Pros and cons of re-imagining

The other day, I was at a concert performance where one of the so-called “young generation” singers made such a mess of one H.R. Jothipala’s songs that I wanted to cry. Jothipala’s immortal songs are firmly etched in our sub consciousness that even Montessori children can hum his songs. We want to remember these songs they way we heard them originally.

There will always be one Amaradeva, one Victor Ratnayake, one Nanda Malini and one Jothipala. Their voices are unique and so is the aura surrounding their creations.

Of late, many youngsters entering the showbiz arena, especially the SMS-based musical reality shows, perform these songs to get popular. It is very rarely that someone tries singing a creation of his or her own. True, there is no law against singing a song performed by another person at a concert venue, but some have gone to the extent of releasing CDs and DVDs of such ‘cover’ versions. No royalties are paid to the original artist or the family concerned. Worse, some of them do not even mention who the original singer is.

It is also true that culture is not static. It evolves over time. The same goes for music. A song that may have appealed to audiences in the 1940s may not necessarily strike a responsive chord with today’s music lovers. In a way, there is some merit in ‘updating’ a song to reflect today’s musical styles and tastes.

But it should be done tastefully, if at all. This is where so many new entrants to the music field have failed miserably. They have gone overboard with their artistic licence to the point of ruining the original song.

On the other hand, there are timeless musical creations too, which can only be interpreted in minutely different ways. The likes of Beethoven or Mozart cannot be imitated. Their music will stand the test of time regardless of who plays or interprets it. Artistes have to walk a fine line between these two extremes.

Artistes

The attempts to copy and ride on the success of the original artistes (here and overseas) may indicate not only a shift in the music industry, but also an intellectual paucity. Are today’s songwriters and composers not equal to the task ? Are the singers bereft of a creative streak ? That is another question that we have to ponder on as the cult of ‘re-imagining’ (because ‘remake’ sounds too blunt) takes hold worldwide.

Around the world, movies, tele-series and songs are being remade, apparently for the new generation. And some of the ‘originals’ are not even that old to start with.

Take for example the 1990 Arnold Schwarzenegger hit Total Recall. It was made just 22 years ago. Pristine film and digital media copies of the film are still available – the latest Mind Bending Edition blu-ray is top notch – and the film is thus readily available to the younger generation and anyone else who wants to see it. There was simply no need to ‘re-imagine’ this landmark science fiction movie.

It is generally acknowledged that Len Wiseman’s 2012 remake of Total Recall (with Colin Farrell reprising Arnie’s role) is vapid and totally unnecessary despite featuring better special effects which could not be achieved in 1990. But somewhere along the way, the new movie had lost the soul, the flair, the original had in ample measure. As the saying goes, if it ain’t broke, don’t’ fix it.

That does not mean that re-imaginations are always bad. Sometimes it could even be necessary. The story of Judah Ben Hur was told in a silent black and white film way back in 1925. The sound came to the movies just five years later and the colour a little later, but it took another 30 years to re-do Ben Hur.

Both elements were absolutely essential to re-tell the fascinating story and William Wyler made the right call in remaking Ben Hur in 1959. Just check out the fantastic new blu-ray if you have any doubts.

Perfect

But there are many other movies that one cannot imagine being re-made, because the original is just so perfect. No one even thinks about re-imagining the Wizard of Oz or Gone With the Wind (incredibly, both directed by Victor Fleming in 1939). Re-make Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane ? No way. How about Francois Truffaut’s The 400 Blows or Vittorio de Seca’s The Bicycle Thieves ? It is unthinkable, to say the least.

However, there is nothing that prevents anyone from re-imaging items from our popular culture especially if they are in public domain, free of copyright restrictions.

If done right, it could give a fresh perspective on the subject matter. No two people will look at a song or movie script in an identical manner, which always leaves room for for artistic freedom and creativity. The question is whether such creative freedom is always used in a way that benefits the society positively.

I believe that copyright and intellectual property laws should be respected in copying, re-imagining or re-interpreting songs, movies and dramas.

If an artiste is still living or if at least the spouse is alive, it does not hurt to ask for permission. Some will have no qualms about another person performing their songs (or any other art form), some will say no and others will come to some sort of monetary or licensing arrangement.

Creativity is in our genes. We cannot suppress the urge to be creative. All those who want to climb the ladder in the entertainment industry of their choice must let that gene work overtime instead of taking the easy way out - copying or re-imagining others’ works. Using one’s own imagination is always better than copying another’s.