This essay critically analyzes the CAE article with the movie “PressPausePlay” presentations and attempts to answer a few critical questions on the same. There are some elements of contradiction and some similarities in the movie and the article and there are also different ways of presentations utilized. The essay argues that for the greater good of knowledge progress and cultural development, plagiarism must be allowed.
(1) CAE is being proactive and so is the movie, but for different reasons. CAE defines plagiarism as something that “it has been viewed as the theft of language, ideas, and images by the less than talented, often for the enhancement of personal fortune or prestige” (“CAE” 83) and then goes onto redefine it stating that plagiarism is indeed necessary to ensure that culture is distributed. There are works of authors that would never have been understood or used or redefined across other disciplines if not for the plagiarist. “Ideas improve. The meaning of words participates in the improvement. Plagiarism is necessary. Progress implies it “(“CAE” 85). The type of words that are used and the meanings conveyed presents plagiarism from two extremes. One is that of defining the archetypal understanding of plagiarism and the other extreme is that of viewing plagiarism as necessary for cultural progress.
In the movie plagiarism is represented in a similar exaggerated way. Where the text supports plagiarism in its entirety, the movie presents the argument on plagiarism from either ends. The provocative nature is most viewed in the movie where artists talk about how culture would decline because of the democratization of music, videos and art in general.