Baby, baby, I’m gonna bring it on home to you
I done bought my ticket, I got my load
Conductor done hollered, “All, aboard”
I’m-a take my seat, ride way backand watch this train roll down the track
Baby, baby, I’m gonna bring it on home to you
-Willie Dixon “Bring It on Home” (1963)
Baby, baby, gon’ bring it on home to you
I’ve got that ticket, I got that load
Join up, gone higher, all aboard
I’m-a take my seat, ride way back
and watch this train roll down the track
Gonna bring it on home, bring it on home to you
-Led Zeppelin “Bring It on Home” (1969)
The popular English rock band Led Zeppelin has been brought to court for their multiple instances of copyright infringement. These cases have settled out of court, but are outnumbered by the startling similarities that reside in the remainder of the band’s catalog. Through an examination of the blues as an art form and contemporary copyright law as it stood at the time of Led Zeppelin’s fame, it will be shown that the band went far beyond the tradition of shared concepts, rhythms, and structure that is present in the blues. Led Zeppelin has committed the unforgivable; they have not only taken ideas, lyrics, arrangements, melodies, and rhythms without any credit, but they have taken these musical elements from a population that has been historically exploited. Led Zeppelin is yet another in a long line of western light skinned appropriators that have taken what they deemed just from African-American culture without fair compensation. This practice has not been isolated to labor and culture, but expanded to creative works that are protected under internationally recognized laws. Called into question is the African-American community’s ability to combat such appropriation. Often the artists themselves are not responsible for litigation, but their record label or other representative who act of the musician’s behalf. We will examine this tendency and its implication for what can be seen as a broad, unrecognized cultural theft. Continue reading
The music business is changing because the record business is changing. While touring, merchandising, and licensing continue to flourish, the sale of CD’s has diminished in recent years. While CD sales decrease, digital music retailers like iTunes, Napster, Rhapsody and eMusic set new revenue records almost yearly. Companies like Tunecore allow artists to become their own record label. A shift in revenue source, a focus on singles over album sales, the creation of new mediums for delivery, and the ease of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) distribution have drastically changed a landscape that for decades has relied on an unwavering business model. In changing times, a business model must change as well. Along with this shift in business model must come a shift in regard for the very art form that has driven the music industry forward since sheet music was sold from Tin Pan Alley. Likewise, a shift in regard for those who create this art must also take place. 
Samuel Johnson said, “How is it that we hear the largest yelps for liberty among the drivers of the negroes?” In this statement a British man remarks on the tendencies of a nation three thousand miles to the west, and this nations thirst for independence from the very land that Johnson himself called home. Spoken in 1775, these remarks came at a time in history when tensions were high and every opportunity was taken to put down, or bring to light inconsistencies or hypocrisies in the practices of other side of the argument. Much like a political campaign, these comments had effects that went beyond merely stating the truth about those who were shouting for revolution. These comments also served to undermine the revolution as a whole, and break down foundations it had been built upon. Given the historical context of this quote, it can be said that there is a fairly decent amount of symbolism behind these words, and much that serves to be considered in the deconstruction of Johnson’s statement. 
In Fareed Zakaria’s The Post-American World the reader is given an insight into the growing global economy in which countries like China and India are gaining ground on the current world superpower, The United States of America. Also given are detailed examples of where the United States has gone wrong, and what improvements can be made in order to better adapt to the changing global power structure. The United States has slowly become a country that focuses on the worst of the world around it, leaving the nation unprepared to actually deal with the problems that arise in a changing landscape. (Zakaria 27) This is a landscape that is marked by the resurgence and return to greatness of two of the pre-industrial worlds great powers, China and India. China’s dictatorship has taken an active role in transforming that nation over the past thirty years, while in India the democratically run government has also seen considerable growth during this time period. In the meantime, the America that once influenced and set the global standard has been slipping away much the same way Britain did at the time of the Boer War. (173) Zakaria makes a case for America returning to this prior policy of “world building” through various means rather than the nations current trend toward bully tactics. All in all, Zakaria’s main points and ideas are well received and interesting. With that said, some of the information certainly leads the reader towards larger questions that, while somewhat addressed in the book, could definitely use some further thought. 
‘Are We Reading the Same Play?’
“Torture should never be conceived simply as an arbitrary game of cruelty.”
The film, “The Incas” gives the viewer a broad overview of the inner-workings and administrative capabilities of the Incan Empire. The documentary covers a variety of topics including the research taking place at Huánuco Pampa, Machu Picchu, and the research of the Incan road system. Archaeologist testimony is paired with photographic and video demonstrations to portray the Incan civilization as incredibly advanced and far reaching, as evident in the broad system of roads present in their empire. 
Akutagawa argues that mere story is not as essential to literary work as the architecture of that story, that is, plot should not be the main focal point. In suggesting so, Akutagawa seeks to take on a more artistic approach to writing whereas the story being told is second to the medium and/or delivery. He thus suggests that the manner which a story is told is of greater importance than the content. Throughout his literary sparring match with Tanizaki, Akutagawa seeks to establish his viewpoint. He displays his opinions in his works, Spinning Gears and Fool’s Life, but do these works reflect his argument? What is to be said for these works when compared to Tanizaki’s works such as Quicksand? Furthermore, Akutagawa’s standpoint raises the question of whether or not his approach is sound in accomplishing the goals of a writer. Artists of all mediums are taking one side or the other in the Tanizaki/Akutagawa argument without even realize they are doing so, and this fact should also be explored as a parallel to the ongoing debate over plot as an aspect of literature. 
A Curiosity Complex 