Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 11:01 AM   
 By:   ian642002   (Member)

Wasn't able to get the FSM edition with the interview with James Horner.

Just curious...what was his opinions about Williams, Goldsmith and other contemporaries (if any)?

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 11:04 AM   
 By:   Morlock1   (Member)

I don't know. Probably that he's never heard of them, and that every score he's ever written was totaly and entirely original.

 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 11:37 AM   
 By:   Jehannum   (Member)

I don't really know anything about James Horner but I do wonder why people persecute him for self-plagiarism when at the same time they cheerfully cite Bernard Herrmann as one of the great composers when it's well known that Herrmann reused many themes throughout his work.

By the way, I love Herrmann, my joint #1 favourite composer, so please don't read any criticism into the above statement.

And please don't let this thread get locked! smile

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 11:48 AM   
 By:   Morlock1   (Member)

There's a big difference. Horner plagerizes himself, but his infamy is mostly for his taking of other people's motifs, namely Goldsmith. He's taken classical pieces often and used them with almost no variation without credit, he has used several themes of his own 6-7 times.

But in my opinion, what makes him the worst when it comes to this, is that he'll never admit it, he always insists that he start anew with every score and comes up with original stuff every time. That's flat out lying.
One of the greatest composer quotes ever is by Herrmann, freely (and even forcefully) admitting that a bunch of his stuff sound the same.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 12:55 PM   
 By:   Tall Guy   (Member)

Hi all

I'm really sorry, but I just want to mention that self-plagiarism is an oxymoron. Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else's words and ideas and presenting them as your own. Therefore, if they're your ideas to start with, it's not plagiarism, it's repetition or self-quoting.

Not trying to be a smartypants, but this phrase just grates on me! And, unusually, it's too humid for comfort in Yorkshire so I'm feeling a bit tetchy.

S'there smile

Chris

ps I personally don't mind composers quoting or repeating themselves. I do mind it when they appear to be trying to pass another composer's work off as their own. But you probably know that, because I've mentioned it before, ad nauseam.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 1:13 PM   
 By:   Rnelson   (Member)

I have the issue but it's been a little while since I read the interview. As I recall he doesn't comment much about either Goldsmith or Williams. In fact I'm certain he never mentions Goldsmith.

He does make comments on his approach to writing and developing thematic material which are so contradictory to what he actually does that they almost sound humorous coming from him.

And one priceless statement he makes is something to the effect that the world has run out of original melodies and consequently we've already heard everything.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 2:20 PM   
 By:   JeffBond   (Member)

No, he says that could happen in about ten years, I believe.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 8, 2004 - 3:37 PM   
 By:   Rnelson   (Member)

No, he says that could happen in about ten years, I believe.

Horner, the prophet.

 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 5:18 AM   
 By:   Jehannum   (Member)

I'm really sorry, but I just want to mention that self-plagiarism is an oxymoron. Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else's words and ideas and presenting them as your own. Therefore, if they're your ideas to start with, it's not plagiarism, it's repetition or self-quoting.

Hmph! (Doesn't like being corrected smile).

I can reply to this in three ways.

1. "Self-plagiarism" is not an oxymoron because, during the time between the original act and the repetition, cells have died and others have divided in the body of the subject and the subject's mind has changed in many ways too - new knowledge, possibly different attitudes, etc. so it could be argued that the subject is now a different person to the one that they were.

2. Oxymorons have rights too. What's wrong with using them for rhetorical effect? What can make a startling and memorable point better than the juxtaposition of conflicting words?

3. Oh crap, Chris, you're right. "Self-plagiarism" is indeed incorrect usage.

I'll have to think about which one is the right answer.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 5:23 PM   
 By:   Tall Guy   (Member)

Hey Pete

I like number 3 myself.

But I admire you for trying so hard to find a theory that would make you right and me wrong. However, there isn't one, so don't waste your valuable time when you could be taking the piss out of someone. I like it when you do that.

Chris

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 5:40 PM   
 By:   EddyD   (Member)

Good God, this dead horse isn't just beaten, it's been vaporized by now. GET OVER IT.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 5:46 PM   
 By:   bondo321   (Member)

Don't you meant "Next."?

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 5:48 PM   
 By:   EddyD   (Member)

Don't you meant "Next."?

big grin I thought about that just as I hit the "Post" button.

 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 7:04 PM   
 By:   Ron Pulliam   (Member)

Looking for a term to replace the oxymoronic "self-plagiarism"?

How about "self-referencing"?

Writers who write about composers have used it.

I'll bet you guys could use it, too!

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 7:41 PM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

Sometimes this all seems a little confusing. Seems to me that plagiarism is when Composer
X lifts music from Composer Y without giving credit to Y. If Composer X lifts from himself, I'd
call that redundancy, forgetfulness, lazyitus or......or....maybe signature style, one's personal
artistic stamp. I hear signature styles all the time in composers, especially in orchestrations.
I recently got IN SESSIONS. If I didn't recognize the melody, I tried to guess
the composer by his style. It was easy to spot Barry and Herrmann by their orchestrations.
I can usually identify a Moross, Bernstein, Rozsa, or a Goldsmith by the way they
orchestrate. (Or by the way some composers drone.) Sometimes I wonder if we confuse
plagiarism with the distinct voice of an artist which will be used frequently. Don't know.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 10:48 PM   
 By:   JeffBond   (Member)

It's quite simple: if you dislike a composer, they're a plagiarist. If you like them, they have a distinctive style.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 10, 2004 - 11:03 PM   
 By:   franz_conrad   (Member)

It's quite simple: if you dislike a composer, they're a plagiarist. If you like them, they have a distinctive style.

The only immortality in this world is for double standards.

 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2004 - 9:19 AM   
 By:   Jehannum   (Member)

How about "self-referencing"?

It's okay but it's not pejorative-sounding enough. That was what was so good about 'self-plagiarism' before Chris spoiled it smile. Using it gave a nice verbal smack.

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2004 - 9:27 AM   
 By:   Jostein   (Member)

It's quite simple: if you dislike a composer, they're a plagiarist. If you like them, they have a distinctive style.

That about sums it up!

 
 Posted:   Jun 12, 2004 - 9:32 AM   
 By:   Jehannum   (Member)

Sometimes this all seems a little confusing. Seems to me that plagiarism is when Composer
X lifts music from Composer Y without giving credit to Y. If Composer X lifts from himself, I'd
call that redundancy, forgetfulness, lazyitus or......or....maybe signature style, one's personal
artistic stamp. I hear signature styles all the time in composers, especially in orchestrations.
I recently got IN SESSIONS. If I didn't recognize the melody, I tried to guess
the composer by his style. It was easy to spot Barry and Herrmann by their orchestrations.
I can usually identify a Moross, Bernstein, Rozsa, or a Goldsmith by the way they
orchestrate. (Or by the way some composers drone.) Sometimes I wonder if we confuse
plagiarism with the distinct voice of an artist which will be used frequently. Don't know.


There are grades of self-reference, from distinctive orchestration to note-by-note self-copying. I think it becomes a crime if the artist does it consciously and wilfully.

I can, however, understand some of Herrmann's self-reference; for example, he didn't expect his radio music to be heard more than once in its original medium, so who can blame him for wanting more people to hear his precious themes and reusing them for later projects?

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.