A cross-generational debate over the value of art, and culture in general, has arisen among users of the social bookmarking service Hatena. The debate, originated by an anonymous entry titled: ehm… Isn`t it weird the idea that we have to pay money for music?, has brought many bloggers to ask themselves questions about the necessity of paying for what is considered to be an artistic product (a song, an image, a video etc.), especially now that free services like Youtube or the Japanese Niko Niko Dōga are available.
えーと。音楽にお金を払わなきゃいけないっておかしくない？
まあだってさ、ニコニコとかyoutubeとかちょっと見ただけでもオリジナル曲をタダで配っている人がいるわけ。
理解できないくらいそりゃあもういっぱいいるわけ。
タダで良いよって音楽が多数なのに、コンビニとかテレビとかでさんざん聴かされる音楽に金払えとかおかしくない？
あ、こういうこと言うとさ、「音楽家が生活できない」とか言う人が必ず出てくるんだけどさ。
良く考えると「音楽で生活できる」のがそもそも異常だったんじゃないの？
[…]
理想がどうとか言う前にさ、音楽でお金儲けしようって発想がさ、もう根本的におかしいんだよ。
After all, you only need to have a look on Niko Niko Dōga or Youtube to see that there are people who distribute original songs for free. And they are so many that I can't even understand why [they do it].
Although for many “free music” is fine, isn't it strange that convenience stores and TV programs so often push people to pay to listen to music?
Well, of course now someone will say “[if they don't get paid] musicians cannot make a living”. […]
But, on the contrary, hasn't the concept of “making a living out of music” been the exception so far?
Leaving aside the idealizations, the idea itself of making money from music is fundamentally weird.
iPod Shuffle 512MB. By flickr user purprin.
These words roused the indignation of another anonymous blogger, who, apparently belonging to an older generation, still believes in the “art for art's sake” ideal.
http://anond.hatelabo.jp/20090305221614
を読んで、高校生の妹に聞いてみたところ、完全に同意していてやばいなーと思った。
[…]
違うよ！と反論してみたのだが、よくわからない様子。
わかりやすくするためにいろいろ例えを出したのだが、それもだめだった。
・バレエ、歌舞伎、舞台、オペラなんかはどうなるのか→別にいらない。
・そうなると美術と芸術とか文化的なものがすたれていくよね？→衰退すればいいんじゃない？
と言っていた。
So I tried with some examples to make my counterargument easier [to understand], but nothing worked.
– “Ballet, kabuki, theatre, opera etc., what about these?–> I don't care, I don't need them”.
– “But, in this way, the arts and the cultural expressions in general will disappear… –> Where is the problem if they do?”
Those were her replies.
これからを担う若者たちがみんなこういう考えだったらマジで日本終わるなーと思った。
自分たちは何も文化を創り出さないくせに、文化を殺す方向にしか考えがいかず
その理由は、別に見てもしょうがない、という『必要でなければいらない』という発想。
何故文化的なものにお金を払うことに対して積極的ではないのだろう？
不況もあるとは思うが、そんなこといってたら不況ならば文化は廃れて当然なのか、というお話になってしまう。
なんでだろう？
Even if they don't actually produce any culture, they are the ones who will make it die.
The reason is [found in the belief] that “things must be useful”, that “seeing [a work of art] doesn't mean much”.
Why wouldn't they be willing to pay money for art?
There is no doubt that the recession carries its weight, but there is the risk that believing that “because of the bad economy it is obvious that culture disappears” ends up being common sense.
More optimistic viewsc ome from another commentator.
バレエ、歌舞伎、舞台、オペラを初めとする文化的なものが、
今日を生きるのに精一杯でリストラされないか心配している大衆に理解できるわけがない。
理解できなくて良い、それでも文化は廃れない。
昔も今も、タダでも、わずかな金額でも、それなりの音楽や絵画などの文化は見れたり手に入ったりする。
本当に良いものが見たいと思う人はそれなりのお金を払うだろう。
But it is fine also if they don't understand; “culture” won't disappear regardless.
In ancient times as well as today, for free or for a small payment, it has been and will always be possible to listen to music or admire paintings, to enjoy and buy “cultural things”.
The people who really want to see quality stuff will pay for it.
Download play. By Flickr user id:ysano.
Lastly, blogger he-na-he-na wonders if the worsening of economic conditions will cause a cultural gap, besides the social one, already very wide in most of the countries.
金払ってでも自分の教養を高めようとする層と金払わずに楽な方に流れる層とに分離して、新しい格差が生まれるんではないかと思った
[…]
これから先、自分の興味ないものにお金を払わない・興味があってもお金を払わない層が「ネオ富裕層・ネオ知識層」として政治・経済・文化をリードしていくようになるのならば、「それが時代の流れです」と言い切っていいだろうし、お金を払うのは一部の物好きな道楽者という扱いになっていくのも仕方のないことだと思う。
[…]
でも、今までと同じように「お金を持っている者こそ教養に対して積極的にお金を払うべき」という考えの人たちが世の中を引っ張っていくのなら、お金を払わない人は流れに沿わない異端者であり、知識階級の最下層として白い目で見られてもおかしくはない。
[…]
[…]
However, if, as has been the case in the past, the actual spiritual leaders end up being those thinking that “the wealthy persons should be the ones who pay and are active in education and culture”, on the contrary, those who don't pay may become the heretics who don't follow the trends. And I wouldn't be surprised if they were regarded with disdain, treated as though they belonged to lower levels of the intellectual class.
[…]
どちらにせよ、ネットが普及して文化のあり方・著作権のあり方が問われるようになったことで、どちらの流れに傾くか決まる分岐点がすぐそばにまで近づいているのは間違いないと思う。
1 comment
Having seen the screenshot of Nintendo DS above, a thought crossed my mind. Can a game title be classified as a cultural product? Most of the games I know are packed with numerous state-of-the-art music you wont find on your ordinary TV or radio. Not to mention the remarkable visual arts created by video games artists, whose names are less, or not at all, familiar to man in the street.