“If I didn't define myself for myself, I would be crunched into other people's fantasies for me and eaten alive.”
Hey readers! If you'd like to have an account on this site (so that you can post comments), or for further information about what you see here, get in touch through the contact page.
which seemed to be arguing for all the things about creating creative work that we all know are true; that everyone is influenced by others, and that copyright should perhaps be known by another name that captures its monopolistic aspects, etc. But then I started wondering why this piece was written in a magazine that my library doesn't have access to (in all our databases Harper's only available online before 2007, which leads me to believe they've imposed an embargo to increase subscriptions) and whether this piece eventually be hidden behind a paywall, and how it was licensed. Then I got to the end:
. . . and so must ask that for a limited time (in the Thomas Jefferson sense) you please respect my small, treasured usemonopolies. Don't pirate my editions; do plunder my visions.
and then it was all over. Really struggling over whether I think this piece is helping or hindering conversations about copywrongs. Can you work within the system and argue against your own actions? Is it useful to do so? I guess that's another larger question I wrestle with, but usually end up preferring the outside.
This work is licensed under a Attribution Share Alike Creative Commons license