Technology

To what extent does technology influence our definition of author -- I would argue it affects it greatly. How many struggling artists, directors, etc. are out there, working with minimal equipment and minimal exposure, and not one of them achieving the status of "auteur", and yet it is possible for their work to be more innovative; those that do achieve that status are generally those who do have access to much more sophisticated technologies, not just a hand-hald video camera. Exposure and celebrity I would argue also play a big role in how we define who is and is not an author. Though many do not start out with access to such technology, it is often more rare to recognize a director of a low budget film or a garage band as a bonafide author, as opposed to a well-established director or a Grammy winning artist. At the same time, though, I feel that technology has allowed for a more vast understanding of what can be considered as art, regardless of whether artists of "low budget" art are considered authors or not.



Which leads to the role that institutions play in shaping our perception of the author.. from a corporate perspective, such as a music label or a publisher, there is tremendous control over who is considered an author or not, and this begins with the decision over who gets exposure and who does not. If they do not believe that a certain person's work is not worthy for publishing (or else, is not profitable), then it makes it that much harder for that person's talents to be recognized. Institutions such as these work to filter out what types of talents are "acceptable" or not, and therefore contribute to the definition of author. And in some cases, they can take it a step further by marketing a certain desirable image of whoever they are trying to promote, even if it compromises that artist's personality.