Deconstructing Beck

Cultural critic Steven Shaviro's article "Deconstructing Beck" uses the album as an avant-garde turning point regarding the use of appropriation and sampling in the music industry today. Shaviro's article takes issue with the legalities of sound/image ownership and copyrights. Shaviro's utilization of the controversy surrounding Beck and Deconstructing Beck bring questions such as "who owns the images and sounds around us?" and "what does it mean to own a sound?" to the surface. Beck's own music is created from various beats and rhythms of all different genres of music from multiple artists. However, Beck's recording company Geffen financially backs Beck and is able to pay the royalty and copyright fees of the samples Beck utilizes in his own songs. Since Beck's songs are paid for and legal he is considered "eclectic" and an artist of appropriation. However, those who do not have record label support and cannot afford copyright fees and continue to appropriate others' music are seen as thieves and criminals. This issue calls into question the issue of music ownership. Since recording companies leverage the money for copyright fees and serve as "watch dogs" over their clients' work, do they ultimately own music? This situation also leads the reader to question how these copyright legalities limit artist creativity and at what point is a song considered brand new? "As the contrast between Beck and Deconstructing Beck suggests, the practice of sampling can take many different forms and has a wide range of implications and meanings.[1]