciously drawn from a million outside sources, and daily used by the garnerer with a pride and satisfaction born of the superstition that he originated them; whereas there is not a rag of originality about them anywhere except the little discoloration they get from his mental and moral caliber and his temperament, and which is revealed in characteristics of phrasing. (Lethem, 246).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Counterargument & Rebuttals 2 (Copyright Benefits Creativity) (1)

# data[].attributes.body
Jonathan Lethem's The Ecstasy of Influence determines that creative pieces and art are fueled by borrowed ideas, influence, and inspiration. This ideology challenges the idea of originality. Nothing is original. Artists now and in the past have drawn inspiration from historical pieces, mythologies, and stories. Don't view the idea of influence as an act of theft. Lethem fights for the idea that influence is an important factor in artistic creation. This book ultimately calls for artists to share freely and allow them to build on each other to evolve.