Plagiarism improves - but it still implies ideas. In the contemporary condition of information overload, the raw surplus of images, ideas and texts has become so great that the selection of material to plagiarize will inevitably be as much “creative” as the construction of those images, ideas and texts in the first place. If the aim of plagiarism is to make a radical break with “originality,” “creativity,” and its commodity value, plagiarists would have to give up the selection process and use some automatic method instead. But even such a method–for example, through a computer algorithm–presupposes artistic choice. It also does not prevent the use of resulting materials for the excess value called art. And if done in the name of established artists, it will just reinforce their brand. For us, “plagiarism,” “fake,” and “art” are just different sides of the same coin. We welcome outside interventions in our name when they perpetuate this perversity. The reverse is true as well: Don’t believe one second that through boycott or mere inactivity you would be able to free yourself from the market scheme of originality and creativity manifested through art and its double, plagiarism. - Eva and Franco Mattes
