Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: spin offs

Thanks for the words in my defense, Ziki.

I think "persecuted" is exaggerating the situation, though.

It obviously has nothing to do with being "off topic." There's an active thread in the next folder about good places to eat in Philly. That can't possibly be considered relevant to Huck Finn, but no one's saying anything about it. Some people just didn't like my opinion and decided to try to shut down the thread over it.

Geez...that kinda does sound like persecution, doesn't it? Ok, here's why it's not:

BNU is about marketing -- both for Barnes and Noble and for the authors they invite. If the authors feel like readers are jumping on their case, other authors won't want to come here. So, things get tense when not everyone is towing the "you are thought-provoking and brilliant" party line (which is never an issue when the author isn't present).

The irony is I've particpated in dozens of these discussions and I've never once met an author who came here expecting to just get licked on like puppies in a basket. They've been creative, intelligent people who welcomed all kinds of discussion about their book, about subjects tangentially related to their book, and about literature in general.

Let's give the authors some credit for being smart enough not to mistake flattery for a welcoming environment or a stimulating discussion.

Fortunately, it looks like everybody's taken a chill pill and gone back to discussing derivative fiction.





ziki wrote:


jonclinch wrote:
Without stooping to defend my own work, I've got to say that serious, high-literary projects of this type have proven themselves worthy again and again. John Gardner's Grendel, Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, Geraldine Brooks' March, Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea.


ziki wrote:


JesseBC wrote: what I don't like is modern writers who mess with the classics -- even when their efforts have been very good.


Do you hear Jon? What say you?

ziki






I do not think you need to defend your work, here or anywhere but I think it is an interesting topic how an idea catches fire and why a writer runs with it. What is the motivation, interest and ambition in it?

I for my life can't understand why that should be such a controversial thing to talk about. Why should a person who doesn't like spin offs be persecuted and why wouldn't others who like it count?

ziki
forced to walk on eggshells


Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Jon's choice of topic

I don't think you're wrong at all. I think there's plenty of evidence that authors who do this show enormous courage, a respect for the original that borders on reverence, and perhaps more knowledge of the original than an academic in literature.

Gregory Maguire named the Wicked Witch "Elfaba" from L-F-B, the initials of L. Frank Baum. He seemed much more interested in Baum's original series (which, as I recall, he could describe in the original order of publicaton) than in the more popular MGM version of only one of the stories.

Susan Hill didn't even volunteer. She was approached by the duMaurier estate and asked to write a sequel to Rebecca. She had all kinds of rules for herself in order to avoid doing anything that would retroactively alter the world of the original.

Maybe Jon has some similar kinds of stories/quirks...?





ziki wrote:


jonclinch wrote:.... from the moment I began working on Finn until now — I've felt called upon to make sure that it's understood as a serious and independent work of art, not a pastiche or a mere jolly entertainment or, worst of all, something that for whatever reason doesn't strive to honor and respect and work within the framework of its sources.



Thank you. And I would think that it actually must be even more difficult to write a spin off (let me settle on that term just for the ease) compared to a story you start from scratch. Twain is a name in literature, HF aspires to the title of great American novel and as I see it, it must take some courage to bite into that apple. Am I wrong?

ziki



jd
Frequent Contributor
jd
Posts: 326
Registered: ‎01-27-2007
0 Kudos

Re: spin offs



JesseBC wrote:
Thanks for the words in my defense, Ziki.

I think "persecuted" is exaggerating the situation, though.

It obviously has nothing to do with being "off topic." There's an active thread in the next folder about good places to eat in Philly. That can't possibly be considered relevant to Huck Finn, but no one's saying anything about it. Some people just didn't like my opinion and decided to try to shut down the thread over it.

Geez...that kinda does sound like persecution, doesn't it? Ok, here's why it's not:

BNU is about marketing -- both for Barnes and Noble and for the authors they invite. If the authors feel like readers are jumping on their case, other authors won't want to come here. So, things get tense when not everyone is towing the "you are thought-provoking and brilliant" party line (which is never an issue when the author isn't present).

The irony is I've particpated in dozens of these discussions and I've never once met an author who came here expecting to just get licked on like puppies in a basket. They've been creative, intelligent people who welcomed all kinds of discussion about their book, about subjects tangentially related to their book, and about literature in general.

Let's give the authors some credit for being smart enough not to mistake flattery for a welcoming environment or a stimulating discussion.

Fortunately, it looks like everybody's taken a chill pill and gone back to discussing derivative fiction.





ziki wrote:


jonclinch wrote:
Without stooping to defend my own work, I've got to say that serious, high-literary projects of this type have proven themselves worthy again and again. John Gardner's Grendel, Tom Stoppard's Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, Geraldine Brooks' March, Jean Rhys' Wide Sargasso Sea.


ziki wrote:


JesseBC wrote: what I don't like is modern writers who mess with the classics -- even when their efforts have been very good.


Do you hear Jon? What say you?

ziki






I do not think you need to defend your work, here or anywhere but I think it is an interesting topic how an idea catches fire and why a writer runs with it. What is the motivation, interest and ambition in it?

I for my life can't understand why that should be such a controversial thing to talk about. Why should a person who doesn't like spin offs be persecuted and why wouldn't others who like it count?

ziki
forced to walk on eggshells





jessebc- off point may not be the exact words i would choose but I am curious as to why you would want to be part of a discussion of a book you are not buying or reading?. While those of us who have bought the book are anxious to talk about it, the book that is. Your not buying or reading the book is noted in the sales figures of the book and your abscence from the discussion in most book clubs. Why go to the trouble to delineate all the spinoffs and derivatives when you cannot discuss this particular deriviative. I cant catch your meaning here and I am curious, jd PS - I hope this is not putting you on the hot seat so to speak I just wonder why???
Author
jonclinch
Posts: 44
Registered: ‎03-01-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Jon's choice of topic

Oh, absolutely.

I'd hoped to get to a couple of them this morning while I was waiting for some calls in my hotel room, but time has not permitted.

I'll do my best to check back in later on.


JesseBC wrote:
...Maybe Jon has some similar kinds of stories/quirks...?

-------------------------------
http://www.readfinn.com
http://www.jonclnch.com
Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: So there

But wouldn't you agree that those examples are going far beyond the scope of derivative fiction?

There may be nothing new under the sun, but there's still a difference between the way most stories can be linked to the collective unconscious versus what is basically the literary equivalent of fan-fiction.

That's why I think the recent copyright infringement suits against fan-fiction writers are so misguided. What were Rhys/Hill/et al doing if not writing fan-fiction? The practice goes back awfully far to suddenly decide it's illegal.

Though I suppose they have a point (if perhaps not one that ought to be handled by the courts). The difference used to be publication since the unpublished were presumed to have a limited audience. But in the internet era of easy publishing and widespread distribution, should there be any limits on the ability of writers to appropriate the characters of another writer?

There's a qualitative difference between, say, Wide Sargasso Sea and a bunch of goth teenagers swapping badly-written stories about Anne Rice's vampires. But if quality is the deciding factor, then who is the arbiter of quality?

And then who decides what's considered part of the canon? Scarlett is considered the "official" sequel to Gone With the Wind, but The Wind Done Gone is considered apocryphal. Because one was commissioned and the other was not, which hardly seems like a fair yardstick.

And must the writer really demonstrate some kind of acceptable level of reverence for the original? What if they want to satirize it? Satire is a pretty fine old tradition as well.

On the other hand, what if they want to write pornography from it? (Porn based on the Harry Potter characters is now so prevalent one can find it from the most innocent Google search.)

But all these types of questions are unique to the specific kind of fiction that seeks to either expand on the plot of a previous story or bring the previous (usually minor) characters into a new story. How can that be globalized to include everything written since the 18th century?





fanuzzir wrote:
As does Pearl, a follow up novel to Scarlet Letter. That re- or over-writing analogy of the Old and New testaments is actually a solid interpretive model. It's also a good description of almost all modern fiction, which is deeply determined by convention and precedents and often outwardly so. I could not name a novel that is not endebted to other narratives or an outright confabulation of them. That's what the novel IS, and was conceived of when it was formulated in the eighteenth century: a rewriting of established literatures. (Here's one formula that has great repute: novel is the parody of epic. And another: novel is the everyday, fallible version of transcendant, divine narratives--Pilgrim's Progress retold from the perspective of a juvenile delinquent. No one got on Twain's case for copping Bunyan.

Bob

Message Edited by fanuzzir on 03-12-200709:40 PM




Author
jonclinch
Posts: 44
Registered: ‎03-01-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Jon's choice of topic

A number of people tried their best to discourage me when I started working on Finn, sure that they were saving me from my own delusions. Some warned that I'd be compared against Twain and found wanting; others warned that I simply dare not even sniff around the ground that Huckleberry Finn had tread upon, since it was so sacred and all. Of course I went ahead anyhow. What I knew -- and they did not -- was that I wasn't interested in doing a sequel to Huck or a soundalike reiteration of it. I hoped that my aspiration to append something serious and honorable to the underpinnings of Twain's novel would serve me well and let me escape from the more obvious traps.

Still, even once the novel was complete and on its way to being read by editors, there were folks out there with misgivings. My own editor reports that right until he opened the manuscript he had no end of doubts.

As for particulars of insight and understanding, mine probably fall into two categories:

1) The role and motivations of Pap Finn. I was careful to construct my novel around and within Finn's appearances in The Adventures, although I worked to give him motivations and intimations of intent that differed here and there from those that Huck attributed to him. I chose to dramatize a couple of scenes that were mentioned only briefly in The Adventures. And in one case, I ignored Huck's narrative and had his father do something else entirely -- not merely because it suited my aims, but because I found Huck's narrative at this point totally unbelievable.

2) The dark side of The Adventures. I was struck by the ugliness and cruelty at the heart of Twain's book the first time I read it, and I suppose that Finn is in many ways the working-out of that experience.


JesseBC wrote:
...Maybe Jon has some similar kinds of stories/quirks...?

-------------------------------
http://www.readfinn.com
http://www.jonclnch.com
Frequent Contributor
fanuzzir
Posts: 1,014
Registered: ‎10-22-2006
0 Kudos

Re: So there



JesseBC wrote:

>But all these types of questions are unique to the specific kind of fiction that seeks to either expand on the plot of a previous story or bring the previous (usually minor) characters into a new story. How can that be globalized to include everything written since the 18th century?







In Literary historical terms, the novel is said to have begun even earlier, with Don Quixote, a parody of medieval romances. Everyone was familiar with those plots; everyone knew the types and conventions recycled. That holds for the main character and Sancho Panza; they were all figures from common literary experience. The novel form was intentionally derivative, a nod to emerging mass literacy and emergent secular sensibilities.

I will give you this: that post-modernism does represent a new form of literary self-reference, and gives writers a new mandate to question boundaries between past and present. I'll leave it to Jon to answer whether he thinks his novel is post-modern.

Whatever fan-fiction is, I am sure that Wide Sargasso Sea is not. You are alone on the planet in casting that novel in such a category.

Has anyone read Ahab's Wife?


anuzzir wrote:
As does Pearl, a follow up novel to Scarlet Letter. That re- or over-writing analogy of the Old and New testaments is actually a solid interpretive model. It's also a good description of almost all modern fiction, which is deeply determined by convention and precedents and often outwardly so. I could not name a novel that is not endebted to other narratives or an outright confabulation of them. That's what the novel IS, and was conceived of when it was formulated in the eighteenth century: a rewriting of established literatures. (Here's one formula that has great repute: novel is the parody of epic. And another: novel is the everyday, fallible version of transcendant, divine narratives--Pilgrim's Progress retold from the perspective of a juvenile delinquent. No one got on Twain's case for copping Bunyan.

Bob

Message Edited by fanuzzir on 03-12-200709:40 PM







Frequent Contributor
Posts: 3,107
Registered: ‎10-27-2006
0 Kudos

Re: So there



fanuzzir wrote:
Has anyone read Ahab's Wife?




pmath did
ziki
Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: spin offs

No, I don't think it's a hot seat question -- or at least it doesn't bother me anyway :-)

I suppose the simplest answer is that I *am* reading Huck Finn, but I'm only on chapter 9 so there aren't very many folders I can go to yet. This is one of the few spoiler-free zones in the joint. And what else are we going to talk about here in the lobby, except...literature-in-general? We can't talk about the specific books in here (except maybe in a very superficial way) and, since books are the one thing we know we have in common, what else are we going to talk about? The conversation just sort of evolved.

But I think I know what you're getting at and I've always thought it was unfortunate that BNU informally discourages even the appearance of criticizing the books that are up for discussion. Not by any sort of policy that I'm aware of, but it's usually not accepted by the participants themselves.

Of course, I like talking about books I've enjoyed. But it can also be fun (and sometimes very insightful) to talk about those I either hated or was at least very critical of or had mixed feelings about -- which is a taboo among most BNU participants. The unwritten rule is that if you can't say something nice, you shouldn't be here in the first place. It's very limiting.

Obviously, this doesn't apply to the situation here: I haven't read Finn, I certainly don't "hate" it, and I don't even "hate" derivative fiction in general. But even that you would pose the question just underscores my point: if I'm not saying something nice, why am I here at all? When, really, the only criticism I've lodged was fairly mild, very general, and fully acknowledged as idiosyncratic and inconsistent.

In this situation, I think the problem was mostly that I was perceived to be trying to undermine the author's credibility in his presence -- which, really, even if I had been, most of them have contended with book critics in major publications and amateur reviewers with an Amazon password and a chip on their shoulder. By contrast, we at BNU are an extrordinarily receptive audience.

But the prevailing assumption is always that one joins these discussions because they liked the book, not because they might like to further understand why they didn't. Perhaps then changing their mind or perhaps not.



---jd wrote:jessebc- off point may not be the exact words i would choose but I am curious as to why you would want to be part of a discussion of a book you are not buying or reading?. While those of us who have bought the book are anxious to talk about it, the book that is. Your not buying or reading the book is noted in the sales figures of the book and your abscence from the discussion in most book clubs. Why go to the trouble to delineate all the spinoffs and derivatives when you cannot discuss this particular deriviative. I cant catch your meaning here and I am curious, jd PS - I hope this is not putting you on the hot seat so to speak I just wonder why???----
jd
Frequent Contributor
jd
Posts: 326
Registered: ‎01-27-2007
0 Kudos

Re: spin offs

JesseBC thanks for the info. I was a little taken aback that you were so frank with Jon, when he is kind enough to share his opinion with us and give us personal insight into his book. I do not want to stop the dialog or shut anyone out of the discussion, but I was curious as to your motivation and appreciate your reply.-jd
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 3,107
Registered: ‎10-27-2006
0 Kudos

Re: spin offs



JesseBC wrote: I'm only on chapter 9 so there aren't very many folders I can go to yet.




yay, you are doing well, I am not even through Tom Sawyer, yet (RL's been just too crazy lately). At times I wish the groups were differently paced, some could move faster, some could be slower but I guess the participation on this board follows the overall promotion work...that's the main purpose the way it is set up now.

ziki
Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Jon's choice of topic

That's interesting, Jon -- thanks! A couple questions spring to mind, but they would inevitably lead to spoilers, which we shouldn't talk about in this folder. I'll try to save them for a more appropriate place.

It seems like a lot of the best books were initially met with editor resistance. I'm not sure why that it is, but I've theorized that maybe it's because the books that editors snap up right away are the ones they figure they can make a quick splash with and recover their costs. Whereas books that really give the reader something to sink their teeth into may take awhile to work their way into the public consciousness and thus seem riskier to the publisher.

So has Finn been picked up by any universities or secondary schools to be used in conjunction with teaching Twain?





jonclinch wrote:
A number of people tried their best to discourage me when I started working on Finn, sure that they were saving me from my own delusions. Some warned that I'd be compared against Twain and found wanting; others warned that I simply dare not even sniff around the ground that Huckleberry Finn had tread upon, since it was so sacred and all. Of course I went ahead anyhow. What I knew -- and they did not -- was that I wasn't interested in doing a sequel to Huck or a soundalike reiteration of it. I hoped that my aspiration to append something serious and honorable to the underpinnings of Twain's novel would serve me well and let me escape from the more obvious traps.

Still, even once the novel was complete and on its way to being read by editors, there were folks out there with misgivings. My own editor reports that right until he opened the manuscript he had no end of doubts.

As for particulars of insight and understanding, mine probably fall into two categories:

1) The role and motivations of Pap Finn. I was careful to construct my novel around and within Finn's appearances in The Adventures, although I worked to give him motivations and intimations of intent that differed here and there from those that Huck attributed to him. I chose to dramatize a couple of scenes that were mentioned only briefly in The Adventures. And in one case, I ignored Huck's narrative and had his father do something else entirely -- not merely because it suited my aims, but because I found Huck's narrative at this point totally unbelievable.

2) The dark side of The Adventures. I was struck by the ugliness and cruelty at the heart of Twain's book the first time I read it, and I suppose that Finn is in many ways the working-out of that experience.


JesseBC wrote:
...Maybe Jon has some similar kinds of stories/quirks...?




Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: So there

I agree with you, Fan. I just think we're talking about different things.

There's the broad sense in which all literature is an evolving, organic process with writers constantly being influenced by those who came before them (which seems to be what you're referring to, right?) Harpers has a good article about that here, which even talks about Twain: http://www.harpers.org/TheEcstasyOfInfluence.html

Then there's modern reimaginings of older stories -- e.g. Romeo and Juliet (itself an adaption of an Arthur Brooks poem) becomes West Side Story or Grease or (the ultimate postmodernism?) Shakespeare in Love. (And I do appreciate postmodernism, if with ironic tongue planted firmly in my cheek.)

But fan-fiction is a specific subset in which the writer creates a new story using the world and/or the characters from a story they didn't originally write. It used to be only considered fan-fiction if the work was unpublished, but, now, with the availability of the internet, publishers are suing fan-fiction writers for copyright violation (I believe these suits are being covered by The Chronicle of Higher Education).

And I'm not the only person on the planet to see the connection here. The defense attorneys have used Wide Sargasso Sea as the most obvious example of how old and established a tradition fan-fiction really is. It meets the exact same criteria by which they're trying to accuse these writers of copyright violation.

I think the lawsuits are ridiculous and only serve as proof that we've taken the idea of intellectual property too far. But wouldn't you agree that the questions it raises are relevant here?





fanuzzir wrote:


JesseBC wrote:

>But all these types of questions are unique to the specific kind of fiction that seeks to either expand on the plot of a previous story or bring the previous (usually minor) characters into a new story. How can that be globalized to include everything written since the 18th century?







In Literary historical terms, the novel is said to have begun even earlier, with Don Quixote, a parody of medieval romances. Everyone was familiar with those plots; everyone knew the types and conventions recycled. That holds for the main character and Sancho Panza; they were all figures from common literary experience. The novel form was intentionally derivative, a nod to emerging mass literacy and emergent secular sensibilities.

I will give you this: that post-modernism does represent a new form of literary self-reference, and gives writers a new mandate to question boundaries between past and present. I'll leave it to Jon to answer whether he thinks his novel is post-modern.

Whatever fan-fiction is, I am sure that Wide Sargasso Sea is not. You are alone on the planet in casting that novel in such a category.

Has anyone read Ahab's Wife?


anuzzir wrote:
As does Pearl, a follow up novel to Scarlet Letter. That re- or over-writing analogy of the Old and New testaments is actually a solid interpretive model. It's also a good description of almost all modern fiction, which is deeply determined by convention and precedents and often outwardly so. I could not name a novel that is not endebted to other narratives or an outright confabulation of them. That's what the novel IS, and was conceived of when it was formulated in the eighteenth century: a rewriting of established literatures. (Here's one formula that has great repute: novel is the parody of epic. And another: novel is the everyday, fallible version of transcendant, divine narratives--Pilgrim's Progress retold from the perspective of a juvenile delinquent. No one got on Twain's case for copping Bunyan.

Bob

Message Edited by fanuzzir on 03-12-200709:40 PM










Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: spin offs

I was skeptical of this new format at first, but I've found it works much better for slow (or busy) readers (like me!) and it's much easier to find threads I want and ignore those I don't. The outdated software of the old format held virtually everyone hostage to every single conversation going on. Overall, I like these forums much better.





ziki wrote:


JesseBC wrote: I'm only on chapter 9 so there aren't very many folders I can go to yet.




yay, you are doing well, I am not even through Tom Sawyer, yet (RL's been just too crazy lately). At times I wish the groups were differently paced, some could move faster, some could be slower but I guess the participation on this board follows the overall promotion work...that's the main purpose the way it is set up now.

ziki


Frequent Contributor
Posts: 3,107
Registered: ‎10-27-2006
0 Kudos

was and is



JesseBC wrote: The outdated software of the old format held virtually everyone hostage to every single conversation going on. Overall, I like these forums much better.





Good for you. I never felt like a hostage on BNU. I could chose there as here what to read. However, I guess this discussion topic is no longer wished for by our hosts.

ziki
Author
jonclinch
Posts: 44
Registered: ‎03-01-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Jon's choice of topic

The editorial resistance, Jesse, was over whether or not I'd be able to make good on the promises I'd made in taking on this risky premise.

It's true that publishers have to worry about recouping their costs and making a profit, but in the case of Finn I've experienced nothing but huge support in both commercial and creative senses. People who work in publishing do so because they love books, after all, and like the rest of us they can get really excited over something that they believe in.

As for the adoption of Finn in academia, I know of one charter high school in Pennsylvania will be teaching it to their AP English classes next month. There surely may be many others. Random House has created a fantastic Teacher's Guide that should be up on the www.readfinn.com web site shortly...

-- Jon



JesseBC wrote:
That's interesting, Jon -- thanks! A couple questions spring to mind, but they would inevitably lead to spoilers, which we shouldn't talk about in this folder. I'll try to save them for a more appropriate place.

It seems like a lot of the best books were initially met with editor resistance. I'm not sure why that it is, but I've theorized that maybe it's because the books that editors snap up right away are the ones they figure they can make a quick splash with and recover their costs. Whereas books that really give the reader something to sink their teeth into may take awhile to work their way into the public consciousness and thus seem riskier to the publisher.

So has Finn been picked up by any universities or secondary schools to be used in conjunction with teaching Twain?
-------------------------------
http://www.readfinn.com
http://www.jonclnch.com
Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Jon's choice of topic

The author of that Harpers article that I posted the link for earlier now has an article in Salon about these same kinds of issues of writers being influenced by earlier writers: http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/03/25/lethem_interview/index1.html
Frequent Contributor
Posts: 3,107
Registered: ‎10-27-2006
0 Kudos

copyright etc.



JesseBC wrote:
The author of that Harpers article that I posted the link for earlier now has an article in Salon about these same kinds of issues of writers being influenced by earlier writers....

IOW: attention is the dough...
The remedy to issues of copyright etc would probably be a sharing economy, whole nutter kind of thinking

ziki
Frequent Contributor
JesseBC
Posts: 278
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: copyright etc.

Yea! I'm so glad someone's still here! I'm only a little over halfway through the book and was hoping I'd still have someone to discuss it with.

Anyway, I think Lessig's idea is much less radical than re-thinking the whole economy. The idea behind copyright (and patent) is that it will encourage creativity and invention by compensating the creator for a short period of time, after which their work enters the public domain.

Even returning to that might solve the problem. Mickey Mouse should long ago have been in the public domain. So should the formulas of many pharmaceuticals that still aren't available in generic because their makers are spending enormous sums on advertising.

It doesn't help that writers have a phobia of plagiarism that goes beyond real plagiarism or copyright infringement.

But, then the other side of that argument is: Should there be any controls for quality? Should someone be allowed to profit from pornographic fan-fiction of Harry Potter? Should there be any sanctions against a more "inside" writer taking a lesser-known writer's work, re-vamping it, and publishing it as their own (which is the gist of the lawsuit against Dan Brown)? Does derivative work ever dilute the originals, especially when those originals are part of the cultural imagination?




ziki wrote:


JesseBC wrote:
The author of that Harpers article that I posted the link for earlier now has an article in Salon about these same kinds of issues of writers being influenced by earlier writers....

IOW: attention is the dough...
The remedy to issues of copyright etc would probably be a sharing economy, whole nutter kind of thinking

ziki



Frequent Contributor
Posts: 3,107
Registered: ‎10-27-2006
0 Kudos

cont. discussion



JesseBC wrote:
Yea! I'm so glad someone's still here! I'm only a little over halfway through the book and was hoping I'd still have someone to discuss it with.





OK, we'll see where we can get with it.
ziki
Users Online
Currently online: 53 members 811 guests
Please welcome our newest community members: