Appropriation is legitimate when the borrower 'betters' the source — Milton's criterion for creative transformation

Oswald cites Milton’s criterion that borrowing becomes piracy ‘if it is not bettered by the borrower,’ and Stravinsky’s complementary aphorism ‘A good composer does not imitate; he steals.’ Together these articulate a quality-based principle for evaluating appropriation: the question is not whether you borrowed but whether the resulting work adds something the original lacked. Jim Tenney’s transformation of Blue Suede Shoes is offered as an example that meets the criterion — the tape manipulation allows listeners to ‘hear [Elvis] differently,’ revealing structure and material that the original concealed. This principle frames compositional ethics as craft-based rather than purely legal: the obligation is to the work, not the permission slip.

Examples

Jim Tenney’s Collage 1 slows and filters Elvis into textural material, revealing the recording’s grain rather than its hook. Oswald’s own plunderphonic transformations pitch-shift and reverse Michael Jackson recordings to the point of creating new melodic content.

Assessment

Apply Milton’s ‘bettered by the borrower’ criterion to a sample-based track you know. What specific transformation occurs? Does the result ‘better’ the source, and by what standard are you measuring improvement?