Art and the question of authorship and ownership in Internet era

A couple of years back one day I received a strange request from an unknown person from New York in USA to authenticate two works of mine. The work looked exactly of mine except it had some colour fading. It also had my name on left bottom in English as I often do. The only problem was I had no Idea of such a sale or transfer. On further enquiry, I learned that he sourced the work from a struggling Indian art student. During those days Google strangely would prominently show a popular Hollywood actress’s name, if anyone would image search my work. This smart Indian student made use of that opportunity and somehow managed to convince this poor chap that this actress is a big collector of my work. During that period I also had a website where I occasionally used to publish some of my exploration and it is being only explorations with the caption that “none of the works is for sale”. Our smart student made use of all these for his advantage to fleece this investor a cool four thousand eight hundred dollars with downloaded print. Since he began to have doubts about the signature in authentication letter that he contacted me for authentication. The entire drama gave me a hearty laughter. I informed the buyer that there is some colour problem in the print and if he sends me an undertaking to send those prints back and bear the courier expenses for a new set of works with my pencil signature, I will send him a new print of the same works. He happily agreed to that and I did not want our smart Indian student friend to get caught in a serious crime in the US, so I left it that.

This entire episode provoked me into a deep philosophical question of authenticity of authorship and ownership of an artwork. History of art is full of such stories where artist and their family died in poverty while their work, later on, made many others billionaires. If one search in goggle, one will find millions of photographs of the same artwork with million other’s copyright watermark on it. Cropped differently (composition) with colour scheme differently, digitally enhanced the qualities; most of them will make the original work into oblivion. Before one jump into an ethical or moral judgment about the entire affair, one may have to consider some serious philosophical artistic issues involved with image making in this entire affair. Allow me to explain in detail.

What is original in art : Labour/craft or concept?

This is a complicated question. In western art from the days of guild during Renaissance to today’s postmodern artists, a large section of artists would not be able to claim authorship of the craft of labour. Most of them are made to order or supervised. So one may have to safely discount that claim from the originality of art. Then comes conceptual authorship. Largely in an art, there are three ways an artist executes an artwork – translation, transformation and transgression. Considering these three areas are largely dealt by curatorial conceptualization in postmodern art, one leaves very little room for the authenticity of authorship of the artwork. Unlike in film, where director is only one of the authors in the creation of film with due credit is given to others in the process of filmmaking, in art, unfortunately, single individual as the artist often claims the whole authorship. One would not hear the name of craftsmen or other people involved in the execution of artworks. There are many conceptualizations involved in every artwork- technical, spatial, curatorial and finally aesthetical conceptualizations. In other words, it becomes a problematic argument when one considers the authenticity of authorship by a single individual.

Work of art and its image reproductions

As I mentioned earlier, on Internet one will find millions of image reproductions of same artwork with hundreds of copyrights for photography. In other words, the authenticity of authorship gets separated from artwork in its image reproduction as a photograph. Considering both are artistic mediums and artists execute both, one cannot claim the authorship of the other. In other words, one has the artistic liberty for a selective recreation of another artwork in its image reproduction!

From Greek time onwards, this viewer prerogative to reinterpret an artwork as observer in observer-observed and observation triangulation is already a settled subject.

This makes the authenticity of authorship complex phenomena in art world. If an artist makes claim of authorship on a craftsman’s labour in transforming a media( kindly note an artist is not selling art but sells its material transformation ) and a photographer claims authorship of its image reproduction and then a digital media artist claim authorship of reproduction’s reproduction, in today’s contemporary art world authenticity and authorship becomes a complex issue.

From that US-based Indian student (although I do not know who is this character) I started experimenting with transgressing into master’s works to transform them into historical and theoretical artworks for a long time. Still, I am as an old school ethics follower, do not claim ownership of these works. I only claim the viewer’s transformative inference authorship in such artworks. My experiments are still going on getting more and more insights into this complex world of authorship and ownership.

Considering no collector or buyer can claim ownership of art but can only claim the ownership of artwork, in today’s world these collectors cannot claim ownership of its image reproduction, unless and until they commission it or buy its rights. Considering artworks are reproduced in critique and reviews in textual format and it is legal, artists can not take away the viewers inference right in image format as well.

Dalit saints of brahminical south

To grasp the significant transformations in Hindu schools of philosophy and social dynamics during the 7th and 8th centuries in South India, it is crucial to delve into the historical context. A prominent figure in this period, Aadi Shankara, hailing from Kerala, played a pivotal role in challenging orthodox Brahmanical Hinduism. Shankara fearlessly rejected the ritualistic practices of mimansa and the belief in multiple deities. Instead, he embraced Buddhist principles of sannyasa and sanga, skillfully integrating them into Hinduism. Shankara introduced the monotheistic philosophy of Advaitha as a community practice, bridging the gap between the Hindu concept of God and the Buddhist notion of void (parabhrama in Hinduism) through the concept of Maya.

Furthermore, the emergence of two saints from Dalit communities within Shaivism and Vaishnavism during this era holds profound significance. Nandanar, a Shaivaite Nayanar saint, and Tirupana Alvar, a Vaishnavite Alvar saint, rose to prominence as religious figures in Hinduism, leaving an indelible impact. These instances underscore a period marked by socio-political upheaval and reformation within Hinduism, particularly in South India.

To gain a comprehensive understanding of the socio-cultural reformation that characterized this era in Indian history, further exploration is imperative. This subject remains obscured by interpretations from both right and left-wing perspectives of Indian history. Additionally, it is essential to acknowledge that during this period, Islam made its presence felt on the southern coast, particularly in Kozhikode.

Thirupana Azhvar

Nandanar

Aadi shankara, Nagarjuna and Special theory of relativity

Aadi Shankara ingeniously embraced and transformed the Mahayana Buddhist's Madhyamaka principle of "shunyatha" into the "nirguna parabhrama" of Advitha. In a manner akin to Poincaré and Einstein's roles in the development of the special theory of relativity, Shankara astutely addressed what Nagarjuna had either overlooked or deliberately disregarded—the Brahminical concept of the eternal "soul." Shankara appropriated this concept and, in a groundbreaking move, asserted that "madhyamaka shunyatha" possesses an inherent eternity within its own argument.

Furthermore, Shankara demonstrated that Nagarjuna's notion of dependent arising and Advaita's exploration of the validity and invalidity of cognizance are exclusively applicable within the veridical world or Maya. When taken together, the philosophies of Nagarjuna and Shankara present a formidable challenge to the principles of the special theory of relativity. They emphatically assert that dependency (relativity) can only hold true within the confines of the Veridical world or Maya and cannot manifest as a causal or consequential factor within the absolute universe.

It is intriguing to note that concepts settled in philosophy more than 13 centuries ago continue to resonate within the realm of physics today.

book

today on the sidewalks of Mavoor road in Calicut, I took an old copy of Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoyevsky and I saw a painful note in blue ink pen on second page " Oh god you took everything from me, do not let me part this book, let not my hunger always win, please...!" Margaret
I had to struggle for hiding my tears and left the book back into the shelf. The book was priced at rupees fifteen.
I am still unable to get over it.

End of internet and the complicated data business

A few years back, I received an invitation to speak at a conference on data networks and start-ups, a time when start-ups were riding high with massive investments, soaring valuations, and profit projections. However, I assumed the role of a devil's advocate during the conference, shedding light on the dark corners that many preferred to ignore in their technological enthusiasm. Some labeled me an alarmist, but privately, numerous attendees approached me for further discussion. Notably, a leading venture capitalist sought advice on when he should consider withdrawing from the market, though I reminded him that I was not a businessman.

It took just a year for my expressed concerns to materialize. The significant meltdown of internet start-ups became a harsh reality. Even today, large data-driven companies like Uber and Ola are grappling to secure new investments to cover their substantial cash burns. Therefore, anyone proclaiming that data is the future of business should be met with skepticism. Such claims may serve to mask job losses or perpetuate a misleading narrative of a technological-data fusion that never truly transpired. The internet continues to resemble more of an amusement park, where individuals pay for various adrenaline-inducing experiences before eventually moving on.

Even in mapping applications, often hailed as the next big data technology, people seek real-world locations and sites, not virtual realms. This underscores that technological progress remains constrained by physical reality and human needs.

The issue with contemporary technology is that it has become ensnared in a web of exaggerated projections without realistic economic parameters. It mirrors the derivative trade within the stock market, where everyone hides behind jargon, formulas, numbers, and images to mask their losses while dragging others into their downward spiral.

In the early days of computer programming, grappling with COBOL, there was a joke about a half-hour system breakdown taking days of analysis and resulting in 345 kilometers of printed program code in the USA. The envisioned data business appears to have fallen into a similar quagmire. Unraveling even a small piece of information demands collating billions of hours of data and millions of hours of analytical efforts.

Studies indicate that a substantial portion of internet data serves amusement and entertainment purposes. Removing categories like pornography would free up 37% of the internet, and in the UK alone, gambling revenue on the internet reached 13.8 billion, with approximately 80% of Americans using the internet for gambling. Removing gambling from the internet would free up another 28% of its data. An additional 10% is estimated to be consumed by film and music viewing. Overall, more than 75% of internet data serves entertainment purposes, with social networks permeating all facets of human activity.

The belief that 25% of the remaining data is useful or decipherable within the 75% of seemingly extraneous data is a far-fetched notion that requires an astonishing level of naivety. Similarly, assuming that 75% of data is beneficial for 25% of legal business is equally misguided. The reality is that technology can be experimental and prone to failure, but business and investments cannot afford such unpredictability. Unfortunately, this vital distinction is often overlooked in the industry.

The heart of the issue lies in the disparity between the breakneck pace of technological advancement and the time required for business investments to yield returns and profit. Modern technology demands capital-intensive investments, while businesses need ample time for market recapitalization and product lifecycle. The relentless speed of technological evolution seldom affords this luxury to businesses, resulting in rapid turnover and limited opportunities for investment recovery.

The emergence of a black hole or bubble in the market is evident, causing growing distrust among the business community toward technological investments. Fear looms large, as significant investments have already been swallowed by this expanding abyss. To recover their funds, more investments might resort to illegal avenues like pornography and gambling, further tainting the already 65% illegal trade space and transforming it into a shadowy underworld. The internet could evolve into a realm society seeks to evade.

This scenario hints at an eventual collapse or government intervention to create another bureaucratic behemoth where technology cannot keep pace. Whether it's a gradual decline or a swift collapse, the internet appears destined for a protracted demise. Contrary to assumptions that these events will take a long time to unfold, economic cycles have compressed to around a seven-and-a-half-year span - the lifespan of business peaks and meltdowns. Consequently, we can anticipate the eventual collapse or meltdown of the internet within the next five to eight years, at most.

bjp

Today BJP has become the Indira Gandhi's Congress in terms of policies, propaganda, party following, socialistic pretensions and crony capitalism. if ludicrous sycophancy and subsequent policy mishaps were the hallmarks of her times the same are brand ambassadors for the present day BJP government. She believed arrogance and fear can instil a long lasting social engineering to create a left of the centre congress, same are the bench marks of this government who believe they are creating a right of the centre congress. They believe majority decides political future of this country. But tragedy for her was the 2 to 3% politically conscious 'centre' who are although insignificant in terms of numbers but had the capacity to swing the power. They always changed the course of discourse in this country. Look at who were against Indira and who are against Modi now. It tells the story.

The worst thing in politics is to believe in propaganda or believe own propaganda and unfortunately Indian political leaderships are masters of that art - creating lies and believe in it.
They don't realise not only communism but capitalism also died. So are its tools.

art education :The purpose of art education is to nurture artists, not necessarily leaders.

"... those who sought a more active role for artists within the burgeoning field of higher education believed they had the necessary expertise to cover content that bridged studio experience, art historical themes, and philosophical issues.

This, after all, was what contemporary artists seriously thought about. It seemed reasonable to surround the artist(as a teacher) with aspiring students who would benefit from serious exchange on topics about art and life. As such, curriculum content could not be specified in any formal way and techniques could not be introduced as prerequisites for creativity: Teaching became conversation and learning focused on individual aesthetic problem-solving. This version of the expert-novice model relied on the image of the artists as a social outsiders engaged in an intense pursuit of a personal vision. Consequently, the criteria for newness were not seen in relation to past or existing image banks or stylistic brands but by a measure of radical difference. The drive toward the illusion of “things never seen” reached a mythical status that kept the social constructed-ness of art practice at bay, at least until the theoretical onslaught of post-modernism."- Graeme Sullivan.

Although the final statement is no longer applicable within current theoretical frameworks, Graeme Sullivan's paragraph effectively highlights the intricate dilemma regarding whether artists/designers should function as institutions of learning or institutions should manifest as embodiments of artistic learning. While it is conceivable to support the credibility of these academic positions—artists/designers as institutions and institutions as conduits of learning—by citing numerous instances found within the construct of "successful artists and designers," it is equally essential to acknowledge that the ongoing crisis in the art and design realm is partly a consequence of these very academic stances. 

The presumed reciprocity between "the value of an outcome and its broader social significance" and the procedural output of an academic process has long been a contentious issue within institutional settings.

Beyond the societal and market influence exerted by artists, the historical role of artists as institutions of learning has often been limited to delineating specific practices for students within their particular areas of expertise. Similarly, academic and pedagogic approaches, characterized by scientific and theoretical frameworks, have struggled to substantially contribute to creative practice beyond validating one's readiness based on the subjective expertise of the instructor. This process further accentuates the artist's (instructor's) role as a subjective institution, creating a complex situation bereft of a straightforward solution.

A strategy for establishing a coherent mutual practice within individual-to-individual, individual-to-community, and community-to-society interactions must evolve within academic contexts. This evolution requires acknowledging one's subjective potential and constraints rather than adopting an authoritarian stance. In the absence of such development, where the theoretical or physical outputs remain subsets of this subjective institution, the growing predicament of individual creative practitioners and their relevance in a society marked by egalitarian technological access and universal values will loom large, casting doubts on the significance of academia and institutions in the future.

Compounding this dilemma is the shift from the pre-nineteenth-century notion of enlightenment centred around meaningful creative practice and truth to the post-twentieth-century emphasis on the statistical significance of meaning and the subjective interpretation of truth. This shift could potentially subject the objectivity of institutional learning to conditional assessment. 

To put it differently, if institutions fail to address the necessity for a harmonious practice aligned with one's life position, elevating this position to an objective of living rather than regarding subjective living as a statistical deduction of truth, counterarguments against the broader goal of the learning process could emerge. Such counterarguments could be rooted in the prevalence of reactionary practices and their apparent sufficiency—a notable example being the widespread prevalence of "cut and paste" approaches, which have inundated the contemporary art and design landscape.