Regressive and Reflexive Mashups in Sampling Culture

Remixing playware

“…music, software) remixing, there is an interesting distinction between reflexive remixes and regenerative remixes, where reflexive remixes essentially are based on static samples with a recognizable historical path, and regenerative remixes relies on dynamic samples that are continuously updated [15]. Remarkably, regenerative remixing can even be extended to the physical form of samples if the sampling material is regenerative, for instance in the form of smart material or natural material.…”

“…This kind of text sampling and remixing was termed Darwinian Writing due to the resemblance of DNA evolution, where the outcome is a mixture of old pieces with crossovers and mutations. Similarly, in his excellent review, Navas [15] describes regenerative remix of networked media through software (e.g. as reflexive mashup of news from different web-sites).…”

“…depends on sampling in the same way that the DJs depend on sampling, or as Navas puts it "culture is redefined by the constant flow of information in fragments dependent on the single activity of sampling. The ability to manipulate fragments effectively, then, extends principles of Remix even in practical terms" [15].…”

Enlightenment, the Remix: Transparency as a DJ's Trick of Seeing Everyone From Nowhere

“…At its best mashup is a combination not of the merely unrelated, but of the exquisitely unrelated, resulting in cognitive dissonance, ironic kitsch, even uncanny beauty. Navas () helpfully outlines taxonomies such as remixes dubbed “extended,” “selective,” and “reflexive” as well as mashups “regressive,” “reflexive,” and “regenerative,” but his terms overlap: “ Reflexive Mashup is… Regenerative Remix ” (Navas, , p. 158). Navas criticizes Ferguson's videos series “Everything Is a Remix” (Ferguson, ) because “the way some of the material is presented begins to water down the very foundation of the term ‘remix’” (Navas, ).…”

Foreword: The Work of the Implementing New Knowledge Environments Community

“…On the one hand, we want to have easy and constant access to information, to be able to mine it at will and use it interactively in collaborative settings; on the other hand, we are still publishing scholarly monographs that cling to an out-dated model of authority and to the idea that knowledge can be stabilized. In order to overcome this contradiction, Adema makes the case for "the possibility to reuse, adapt, modify and remix material" and explores in depth the concepts of "modularity" (see Manovich, 2008), of the author being replaced by a "selector" in a sampling environment (see Navas, 2010), and of the printed book giving way to the "fluid text" (see Bryant, 2002). While recognizing that these are only halfway solutions and that "just like stability, fluidity is an ideal type, " Adema concludes her Derridean critique of the present situation by proposing that these experimental concepts may help to reinvent the scholarly knowledge dissemination system.…”