Which type of plagiarism is worse?

[indy4 152]

Option 1: When the notes and/or rhythms of two pieces are the same or similar, but the moods and atmospheres of the pieces are different. Examples include:

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Danger Motif in Star Trek II

Horner's "The Machine Age" vs "A Kaleidescope of Mathematics"

Williams "Star Wars Main Titles" vs Korngold's "King's Row Main Titles"

Option 2: When the moods and overall effect of two pieces are the same or similar, but the specific notes and/or rhythms differ. Examples include:

Williams' "The Death Star/The Stormtroopers" vs Holsts' "Mars: The Bringer of War"

Zimmer's "The Battle" vs Badelt's/Zimmer's "The Black Pearl"

Williams' "Dinner with Amelia" vs Zimmer's "Main Theme from As Good as it Gets"

I think Option 2 is the worse one. The similarities that Option 1 results in seem more superficial. That's not to say they're always superficial, but that they're more superficial than Option 2's. Which makes Option 1 easier to forgive, IMO.

[Jay 27,216]

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Danger Motif in Star Trek II

Don't you mean his danger motif in a variety of scores vs Khan's Theme from Star Trek II?

Alot of your examples aren't plagiarism at all, they are clear homages

[indy4 152]

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Danger Motif in Star Trek II

Don't you mean his danger motif in a variety of scores vs Khan's Theme from Star Trek II?

Some of Horner's uses of the Danger Motif fall into a third category: notes that are exactly the same AND moods that are exactly the same. I need to specify two examples that had a different tone, and those are the most obviously different ones that I've heard.

Alot of your examples aren't plagiarism at all, they are clear homages

I don't think so...unless there's a clear reason for an homage (ie "Swing Swing Swing" from 1941) or the composer admits it's an homage, I don't buy that it's an homage. But that's beside the point, the examples may be faulty but the question still stands.

[Datameister 1,394]

I've got to say, indy4, I really disagree with most of your examples (as they pertain to your two options), but I do think the distinction is a rather useful one to make.

For starters, I think Option 1 (technically similar content, different feel) is much more likely to be coincidental and subconscious and even unavoidable. Melodies seep into composers' brains, and it's inevitable that they'll emerge here and there in material they write. Not to mention the fact that there are only so many combinations of notes, so some truly are coincidences. Great minds think alike, as they say...even if they haven't heard each other's work. Option 2 (technically different content, similar feel) is more likely to be an intentional homage...or an attempt to rip off a great piece of music without leaving much room for legal action.

Of course, there's always going to be significant overlap. You can't create eyebrow-raising similarities in the mood without making the notes and rhythms somewhat similar. Conversely, the very action of writing the same notes is sometimes going to produce emotions that are at least slightly related to other uses of those notes, but it's possible to find examples that really are sooooooooo affectively disparate. So usually, with Option 2, it's just a question of the degree to which Option 1 is also in play. With Option 1, it's possible that there's no Option 2 whatsoever, in which case, anyone who happens to catch the similarity is probably going to think, "Oh, that's a funny coincidence", not, "He's a hack!" Again, I'm not referring to the specific examples you used, which I disagree with...I'm just using the definitions you gave.

Anyway, I'm voting for 2.

[Jay 27,216]

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Danger Motif in Star Trek II

Don't you mean his danger motif in a variety of scores vs Khan's Theme from Star Trek II?

Some of Horner's uses of the Danger Motif fall into a third category: notes that are exactly the same AND moods that are exactly the same. I need to specify two examples that had a different tone, and those are the most obviously different ones that I've heard.

Sorry, what I meant was that it doesn't act as a danger motif in Star Trek II - it's Khan's Theme there. So maybe

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Khan's Theme in Star Trek II

[indy4 152]

Of course, there's always going to be significant overlap. You can't create eyebrow-raising similarities in the mood without making the notes and rhythms somewhat similar. Conversely, the very action of writing the same notes is sometimes going to produce emotions that are at least slightly related to other uses of those notes, but it's possible to find examples that really are sooooooooo affectively disparate. So usually, with Option 2, it's just a question of the degree to which Option 1 is also in play. With Option 1, it's possible that there's no Option 2 whatsoever, in which case, anyone who happens to catch the similarity is probably going to think, "Oh, that's a funny coincidence", not, "He's a hack!" Again, I'm not referring to the specific examples you used, which I disagree with...I'm just using the definitions you gave.

I think that may be true all the time, but often the impact of, for instance, having a technical similarity, is so insignificant that it's not even worth mentioning. For instance, consider the possible use of the Emperor's Theme in the parade music in TPM (and I know this isn't a case of plagiarism, but it is a case of technical similarities between two pieces). These notes, when played as the Emperor's Theme, convey completely different atmospheres for me. Perhaps I have some sort of subconscious reaction that is shared between both of the pieces, but it is so insignificant that it's not noteworthy. These are the cases when I think the two options become more distinct. I agree that there are cases where it's not even worth drawing the distinction, but I don't think that's always the case.

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Danger Motif in Star Trek II

Don't you mean his danger motif in a variety of scores vs Khan's Theme from Star Trek II?

Some of Horner's uses of the Danger Motif fall into a third category: notes that are exactly the same AND moods that are exactly the same. I need to specify two examples that had a different tone, and those are the most obviously different ones that I've heard.

Sorry, what I meant was that it doesn't act as a danger motif in Star Trek II - it's Khan's Theme there. So maybe

Horner's Danger Motif in Avatar vs Khan's Theme in Star Trek II

Khan is a source of danger in STII.

[Naïve Old Fart 6,637]

All plagiarism is bad. Period. Homage? Now, that's a different matter.

[Pieter Boelen 633]

What I hate the most is reusing music within a series, even with somewhat changed orchestration,

but still clearly not thematic usage but reusing music specific to a previous scene.

It gets worse when it happens within the same movie.

[Ollie 859]

I still think the King's Row comparison is stretching it.

The similarities between Star Wars and Ice Cold In Alex are way more shocking.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Example please

[Jay 27,216]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Ok that is fairly obvious!

[Romão 1,931]

That's also a bit of a stretch

[Jay 27,216]

Ok that is fairly obvious!

Surprised you never saw that before, it's been discussed on the board multiple times

[Ollie 859]

That's also a bit of a stretch

I'd say it's much more than King's Row. And frankly I admit to being more shocked at hearing Ice Cold In Alex.

[Brónach 490]

Williams made it way better.

[Datameister 1,394]

That's also a bit of a stretch

Not at all. Very similar rhythmically and harmonically.

[fommes 126]

I voted for Option 2, because Zimmer's among the examples, so that one has to be the worse option.

[Naïve Old Fart 6,637]

What I hate the most is reusing music within a series, even with somewhat changed orchestration,

but still clearly not thematic usage but reusing music specific to a previous scene.

It gets worse when it happens within the same movie.

Step forward, Murray Gold...

[Marcus 385]

Given that many of the listed examples rather miss the mark, the argument of this thread is potentially lost.

All plagiarism, which is to say conscious borrowing of material without it being a comment on, hommage to or satire of the original material, is unartistic. Instinctively, we strive to avoid it. It is a sign of weak integrity. However, especially in media music, instances occur when we may be asked to create somewhat in the mold of a pre-existing piece (I cannot think of clearer examples than temp tracks). In these situations, most of us will attempt to better what we're asked to emulate, or at the very least put our own stamp on it. It is painful to have to adhere to something we might be artistically inclined to disagree with, and subsequently, we hope it is something we can avoid (but sadly, you can't always, especially not in a commercial art form, such as film music).

On the other hand, music is a language. It has its codes, its vocabulary, its cliches and truths, and our musical response to drama, to other art forms, and even to life, will have certain universally shared qualities, certain given similarities, and our individual voices are merely "natural variation". Sometimes, this aspect of artistic nature causes two people (or several) to create works of staggering sameness. Audiences often mistake this fact for plagiarism, when in reality, it is more a symptom of "universalism"; it is bo more a case of plagiarism than two separate meals, or sessions of love-making.

On a final note, pertaining to "self-quotation": Sometimes, a phrase, a motif, or certain harmonic patterns, etc., will seem to "represent" something specific, or will have a "magical" hold on us; we might obsess or become fixated. This can be distracting, but at other times it can also become a powerful unifying element, and lend great continuity. Let it be said that it is through our quirks and idiosyncracies that we gain a "voice" in the first place!

[Pieter Boelen 633]

What I hate the most is reusing music within a series, even with somewhat changed orchestration,

but still clearly not thematic usage but reusing music specific to a previous scene.

It gets worse when it happens within the same movie.

Step forward, Murray Gold...

I think it's worse still in film series and films. It's done quite a lot in the PotC sequels, especially the last. Also some parts in Star Wars III and Indiana Jones 4.

And unless I'm very much mistaken, Brian Tyler does it a LOT within the same film score.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Step forward, Murray Gold...

Does Murray Gold decide what music is tracked in episodes of Doctor Who? I somehow doubt it.

[Sharkissimo 1,971]

For me, it's a more a question of self-plagiarism (or recycling) vs. plain old plagiarism (stealing from others). I have little to no problem with the former (Herrmann was a master at this), while the later I can tolerate up to a point. When it's a rare liberty (like with Williams) I don't mind, but Horner simply takes the piss. That man is a bleeding kleptomaniac. He's certifiable!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Horner has done if so often, and so consistently that it has become a characteristic feature, rather then negative one.

It's what defines him, like Cindy Crawford s beauty spot, or J-Lo's enormous ass!

[Sharkissimo 1,971]

Horner has done if so often, and so consistently that it has become a characteristic feature, rather then negative one.

And can still be both characteristic, and negative. Can't it?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Williams' "The Death Star/The Stormtroopers" vs Holsts' "Mars: The Bringer of War"

This thread does not seem to distinguish between plagiarism (the deliberate stealing of something and passing it off as your own invention) and homage (the knowingly referencing to another's work, often with the intention for the reference the be picked up by the audience)

For star wars Williams and Lucas very deliberately chose to model the score on famous concert music, romantic music and the early Viennese school of film scoring, to make the alien environment of the film feel more familiar.

Therefore any similarity of the SW score to a well known classical piece is certainly intentional, and meant as an homage, not plagiarism.

Horner has done if so often, and so consistently that it has become a characteristic feature, rather then negative one.

And can still be both characteristic, and negative. Can't it?

That depends on the listener, not the composer.

[Sharkissimo 1,971]

Horner has done if so often, and so consistently that it has become a characteristic feature, rather then negative one.

And can still be both characteristic, and negative. Can't it?

That depends on the listener, not the composer.

I know, but just because something becomes a habit, that doesn't make it any more justifiable.

[indy4 152]

Given that many of the listed examples rather miss the mark, the argument of this thread is potentially lost.

All plagiarism, which is to say conscious borrowing of material without it being a comment on, hommage to or satire of the original material, is unartistic. Instinctively, we strive to avoid it. It is a sign of weak integrity. However, especially in media music, instances occur when we may be asked to create somewhat in the mold of a pre-existing piece (I cannot think of clearer examples than temp tracks). In these situations, most of us will attempt to better what we're asked to emulate, or at the very least put our own stamp on it. It is painful to have to adhere to something we might be artistically inclined to disagree with, and subsequently, we hope it is something we can avoid (but sadly, you can't always, especially not in a commercial art form, such as film music).

Sure - in film music plagiarism may be valid from a functional standpoint, but that doesn't make it valid from an artistic one. I have never claimed to be shaking my fingers at composers, but that doesn't mean I can't dislike a trend that is sometimes necessary in film music.