Showing posts with label art. Show all posts
Showing posts with label art. Show all posts

Thursday, April 11, 2024

Art Versus Life

A work of art (specifically, literature, including poetry such as song lyrics) does not necessarily reveal the life or personality of the artist. Agatha Christie and Dorothy Sayers didn't make a habit of committing murders. Stephen King has probably never met a vampire or an extradimensional shapeshifter, and although he incorporated his near-fatal traffic accident into the Dark Tower series, I doubt he actually encountered his gunslinger Roland in person. Robert Bloch, reputed to have said he had the heart of a small boy -- in a jar on his desk -- was one of the nicest people I ever met. As Mercedes Lackey has commented on Quora, she doesn't keep a herd of magical white horses in her yard. Despite the preface to THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS, it seems very unlikely that C. S. Lewis actually intercepted a bundle of correspondence between two demons. And, as a vampire specialist, I could go on at length (but I won't) about the literary-critical tendency to analyze DRACULA as a source for secrets about Bram Stoker's alleged psychological hangups.

C. S. Lewis labeled the practice of trying to discover a writer's background, character, or beliefs from his or her work "the personal heresy." Elsewhere, writing about Milton, he cautioned against thinking we can find out how Milton "really" felt about his blindness by reading PARADISE LOST or any of his other poetry.

The Personal Heresy

An article by hip-hop musician Keven Liles cautions against analyzing songs in this way and condemning singers based on the contents of their music, with lyrics "being presented as literal confessions in courtrooms across America":

Art Is Not Evidence

Some musicians and other artists have been convicted of crimes on the basis of words or images in their works. Liles urges passage of a law to protect creators' First Amendment rights in this regard, with narrowly defined "common-sense" exceptions to be applied if there's concrete evidence of a direct, factual connection between a particular work and a specific criminal act.

This kind of confusion between art and life is why I'm deeply suspicious of child pornography laws that would criminalize the broad category of "depicting" children in sexual situations. A description or drawing/painting of an imaginary child in such a situation, however revolting it may be, does no direct real-world harm. Interpreted loosely or capriciously, that kind of law could be read to ban a novel such as LOLITA. Would you really trust a fanatical book-banner or over-zealous prosecutor or judge to discern that the repulsive first-person narrator is thoroughly unreliable and that his self-serving claims about his abusive relationship with a preteen girl are MEANT to be disbelieved?

Many moons ago, in the pre-internet era, a friend of mine who wasn't a regular consumer of speculative fiction read my chapbook of horror-themed verse, DAYMARES FROM THE CRYPT. To my suprise, she expressed sincere worry about me for having such images in my head. Not being a habitual reader of the genre, she didn't recognize that the majority of stuff in the poems consisted of very conventional, widely known horror tropes. Even the more personal pieces had been filtered through the "lens" of creativity (as Liles puts it in his essay) to transmute the raw material into artifacts, not autobiography.

In case you'd like to check out these supposedly disturbing verse effusions, DAYMARES FROM THE CRYPT -- updated with a few later poems -- is available in a Kindle edition for only 99 cents, with a cool cover by Karen Wiesner:

Daymares

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.

Friday, August 04, 2023

Medieval Art Celebration by Karen Wiesner

Art by Karen Wiesner

In celebration of all things Medieval, a simplified black and white sketch I did in 2022 of the painting The Accolade by Edmund Blair Leighton (1901).

@Karen Wiesner

Sunday, October 10, 2021

Snag And Be Damned

Each week, I read dozens of USA and international copyright-related columns, including media law, trademark law, technology insights, art law, proceedings of the USPTO, music policy, writing industry forums, and more, and I put together some of what I find most interesting and potentially relevant to writers.

This week, "art" jumped out at me.

As legal bloggers for Herrick Feinstein LLP  explain, there are differences in artists' rights in the USA versus, for instance in Italy.  In some European jurisdictions, an artist receives payment every time a copyrighted work of art is sold and resold. Not so in the USA.  Gabrielle C. Wilson, Howard N. SpieglerLawrence M. Kaye and Yale M. Weitz  write a thorough summary of art law rights in the USA.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e90a3a21-32c4-4672-85e4-19c994420cbc

Interestingly, museums usually try to obtain the permission of the artist/copyright owner before copying the artwork into catalogues or into posters and other advertisements. If that is an issue for catalogues and advertisements, is it a stretch to wonder if it could be an issue for cover art for self-published books if author-publishers do not make sure to obtain all the necessary rights and permissions for their cover art?

Another issue to be considered is the incidental or deliberate appearance of "street art" in photographs or advertisements.... or even on items of clothing. Or not!  Street artists have rights, even when they do not own the surface on which they apply their art.

Social-media-law expert legal blogger Robert B. Nussbaum for Saiber LLC's Trending Law Blog discusses a recent reversal of a liberal circuit's decision on whether or not it is copyright infringement to use Facebook's embedding tools to exploit someone else's video (in this case of an emaciated polar bear) in defiance of the copyright owner's clearly posted copyright notice.

https://trendinglawblog.com/2021/10/05/southern-district-of-new-york-rejects-ninth-circuits-copyright-analysis-regarding-embedded-images/

Apparently, just because Facebook or Instagram make it possible for their users to do something (embed copyrighted works without permission) does not mean that Facebook's magic impunity umbrella will protect users from liability.

Also piling on Facebook (my characterizaation), legal bloggers Kyle Petersen and C. Linna Chen  of Loeb and Loeb LLP discuss the interesting case of an attractive (one infers) lady newscaster who found her photograph being used without her permission as part of an advertisement for a Facebook dating app. She sued Facebook and other platforms.  Facebook tried to hide behind Section 230, without success.

https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2021/09/hepp-v-facebook 

Read all about it. What a terrible precedent it would have been if the lady had lost! Facebook could have been emboldened to snag any attractive face to use in its promotions for any other app or product or service. 

Imagine if you found your face or that of someone you love being used without permission or compensation to sell an activity or product that you do not endorse or approve! Maybe, also, be careful where you get the images that you put on your website and cover art.

Nevertheless, it is probably a better idea to peel away Section 230 protections and give the newly created CASE Act court a chance to work, than to give governments more power.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

SPACE SNARK™ 

 

Sunday, June 20, 2021

Of Art and Dirty Laundry

In times of inflation, art appreciates. When cash (or bonds, or equities) lose value, people spend. They buy art, precious metals, property, stamps, and alcohol.

By the way, the cost of an American "Forever" stamp is likely to go up from 55c to 58c on August 29th, 2021.
For those who still use postage stamps to pay bills and send thank-you notes, buying a stash of forever stamps before the increase represents at least a 6% saving.
 
The savvy shopper might also invest in Tide Pods as a store of value. Proctor and Gamble has announced that it will be raising prices in September on adult incontinence products, baby care, feminine care and more.

Art is more interesting from a copyright perspective, and also a literary point of view. Thrillers have been written about high value rare coins, high value rare stamps, lost and stolen masterpieces: Charade, The Saint in Palm Springs, The Rembrandt Affair, The Monuments Men, The Last Vermeer etc.

Works of art can be forged, stolen, traded, used as a medium for smuggling something even more valuable, or created or sold as a beard for money laundering. In some jurisdictions, such as the UK, the authorities are taking notice. The law office of DLA Piper have a great article on anti-money laundering and requirements for art market participants to register (in the UK.). 
 
Legal bloggers Gabrielle C. WilsonHoward N. Spiegler, Lawrence M. Kaye and Yael M. Weitz of the law offices of Herrick Feinstein LLP have published a thorough and comprehensive "snapshot" of the state of art ownership and trading in the USA including a discussion of what happens if an unsuspecting person buys a work of art that later is revealed to have been stolen.

One of the most interesting commentaries on the international art market comes from Art Law: Introduction, authored by Pierre Valentin of Constantine Cannon LLP

Quoting a small portion:

"Owing to changes in taste, high-end and, to a lesser extent, mid-market 20th-century and contemporary art and collectibles are doing well. Old masters and older furniture are not doing as well, unless they are exceptional examples."

And, on prices for exceptional works:

"...some commentators predict that within just a few years, an [iconic example of] artwork will sell for over US$1 billion. There is a relatively small pool of international billionaires and museums competing to acquire trophy pieces. Exceptional prices have been achieved at auction when only two such collectors or museums bid against one another."

Astonishingly, works of art costing $500,000 or less are considered "lower end".

If and when one buys a physical piece of art, one owns the canvas (or wood, or paper) and the paint (or whatever medium is applied to the surface), but one does not necessarily own the intellectual property. One cannot create prints or derivative works... except in the circumstance that the creator assigned the IP by written contract.

That principle also applies when one does not own an original copyrighted work at all, as is the case with Andy Warhol and his copying of a photograph of Prince. An Appeals court has ruled that it is not transformative, and not fair use to take someone else's portrait and merely change the color of the subject's skin.

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/andy-warhol-foundation-loses-lynn-goldsmith-copyright-lawsuit-1955399

Lee S. Brenner and Nicholas W. Jordan for Venable LLP, discuss the case, and the four important factors that determine whether or not a use is "fair".

It would seem that the Warhol Estate's contention that giving a person a purple face transforms them from awkward to "iconic" is ... not convincing.

On the same topic, Clyde Shuman, blogging for Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz explain that this case may have a lasting impact on the concept of "fair use" in American copyright law.
https://www.pearlcohen.com/second-circuit-andy-warhols-use-of-copyrighted-prince-photograph-not-fair-use/

I think that is good news for professional photographers, and also for artists in general.

Happy Fathers' Day.


All the best,

Rowena Cherry  


Sunday, April 18, 2021

A Non-Fungible Future?

There was once a man who bought an original sketch in an inventory-draw-down sale. The sketch was done during the course of employment by a moderately well known designer. So far, so good.  The buyer was an EBay seller, and he created dozens of prints of the original sketch, which he auctioned on EBay week after week for years. That was questionable.

Lawfully, one cannot purchase a drawing, painting, photograph, cartoon, musical record, novella or novel  (even in e-book form) and proceed to create copies and sell them. Not unless the original creator formally assigned the copyright.

Now, there is Blockchain, and Non-Fungible Tokens, or NFTs. It seems that a single work of art that is sold as a NFT can be sold on, but not duplicated, and a modest royalty can be paid to the original creator with every down-market sale and resale.

Can creatives and celebrities rejoice? 

Lexology link:
 
Seemingly, so say legal bloggers Jeffrey Madrak and  Agatha H. Liu PhD for the IP law firm Hickman Becker Bingham Ledesma:
 
"Non-fungible tokens, or “NFTs” are taking the digital world by storm. Jack Dorsey, the founder of Twitter, recently sold an autographed tweet associated with an NFT for $2.9 million. Super Bowl champion Tom Brady just announced the launch of the NFT platform he has cofounded that will offer digital collectibles. Such popular use with highly appraised items begs the question – What actually is an NFT? And for those of us in the high-tech world, the further question – How do NFTs relate to intellectual property?"

 They go on to explain:

"An NFT is a digital version of a certificate of authenticity (a token), secured and embedded in a blockchain. When an NFT is created, digital information including the creator’s name and other programmatic details such as the creator’s blockchain wallet address are linked to an underlying asset and stored in a blockchain (while the underlying asset might not be stored in the blockchain). Because NFTs are secured by a blockchain, no one can modify the record of ownership or copy/paste a new NFT into existence."

For authors in particular, author Maggie Lynch has put up a comprehensive blog post on the topic, in which she lays out the pros and cons for adopting the technology.

https://povauthorservices.com/the-blockchain-nfts-cryptocurrency-and-author-opportunities/ 

Herewith, a quote of a small portion, with permission and attribution to Maggie Lynch and her blog.

"Here are some ideas of how an average author might consider creating NFTs. I’m sure there are many more I haven’t even considered yet.

  • Digital 1st edition released in limited numbers prior to a book being released en masse to retailers
  • A collectible version of a backlist book or a recent release that has different art or added art pertaining to the story
  • A special edition boxset that is not offered in retail markets and won’t be offered in retail markets
  • A bundled special edition that includes ebook, audiobook, and a shipped hardback book as a package
  • A 1st edition Live Reading before the book is released widely, whether narrated by the author or a paid narrator
  • Additional works of art based on your characters that are sold as separate digital art, playing cards, and/or provides information not in the books but germane to the story
  • Tiers of special editions – Platinum tier: Only 25 copies are made of original offering which includes additional art, audiobook, and a special edition hardback delivered signed and numbered. Gold tier: 500 copies of special edition which includes everything but hardback. Silver tier: 1,000 copies of digital special edition which includes additional art.  After this, the book is released as a regular ebook, print, audio all separate without any special edition things to the wider marketplace.
  • A digital object that helps your reader solve a puzzle inside the book.
  • A digital object that allows your reader to select two or more alternative endings
  • A way for the buyer to have a video call with you for a specified period of time or to book you for a limited part of friends (book group, family, etc.)
  • You could use one or more of your NFTs as part of a contest or giveaway to create buzz and get people interested in the platform

All of these are additional opportunities for PR, promo, buzz, and have the potential to also influence regular retail sales of your book products. Doing NFTs is one more market for you. I would not leave the usual mass markets just to do NFTs. Instead I would add NFTs as another way to gain income, at least until it proves it is the only way that makes sense for you to market your books."

Legal blogger Sophie Goossens, representing Reed Smith LLP, (a British law blog) takes a dimmer view of NFTs when it comes to ownership of works of art in a blog titled "You Think You Own An NFT? Think Again." She is, of course, speaking to art connoisseurs.

https://viewpoints.reedsmith.com/post/102gu68/you-think-you-own-an-nft-think-again
"Can one own a physical a piece of art? Yes. What do you own: the 'tangible property' i.e. the canvas, the statue, the physical sheet of paper embodying the work. Do you own the intellectual property in a piece of art just because you hold the original or a limited edition of it? No, if you want to own the intellectual property in the artwork, it needs to be assigned to you from the creator, by contract."
Sophie Goossens asks and answers several more interesting questions about possession and ownership of art and digital art.
 
Last (but not least), Pramod Chintalapoodi of the Chip Law Group takes a look at the legal implications of NFTs, and warns:
"The NFT's usefulness when it comes to IP rights is currently limited, and even problematic. The dilemma here is that ownership of NFT does not translate into ownership of an original work. In other words, buying an NFT does not mean that one is buying the underlying IP rights in a given content. Section 106 of the US Copyright Act states that a copyright owner has exclusive rights in reproducing and preparing derivative works. They also have exclusive rights in distributing the copyrighted work. Buying a piece of art does not mean that the copyright to that artwork transfers to the buyer."
https://www.chiplawgroup.com/legal-implications-of-nfts/

The bottom line seems to be that NFTs may be good for thwarting pirates and exploiters, and are therefore good for creators of art and literature.... but, one has to be prepared to adopt Ethereum.

Coindesk has put up a How-To guide to entering the NFT market:
https://www.coindesk.com/how-to-create-buy-sell-nfts


All the best,

Rowena Cherry  


Saturday, October 03, 2020

Piracy, the Photographer, and the Photographer's Models

I found Mitchel Gray in the front matter of Men's Health Magazine in 1994. At least, I found his name in very small print, in the credits for the photograph of the cover model. Over the years, he has been my go-to source whenever I have needed a gorgeous, shirtless male for my books' cover art.

This double portrait of an NFL player is an example of Mitchel Gray's artistry from his "Bodies In Motion" series. The most unique feature of this series is that both figures are the same person.


Please note that the image is watermarked in dark red (which is subtle, but "there"). The copyright belongs to Mitchel Gray, the image is shown here with Mitchel Gray's explicit permission. Snag it at your peril.

Print costs vary according to the size of the print, and are available from 11 x14 to 40 x 60
$750 - $4,000.  Licenses for cover art and more would depend on time frame and usage.  To see more, check out www.mitchelgray.com
 

Recently, I asked Mitchel Gray a flurry of copyright infringement related questions.

1) How has piracy affected you?  (Have any of your photographs been snagged from the internet and exploited by someone without permission?  Have you found any of your photographs, without your permission or payment, on any of the sites that sell licences to use images?  Have you found any of your images online with the copyright information cropped out or stripped out?  How does that make you feel? 

Mitchel: Piracy has not impacted me terribly badly, but certainly a few times --as far as I know-- and that’s the problem. I may not be aware of any number of snagged images. I try to watermark any online usage of mine, but that certainly does not exclude being “copied and pasted” directly from my website or elsewhere my pix may appear -- there are some very competent “thieves” out there. I have not found my images on the sites that sell licenses, but that doesn’t mean they’re not there—I can't spend all the time required to search. I have found images online with my credit removed, but that usually occurs when the models post the images—and not that often even then. Sometimes the client will do it. 

It’s very irritating.

My next salvo of questions were:

2) How does a photographer make money?  What does piracy do to your cash flow?  Is it good, free publicity?  Or is it very damaging? 

Mitchel: A few different ways: direct commissions from private clients, Ad agencies booking jobs, or purchasing existing images, magazine editorials, stock photo sales, fine art private and gallery sales, and books, both printed and virtual. Piracy simply deprives the photographer of revenue which ain’t good. But sometimes as you mention, it may be free PR, however that depends who and where they are posted

3) What can you do, if you see copyright infringement of your photographs?  Has this happened to you?  Has the DMCA "takedown" process worked for you?  Have you ever sent a DMCA and been thwarted by a counter notice?  Have you ever sued anyone? 

Mitchel: You can sue the user, or publish a wide ranging post about its misuse naming the user, you can force it to be removed from the site using DMCA. I’ve never been thwarted by any counter notice. However, sometimes there may an issue of interpretation of an agreement. I have sued a few.

4) What goes into taking great photographs that you could sell for cover art for a novel? Location?  Light quality? number of shots?  Amount of time? Do you pay the model?  Airbrushing? 

Mitchel: All the above plus a clear knowledge and discussion of the intent for the look, location, and subject matter from the author or publisher, depending on who is hiring me. And concept, concept, concept!

Asked to explain, Mitchel obliged.

"Concept, concept, concept” refers the idea of the photo—or what am I trying to say in the picture. There are a lot of ways to get your point across and each of them will present a different visual while doing it, and it gets more complex depending on the project—a portrait is different than headshot, a book is different than a magazine editorial, an ad is different than a label on a can, etc. That is one of the joys of the medium.  

 5) How has piracy affected your models?

 Mitchel: In a similar way, but with more potential impact, depending again on the location of the post, who is doing the posting, and on what is the intent the post is- who is it being used for. Also if it is being used in conjunction with other questionable content. It can be very painful, and infuriating

6)  How long can a cover model's career last?

Mitchel: A wide range here. A few years for some, 30+ years for others, all depending on how they adapt - or are allowed to adapt- to the aging process, and the type of publication or a story that will be told. I have one friend who is now 57 and still modeling. Different clientele, different uses.

7) What should an independent author know about buying a photograph for the cover art of an ebook?   What should she expect to pay?  What rights would she get for the money?  What waivers and releases would she need to obtain (and pay for)? 

Mitchel: This is all up for negotiation each time. The price is based on time limits, the expanse of circulation areas, what else she might want to use it for other than the cover, i.e. advertising, promotion, social enhancement, etc. She would need a release from the photographer that states either the areas, or if the shooter is willing, a buyout which is always the most expensive.

8) Where are good, reputable sites for buying licenses for cover art? 

Mitchel: There are the stock photo companies (they are also generally the cheapest which stinks for us), a number of new online sites that offer photo sales, and private individuals. Since the business is now virtually totally digital, one only has to provide digital files and that has fueled in increase in online sites.. I’m sure there a more, but these are the legitimate ones.

9) What other services might photographers offer (if any) in cover art preparation?

Mitchel: So many options- 

1. conceptual sit-downs to lock in on the purpose and market.
2. location search and securing.
3. Hair & Makeup artists and stylists
4. travel arrangements if need be.
5. studio usage and rental
6. lighting approaches
7. digital application and knowledge 
8. editing !!!!!

And a lot more.


10)   Do you have any advice for any amateur photographer who lives in an especially scenic location for monetizing their photographs?

Mitchel:  Yes, shoot a whole lot of images, perfect your editing skills (photoshop, and more), research research research stock houses and stock sites for both legitimacy, style of images, and price points. And keep on shooting! You never know what you might capture that someone may have a use for.  Of course, this pertains mostly to stock sales. Comission shooting is obviously a much different story. In that case you shoot those pictures to get hired, not to sell directly

As an example of what Mitchel did for me, here is the before shot of the rock climbing model who seemed perfect as 'Rhett, hero of Knight's Fork.











And here is how Mitchel cut the ropes and inserted a sword.






 








To contact Mitchel Gray

Mitchel Gray
mitchelgray7@icloud.com

917.721.7303

www.mitchelgray.com


Thanks, Mitchel!

All the best,
Rowena Cherry 


Saturday, March 07, 2020

Willy Nilly and the Erosion of Privacy

Does personal privacy matter? Less so, it seems, in the age where a priority is put on the convenience of others and the profitability of "data", whether the subject of the eroded privacy likes it or not.

"Willy Nilly" harks back to the Old English for "will he" and "ne-will he", "ne" being the negative prefix which is not usually cited in online dictionaries. Most resources condense "ne-will" to "nill", but not all.

Millennials don't seem to mind.  Authors are accustomed to having to give up some privacy as a trade off for pursuing a career, and some authors use pen names... and sometimes, a pen name is not the guarantee of privacy that it used to be.

Perhaps, it is not a good thing for all those sites --that post disclaimers asking paid users to refrain from making employment, or housing, or lending, or other important decisions about the person whose alleged info they are selling online-- to be allowed to monetize private information.  They don't always get it right.  Even if they did get everything right, that information tends to deny persons a fair chance or a second chance.

It is divisive.

Ironically, to read a Loeb and Loeb legal blog article about privacy, you have to accept cookies.
https://www.loeb.com/en/insights/publications/2020/02/new-uspto-rule-makes-trademark-owner-email-and-mailing

Lexology link.

Loeb and Loeb LLP legal bloggers Melanie Howard, David W. Grace and Ashley Van Leer explain for the benefit of trademark owners how new USPTO rules make trademark owners' street addresses and email addresses available to the public. Authors cannot hide behind their intellectual properties attorney any more.

That is lovely for the "Person-Locator-type" internet businesses that sell personal information, and also for scammers, robocallers, spear phishers, and other common varieties of spammers... and advertisers and marketers.

By the way, on the subject of government helpfulness.... the Copyright Office will be raising many fees as of March 20th, 2020. (Not for photographers.)
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-02-19/pdf/2020-03268.pdf

Reverting to advertising and targeting, and the annoying loss of privacy, the Charles Russell Speechlys LLP  UK focused legal blog has some must-read insights into data driven online targeting.

Lexology link.

Original:
https://www.charlesrussellspeechlys.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/commercial/2020/2020-update-data-driven-online-targeting/

Legal blogger Olivia Crane does a deep dive into what data-driven online targeted advertising means, especially for Britons. This author sympathizes with Olivia Crane's unpleasant experience with shower curtains.

I had a similar experience recently with a synthetic planking product that popped up and virtually stalked me wherever I went (online).  This was after I made a purchase which I regret to this day... so where was the commercial sense in metaphorically bludgeoning me with a Lumber product?

It seems to me, the sensible advertisement targeters might be using "targeting" in much the same way as click-fraud.  "This woman recently bought a new roof for her house (usually a 15 - 30 year warrantied purchase), let's sell her name to roofers, so they can try --in vain-- to sell her a new roof!"

Most authors use Facebook, too.  The Socially Aware legal blog asks, "Are your facebook posts discoverable?"  Of course they are!
https://www.sociallyawareblog.com/2020/02/24/are-your-facebook-posts-discoverable-application-of-the-forman-test-in-new-york/#page=1

Lexology.

J. Alexander Lawrence and Lily Smith for Morrison Foerster LLP give chapter and verse on how far your privacy can be eroded and information you shared semi-privately on Facebook can be exploited and used against you in a court of law.

So, if you are ever going to sign a lease to rent a home that says "No cats", and having an illicit cat is grounds for eviction, do not post photos of your beloved cat on your Facebook page with distinctive features of said rental house in the background... for example.

Finally, for readers who love fine art, your ability to acquire anonymously is receeding, as Andrea N. Perez, writing for Carrington Coleman explains.
https://www.ccsb.com/our-firm/publish/loss-of-privacy-rights-when-purchasing-art/

Lexology.

Art lovers are presumed to be terrorists and/or money launderers until they prove otherwise according to the EU's Fifth Directive.

What an excellent book title "The Fifth Directive" would be!

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 

Saturday, November 16, 2019

Bare Bottoms, Bubbly, Benelux And Beyond

One cannot resist alliteration, can one?

This past week, the most interesting copyright-related legal blogs centered on art, artists' moral rights, and the rights of those whose trademarks were depicted in commercial art.

Starting at the bare bottom, legal bloggers Annick Mottet Haugaard,  Olivia Santantonio, and Ruben Van Breugel discuss --with illustrations-- the legal objections brought by a maker of one of the world's finest Champagnes to an artist's repeated commercial use of their trademark in his works.

Lexology Link (which at the time of this writing is displaying the pointillismish bottom)
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=e66edcf1-d801-4444-804b-8ac28db7d19a

Original Link (which unfortunately has broken links for the illustrations)
https://www.lydian.be/news/which-extent-can-artists-use-trademarks-their-works-0

The bare-bottom-with-bubbly case has not been settled, but for any author who is considering using someone else's trademark in her cover art... beware.


Beware, also, what you re-tweet. Defamation laws around the world are different, as J. Alexander Lawrence blogging for Morrison & Foerster LLP's Socially Aware blog explains.

Lexology Link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=55aed4c8-51e2-43c2-a4cf-cc7d529609b1

Original Link:
https://www.sociallyawareblog.com/2019/11/12/the-joys-and-dangers-of-tweeting-a-cda-immunity-update/#page=1

Even if you have the right to express yourself in 120 characters or more, someone else may have the right to sue you.


Talking of being sued, Susan Okin Goldsmith  writing for McCarter & English LLP has an inconvenient warning for owners of websites or blogs that allow third parties to comment or upload material (presumably or links) that might infringe on the copyrights of others.

Register your agent with the Copyright Office, or risk liability for whatever your visitors may post. The article is well worth reading, and gives detailed instructions on how to register and what it will cost.

Lexology link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2c03a3d0-4085-4419-aed1-afc8b0c2e0eb

Original Link:
https://www.mccarter.com/insights/renew-or-register-your-websites-copyright-agent-now/


Finally, and quite startlingly, Aysha Alawi-Azam  blogging for Clyde & Co LLP  reveals that an owner of a work of art may have difficulties if they change even the frame, let alone if they heavily restore the art, and the still-living artist objects.

Lexology Link:
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=747eca5a-cd5f-4795-9a8d-06c5f8077837

Original Link:
https://www.clydeco.com/insight/article/artists-moral-rights-in-the-frame

Sometimes we buy art at an estate sale, for instance, and it never dawns on us that it might be unwise to switch out one frame for another. It's worth reading the original... there are some glorious illustrations.

All the best,

Rowena Cherry 



Sunday, July 22, 2018

Expensive Mistakes

Not all art is in the public domain, even if it is in a public place. even if an image-licensing service can license the right to use a specific photographer's photograph of that art. One might still, additionally, need a license from the original artist.

The United States Postal Service made such an expensive error, and will have to pay $3,554,946.95 plus interest to a sculptor.

Initially, a USPS employee mistook a view of a modern sculpture inspired by Lady Liberty for the Ellis Island original.  The latter is in the public domain. The former is the intellectual property of the living sculptor. Possibly, the USPS could have settled for $5,000 when they first discovered their mistake.

In a Washington Post article from 2013, author Lisa Rein quotes the lawsuit.

"Defendants, through the USPS, determined that it was in their financial best interest to continue to infringe upon Davidson's rights, as the costs to discontinue the infringing activity exceeded the marginal cost of royalties...."

They calculated wrong. Way wrong.  Legal blogger Jesse M. Brody for the law firm Manatt Phelps and Phillips LLP suggests that this may turn out to be one of the most expensive copyright mistakes ever.

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=382f2fb0-40d7-46a1-bf28-5abef7caa891&utm_source=lexology+daily+newsfeed&utm_medium=html+email+-+body+-+general+section&utm_campaign=lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=lexology+daily+newsfeed+2018-07-20&utm_term=

It would appear that the costliest part was a 5% running royalty on the 3.24% of the stamps that were bought by stamp collectors, and represented unadulterated profit for the USPS.

An article by Timothy B. Lee for Ars Technica shows the two faces of the Statute of Liberty: the fierce-faced original on Ellis Island, and the troubled-looking homage in Las Vegas.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/post-office-owes-3-5m-for-using-wrong-statue-of-liberty-on-a-stamp/

Presumably, this costly lesson in copyright infringement affects us all. We'll probably all pay more for stamps,
forever.

Now comes General Motors, with the argument that Joe Public should not be expected to research the history of every public building (especially if that building is covered in graffiti) before taking a photograph, or filming something else where the graffiti is in the background.

The case of Faulkner v General Motors Company is discussed by author Alan Feuer for the New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/arts/design/general-motors-graffiti-artist-copyright.html

It raises some interesting issues about the use of photographs and films of public buildings and art in (and on) public places.

For artists, the copyright alliance has a timely article on how to copyright your paintings.
https://copyrightalliance.org/ca_faq_post/copyright-my-paintings/

For artists who wish to license certain rights to a work, but not to relinquish their copyright in the work, the very generous and courteous people of ARTREPRENEUR publish a template agreement, free, on condition that the beneficiaries of this template give them written credit.

Find the template here:
https://artrepreneur.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Artist-licensing-agreement.pdf

Explicit credit: https://artrepreneur.wpengine.com/

All the best,

Rowena Cherry


Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Marketing Fiction In A Changing World Part 26 -Must You Compromise Your Art To Sell Big?


Marketing Fiction In A Changing World

 Part  26

Must You Compromise Your Art To Sell Big? 

by
Jacqueline Lichtenberg


Previous parts of this series can be found here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/05/index-to-marketing-fiction-in-changing.html

Here is one dismaying idea that arises among beginning writers when established professionals explain the field of fiction publishing.

"If I do what you say, I would be compromising my Art."

That idea, that your personal Art, something that defines who you are to yourself and what you were born to say to the world, must be tossed aside, ignored, tramped on, or lied about in order to sell fiction to a large, commercial (mass market) Market, arouses a "fight for life itself" response.

In fighting for your life, you may well regard the entire problem as "the end justifies the means" -- and be willing to do anything at all to survive.

We see that today in the resistance to Donald Trump -- half the country is morally convinced he is a threat to our very lives, and to all we've sacrificed so much to build for future generations.

The response to such a threat is utterly primal, and once triggered that response prevents any other nuanced message from dampening that response.

The response a writer feels to the mere whiff of the idea that they must compromise their Art in order to reach their intended audience, is that same "fight for your life" visceral response.

The heroic type person will fight to the death to protect their Art (or their politics).  The wimpish type won't make waves.  The majority fall between these two types.

But what if the response itself, a purely animal-flesh based response to a threat to life (or lives of our children), is inappropriate?  What if the problem of a Wild Politician or a Savage Publishing Industry is not a threat to life and limb, to children and posterity?

What if it is an entirely different sort of problem?

What if Compromise is not at all anything like a solution to the real problem?

We excoriate politicians for refusing to "compromise"  -- then turn around and refuse to "compromise our Art" -- maybe we have to reframe the problem of "How can I sell my novel (mine, my Art) to Mass Market Paperback publishers?"

Framing the issue changes the debate.  In fact, it changes the very issue itself.

To teach yourself to write good dialogue, read up on the psychology of "framing" and public argument and debate.  Some people grow up into a full, unconscious ability to use "framing" to direct the thinking of others while other people have to learn it in adulthood.

Here are some links where to start (it is a huge study).

http://frameworksinstitute.org/assets/files/PDF/chroniclephilanthropy_wordsthatchangeminds_2016.pdf

Frameworks Institute is a Washington based Think Tank hired by governments and other enterprises to "re-frame" a message to get the public to do what the hiring firm wants the public to do (rather than what the public actually prefers to do.)  They are aggressive manipulators -- proving how plastic public opinion can be.  (the ethics of doing this make fabulous Theme material).  They make a lot of money tricking the public.

Here is wikipedia's entry - worth contemplating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)

If "they" can do this frame thing TO YOU to put you at a disadvantage -- then surely you can do it to yourself to give yourself an advantage?

Problems are as plastic as public opinion -- you can reshape your problem, thus re-populate your list of possible solutions.  (and in the process of working on your own mind, you can take notes for the plot of your next novel).

When a think-tank "frames" a problem to sway public opinion, they are acting, and actions are Plot Events.

When a Character (or a person) explores their own mind looking for old, rotten, and inappropriate 'frames' left over from immature thinking, they are growing, arcing, changing -- and thus telling their own Story.

The exact same thing, FRAME, is both story and plot -- so therefore, it is a Theme.

It turns out, a scientific study supports the observation that humans do CHANGE with age and experience -- real personality change.

https://qz.com/914002/youre-a-completely-different-person-at-14-and-77-the-longest-running-personality-study-ever-has-found/

----------quote---------
If your patterns of thought, emotions, and behavior so drastically alter over the decades, can you truly be considered the same person in old age as you were as a teenager? This question ties in with broader theories about the nature of the self. For example, there is growing neuroscience research that supports the ancient Buddhist belief that our notion of a stable “self” is nothing more than an illusion.
---------end quote----

Maturity is not just getting older, but refining and reshaping the very plastic material of which your Character is made.

That does not mean being a victim of Think-Tanks that hammer you into a new "frame of mind" to march lockstep with the rest of the mob -- you can do it to yourself, and maybe get better results.  You can be the artist who reshapes yourself, just by reframing the problems in your life.

The classic language shift that has been urged on those seeking success is to think of problems as opportunities.

That is a re-framing.  It might help you -- might not.

Some people never learn framing, and thus can be manipulated by the unscrupulous with little effort.  Characters who use "framing" in their dialogue to get other Characters to change their behavior will seem realistic, like real people, to the reader.

But with TIME - we change in very fundamental ways.  And as we, ourselves, change, our very Art changes.

Is that compromising your Art - to mature and change yourself?

Your "self" is just one variable in this business of selling to Mass Market.

The Market itself is another very complex variable.  As the generations rotate through a particular genre or style of story, forming a Market for that story -- and then moving on, leaving that Market to be picked up by a younger generation, the publishers, too, change.

Editors are usually fairly young people, early in their own story-arc of character maturation.  And then they move on to other genres or niches in publishing.

So with Time, you change, the Market's audience members change, and the publishers and editors change.

Today, the changing market calculations have to take into account the ebook and audiobook -- and who knows what next.

Your Art changes, too.

The trick to "not compromising" your Art is very simple.  Create the piece, study what you have created, then watch the ever-changing Market for it to rotate through being just the right vehicle for that piece of Art.

Meanwhile, create more Art pieces.

Art critics have all noted how a given Artist (in any medium) will have "periods" -- sets of years when all the pieces produced relate to a given theme, subject, setting.  You, too, will have "periods" during which you explore specific themes.

With novelists, it is not always possible to discern when a given novel was written -- because an item may not be sell-able now, but will sell 10 years hence as the Market shifts.

So the answer to that age-old question is, no!  You never have to compromise your Art.  You just have to watch the Changing World change your Market into a home for that particular piece.

I know of best sellers that waited 20 years and more for the Market to cycle around.

Today, of course, we have the option of placing any piece directly into the publishing stream via self-publishing.  Sometimes that is the best way to go with a given book.  Figuring out which pieces you produce should go Indie, which self-publishing, and which Mass Market, is the business of writing.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Theme-Archetype Integration Part 1: The Nature of Art

Theme-Archetype Integration
Part 1
The Nature of Art
by
Jacqueline Lichtenberg

On Facebook Messenger, I was discussing how to create fiction that can sell to a commercial market and at the same time just write what you want to write, what you feel you need to say, what is deeply personal and matters to you -- what you personally want readers to feel in their guts, way below the verbal level.

That gut-response is what makes fictions memorable, and thus talked about and recommended. 

I get that response to many things I've written, particularly Sime~Gen.








https://www.amazon.com/Sime-Gen-13-Book-Series/dp/B016QAFPMK/

Sime~Gen #14 is in the works, with more planned.

Most recently, I was reminded on Facebook how moving my first non-fiction book, STAR TREK LIVES!, has been to people still connected to me via social networking. 

Robert Eggleton posted a picture of the cover of STAR TREK LIVES! and said nice things about it, whereupon a number of people chimed in with their memories.  I only noticed the post when Robert J. Sawyer "tagged" me on his comment, and I got drawn into a long discussion where I answered underneath people's comments.  If you know how Facebook "works" -- it spawns lots of conversations under a broad topic where lots of people exchange views.  Choose the right friends, and it can be very cordial.

On previous series of posts on this blog, I've explained the intricate relationship between STAR TREK LIVES! -- non-fiction about a TV Series -- and Sime~Gen a future-history of humanity set (so far) mostly on Earth of the far future.

The private discussion on Facebook Messenger with this other writer was within the context of the lasting impact my work has had, still echoing down the generations of writers and readers. 

I had pointed her to
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/05/index-to-theme-plot-integration.html

and to
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/11/index-post-to-art-and-craft-of-story.html

... which she had read through once, and came back to say she was left puzzled by my use of the term "archetypes" (she is a well educated professional writer, so it was my usage not her ignorance).

And it is true, I do use the word to refer to a bit of fiction-structure which is related to fiction the way math is related to theoretical physics. 


 That archetype structure behind the fictional worlds is what gives those fictional worlds their verisimilitude.

We've discussed verisimilitude in several posts.  Here are a few:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/10/alien-sexuality-part-3-corporate-greed_25.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/06/depiction-part-14-depicting-cultural.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/07/why-every-novel-needs-love-story-part-2.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/07/why-every-novel-needs-love-story-part-1.html

Creating verisimilitude is a key writing craft skill -- craft not art.  Craft can be learned by anyone who can write a literate sentence.  Art may be born into you, or absorbed from those who raise you, or a combination, but you can't just "learn" it with the intellectual part of your mind.  And you can't learn Art with the part of your mind that can be trained in a Craft (such as driving a car can't be mastered by reading a book about it.)

I make vocabulary distinctions to refer to components of what it takes to launch into a commercial fiction writing career. 

Art is like Math.  In Math you "let X equal" -- or just arbitrarily assign meanings to blank variables.  That trick is the power behind applying a mathematical discovery to a real world problem, such as the Grand Adversary of all students, The Word Problem. 

A Math formula is the math equivalent of fiction's archetype. 

If you are accustomed to solving problems using carefully selected math formulae, then you know on a nonverbal level what an archetype is.

Yes, it is non-verbal.  The language handling section of your brain can not acquire or manipulate the underlying concept "archetype" with the kind of facility necessary to create the artistic dimension of fiction.

LOVE CONQUERS ALL leading to the HAPPILY EVER AFTER is the result of applying an archetype to a problem, of "letting X equal and Y equal" then applying rules to manipulate the equation until you get a solution.

The problem you are applying the archetype to is the problem of "What Is The Meaning Of Life?"  Or maybe, "What Is Life?"

Which archetype you select to apply to that WHAT IS LIFE? problem is dictated by the theme for your fictional story.  Or maybe the other way around on some occasions, the resulting THEME your novel explicates (after you cut, trim, rewrite, clarify) will have to be an exemplification of the archetype you accidentally applied.

When you are doing "Art" - those "accidents" are in fact your subconscious screaming at you, "SAY THIS!" 

We don't always know what we know until we tell ourselves. 

So how do we know what we know in order to say it in a novel?

We view the world and then we depict what we see.

Art is a selective depiction of Reality.

Art is not reality itself.  Art is a few bits and pieces of Reality, rearranged to say something that may be useful to those who hear it. 

Fiction is a conversation about Reality in the language of Art, between fiction writers with readers eavesdropping.  Art is a "language" just as mathematics is a language.  Physicists talk to each other in Math.  Fiction Writers talk to each other in Art.

Physicists talk about the structure of Reality, and Writers talk about the structure of Life.

Both professions are Artistic professions, creative professions, exploring "where no one has gone before." 

Good physicists ask good questions no physicist has asked before.  Good writers as questions no writer -- or in the case of science fiction romance, no living being -- has asked before.

Having asked a New Question, the artist then suggests an Answer.

Not THE Answer, mind you, but An Answer.  Another writer will try to disprove that Answer, postulating a different Answer, and the argument will take shape as readers try out every variation they can imagine.  News stories and academic studies will flow, "progress" will be made, and the conversational argument will continue.

That exploration of the non-existent, unreal world of imagination is endlessly fascinating because if a human can imagine it, some other human can make it real.

That is how Art fuels human progress, and why it is so important to "support The Arts" -- Art inspires.

Commercial Art may inspire but that is not its purpose.  Commercial Art exists to make a profit, and Commercial Artists do this work to make a living while dreaming of making a killing! 

Art is a necessary component of human life -- it existed as Cave Paintings and campfire stories long before people lived in permanent structures with sewers and chimneys.

Art has proven to be a necessary component of Civilization because it inspires creativity and convinces young people to dream and make it real.  Through Art we know we can succeed.

So, as I have discussed in many previous posts, the Artistic component of novel writing, as opposed to the Craft Mechanics component, comes from the writer's ability to look at the tangled mess of "white noise" that is the Reality we live in, and sort out a signal, see a pattern in the randomness of reality. 

That signal may actually be there -- or maybe not, maybe it is just the writer's imagination.  Psychological Studies have determined that humans will always see patterns where there actually are none -- such studies are cited as proof that God does not exist, but is just a figment of our imaginations.

We see patterns in the Stars and give constellations names.  Various cultures have seen different patterns and named them differently, attributing different powers to the same sky patterns.

There is something that we just know:  Reality consists of patterns.

We don't believe this.  We know it. 

Science, on the other hand, seems to have proven that we see patterns where there are none.  Most of reality is random.  Entropy (disorder) always increases.

Then there is the Observer Effect, in physics, where the act of observing changes the observed.  This happens because to observe, one must bounce something off the object being observed and detect it.  When the bounce-impact happens, the observed object thereupon changes, and the bounce-back particle does not carry all the information about what the object will become. 

In other words, as of the early 20th Century, theoretical physics (mostly just math at that time, but now being checked out by the Hadron Collider) postulated a connectivity among all physical objects.

Oddly, this notion mirrored the bedrock principles of the most Ancient mysticism we have record of -- ancient magical traditions, religions even more ancient, -- humanity has always "known" that somehow what we think and feel affects concrete reality. 

Physics is all about discovering the equations that describe how physical objects affect one another (gravity and so on).

Art is all about discovering the archetypes that describe how human lives affect one another (Romance and so on).

The psychological "archetypes" that Carl Jung made so famous
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GYGPZ22/
describe not only how individual humans function, but also how we are all "connected" through the collective subconscious. 

Structuring human psychology this way brings human psychology into the same kind of structure that physics was postulating (during those same decades of the early 20th century).  In short it is "wheels inside of wheels" -- symmetry. 

And if you study Kabbalah, you will find that the Tree of Life structure that delineates (with mathematical precision) the connection between human consciousness and the physical world around us also uses that "wheels inside of wheels" structure.

The 10 Sepheroth or areas of definition, each contain all the 10, each of which contains all the ten -- the infinite regression effect symbolized by the Quaker Oats box with the picture of the Quaker Oats guy holding a box of Quaker Oats with the Quaker Oats guy holding a box of ..... infinitely.






Note how the image here shows each of the Sepheroth as Trees in and of themselves.  Now visualize how each of the Sepheroth on each of the little Trees contains another Tree.  In Math, these are called Cross Terms. 


One excellent way to understand how this bit of physics (reflection, infinite iteration) applies to human emotion at the interface between the spiritual and the physical (Love vs Sex) is to study this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Guide-Counting-Omer-Forty-Nine/dp/B008NAF37Y/




This 49 day drill, done annually, educates and trains that non-verbal part of the mind that knows without believing.  (...knows such things as Love Conquers All -- a corollary of Joy Breaks All Barriers -- and other principles that are hugely unpopular these days.)

The human emotions are the lower 7 of the 10 Sephiroth, and each of the 7 manifest in human beings as combinations with each of the other 7X7=49. 

Each one of these focused exercises will yield at least one, of not dozens, of Romance Novel Plots, all with Beginning, Middle, End laid out clearly.

Underlying this particular book's explanation of this 7X7 structure of the human psyche is the pure Archetype that generates our human personality.  Once fully grasped, these principles will reveal why sayings such as, "There's no accounting for taste!" are not true. 

Archetypes belong to the realm of non-verbalizable knowledge.  It is not belief, but actual knowledge accessed by a different cognitive function that does not encode data in words or even in math.

An archetype is a pattern.  If you set out to make a new dress, you go to the notions store and select a pattern.  That pattern envelope contains several variations (long sleeve, short sleeve), and the one you select will give you a range of sizes. 

Behind all the variations and sizes is an "archetype" of "dress" -- ball gown, job interview dress, cocktail dress, etc.

Now you go select material and matching thread and buttons, zippers, sequins, whatever. Every possible combination will produce vastly different results.

But underlying all those different dresses is still The Archetype for that style dress that generated the folded tissue inside the envelope.

With writing a novel, you do the same thing.  You go to your store of Views of The Universe -- (life's a Ball, life's a party, life's a dinner date, life's all work, life's deep sea fishing expedition) -- and you pick out one of your Views.

Then you go to your notions counter and pick out details of how this Life you are going to depict is going.

Just as sewing that dress is an exercise in craft, so too is writing the novel depicting the meaning of life as experienced by this particular Character.

Your reader will recognize the verisimilitude of the life you are depicting because your reader, too, knows the archetype behind your original creation.

As Jung pointed out, we are all connected by something -- and he called that something the Collective Unconscious.  Maybe there is no such thing, but there is something we all have in common, we all recognize, no matter how hidden by details.

Art is in the selection of details juxtaposed to convey a theme - a message about the nature of life.

But the commercial novel writer does not get to invent new patterns, freehand.  If enough readers can recognize the underlying archetype, the pattern you selected, the novel will sell well.  If that pattern is not recognizable, the first people to buy it will not recommend it to others.

Scholarly, creative writers don't get to invent archetypes either -- but they may discover them.  Archetypes are as structurally fundamental to the structure of reality as are the laws of gravity.  We can't invent gravity - but our understanding of its relationship to space and time has changed markedly over the last few decades.

 Jean Lorrah, my sometime collaborator and a Professor of English, has noted that the novels we write belong to a hitherto unrecognized category, a particular Plot Archetype which I call Intimate Adventure (Action Adventure with the Action replaced by Intimacy which may or may not be sexual).

In real life, all the archetypes overlap and interact -- every human born on this planet has a unique composite of archetypes (Natal Chart) plus all the modifications (epigenetics) they gather through life.  It's a mish-mosh. 

In fiction, the Characters have 3 prominent traits, only one of which is dominant.  Characters are like musical chords, formulated just so. Not every chord goes with every other chord -- in a novel, the writer has to stick to the "Key" as the music writer has to stick to a Key.  The plot events of a novel are the "Time" or rhythm, -- is it a waltz or a fox trot or a tango? 

As I have explained in previous threads, Writing Is A Performing Art, a wisdom taught to me by Alma Hill.

Commercial Fiction Writers perform the story, just as a pianist might perform a Chopin piece for an audience.

No two performers do it the same way, and no two performances by a given pianist come out exactly the same.  A performance is a hand-made, one of a kind, artistic creation.

It is just like giving a speech someone else wrote, or making a dress from a pattern bought at a store.  Individual components are carefully chosen to go together into an artistic whole, with each component enhancing the meaning of all the others.  A huge set of individually mastered skills are brought together into a performance to present a tiny glimpse of infinite wisdom.

The choosing of components, the bringing of the components together to make the underlying Archetype visible, yet manifesting in a unique way, is the writer's Art.  The craft lies in the practice and mastery that makes the performance seamless, effortless, uplifting, memorable.

One sour note, one off-beat plot event, can reduce the sublime to the intolerable.

The Art is in the non-verbal message that is conveyed by the style, voice, and the beauty of the performance. 

Some commercial writers have to know what they're doing to do it well.  Some can't do it at all if they know what they're doing.  Others are hybrids of these extremes.

How you accomplish the performance is idiosyncratic.  What story you perform for which audience is idiosyncratic.  Writing teaches you as much about yourself as it does about the world and your audience.

The art lies in how you fit what you have to say within the recognizable archetype you share with your audience. 

Artists see something in the chaos of reality that the audience doesn't see, then use the tools of shared archetypes to reveal the purpose and meaning of life.

There is no art form that does this better than the Science Fiction Romance.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com