The Remix: Love It or Leave It?

The question of whether or not remixes are original is a complex one for me as a music lover. First, I must say that there is a difference between a remix and a mashup. By my own un-scientific definition, a remix is a song that is an augmented or differently produced version of the original. Maybe the tempo is sped up, maybe a rap verse or another artist is featured (the latter most likely for a pop song), but the remix is the same song done in a different way. They are usually authorized by the artist(s). A mashup is, as Gunkel describes, a "bastard" form of music in which two or more songs (most often from different genres) are chopped, screwed, and made into one song. The original songs are edited very little if at all outside of taking pieces of each song and making them fit together. I don't mind remixes if they truly do sound cooler than the original, but I think mashups are kind of stupid.

Despite the difference between remix and mashup that I see, Gunkel would likely have disdain for remixes. With the elaborate argument he gives, Gunkel is not wrong -- a remix is still a largely unoriginal musical work. LIke mashups, Gunkel would say of remixes that "there is nothing original in the technique, elements, or results of any particular mash-up; it is derivative to the core" (Gunkel 11). He also goes on to say that mashups are "exceedingly and unapologetically redundant" (Gunkel 12). A remix is redundant because it is recycling everything about the original song and simply adding onto what already exists, thus it is a derivative of the original work. The artist, songwriters, and producers, don't have to start from scratch with a new concept, they can simply re-work old ideas.

Although I do agree that remixes are unoriginal, they can sometimes completely outdo the original versions they are based off of. Gunkel points out that "one could perhaps make the argument that a mash-up re-animates one's appreciation for the original music and even creates new markets for the source material and the artists who created it" (Gunkel 12). This was the case for Jennifer Lopez with her 2003 song "I'm Real." The original song was all but forgettable, but the remix with Ja Rule was one of her biggest hits, and opened her up further to the hip-hop/R&B market. Also, unlike Gunkel's claims, the remix sounds completely different from the original. The lyrics are different, the production is different, there is a rap verse in the remix that didn't exist in the original.....the remix of "I'm Real" is, besides the title, a fairly original work.

Another example is Beyonce's 2014 "Flawless Remix" featuring Nicki Minaj. I had never heard the original "Flawless" before I heard the remix, but the song made me want to listen to the original and the rest of her "Beyonce" album. It increased my appreciation of Beyonce and Nicki Minaj as well. The remix as a separate work contains none of the voiceovers the original does, and has two new verses entirely -- there is only one section of the song that is copied from the original. This remix aong with "I'm Real" reiforce Gunkel's counterargument.

Still, if the remix serves no purpose but to diminish the original song by taking away the lyrics and integrity of the original, then I agree with Gunkel's sentiment. (See Lana Del Rey's "Summertime Sadness Remix.") Remixes can work as long as they add something different to the original, but if they don't, then they prove Gunkel's argument right.