Would Marx have predicted this?

The essay by Johndan Johnson-Eilola brought back fond memories of my summer class on Literary Theory. He discusses the effect of postmodernism on intellectual property and copyright laws, and summarizes that, thanks to technology, scholars find themselves confronted with the economic impacts of what had been a theory fairly confined to the cultural and education worlds.

If one supports the idea of the fragmenting of text, then it raises the difficult question of how can the authors of such text retain their rightful ownership once it is sent in chunks, bytes, quotes and images in different directions throughout cyberspace. With such movement, I find the capabilities for the creation of new text to be unlimited and exciting.

The directions in which technology pushes scholars and students are very new, and now the law and economy is attempting catch up to those changes. Much like the tension found (and celebrated) in postmodernism, the result creates some odd juxtapositions. Johnson-Eilola describes the situation as “one in which we have to both participate and resist. We cannot just give ourselves over to maximizing capital or completely fragmenting the self” (212).

There are no easy answers to the questions arising, and Johnson-Eilola doesn’t paint a rosy picture for future developments: “I admit that I find the incessant commodification of knowledge a depressing trend” and he laments any moves “toward making text a terrain for profit and little else” (212).

I think his advice is worth heeding that scholars commit themselves to staying involved in the decisions made, and increasing awareness about the value of discussion on text as property.