posted
Oh, gosh, Lisa. We're hijacking this whole thread! Sorry guys. Just email me, Lisa, at my usual address, and we will stop bothering these nice folk.
Apologies, nice folk. Have you ever been to a party with a group of people that you know, and met someone that you know from somewhere completely different? Of course you are compelled to go over and say "What are YOU doing here!" Well that's what just happened.
Back to our regularly scheduled thread...
...such a jerk to insult our favorite author that way...
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's talking to you like you just wrote your first book and like you were a ametur writer. Really if he knew so much he should write! You are considered one of the greatest writers nowadays and he's sent you that letter. You'v written a ton of best sellars and popular books. He's crazy.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think many of you folks are missing the point.
The letter is not a critique or even criticism. It is not an honest attempt to help OSC improve his writing. It is an angry, vicious attack on a person. The fact that it is couched as reasonable criticism doesn't change that. In fact, it makes the writer even more vicious because he is deceptive in his intent. It is also similar to people who critique works by beginning with "I'm sorry, but." They are not sorry at all. They are, however, cowardly, as they hide behind the apology and then accuse the writer of being thin-skinned because the write resents the attack. You've met these people if you've ever been in a MFA program or joined a writing group.
I'm glad OSC posted the letter. I hope the writer reads it and is ashamed.
As for copyright, it's a moot point. The author has no recourse unless he can prove that he lost income by the posting of his email.
No one would ever pay a dime to print that drivel.
Posts: 80 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's the deal: this is the downside of fandom. Every fan likes to imagine that he or she has some personal connection with the author or artist or performer who's touched them; they're clearly on the same wavelength, after all, since they both have thought the kind of thoughts that led one to produce a great work and the other to enjoy it. *wry laugh*
And inevitably the artist does something the fan doesn't like as much, or would have done differently -- or the fan himself has moved on to another style and hasn't really noticed it -- and the fan wonders "why isn't my friend Orson, who always knew the deepest secrets of my soul, writing to me anymore?" Maybe he discovers that the object of his fandom has an opinion he doesn't share; maybe that object has in some way directly offended him, perhaps by failing to reply promptly enough to all six hundred E-mails listing the last few continuity errors in episodes 200-212; maybe they're just not in the same demographic anymore.
And so the fan has to decide whether he's going to just move on, or whether it's in his "friend's" best interest to have someone step in and save him from, God forbid, not being the person the fan wants him to be (because, at the end of the day, don't we all want our friends to want to be who we want them to be?) So E-mails like this, they're creepy and sad and passive-aggressive, and ultimately inevitable; I think that's why so many sci-fi figures, in particular, wind up eccentric recluses in their old age.
posted
I used to the the work of OSC was degenerative to the reader. It held me in an addictive thrall that was preferable to sleep, food, or sex.
But after a little therapy...
I just decided to enjoy them for what they were and not obsess on whether it was good for me.
For some reason "sci-fi figures" makes me think of those muscular plastic dolls. I had a dream the other night that I was married to a drug lord and our palatial home was being raided by the federales and we were trying to save his collection of WWF figurines, still in their original packaging.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:As for copyright, it's a moot point. The author has no recourse unless he can prove that he lost income by the posting of his email.
That's not the point - the point is that people on this site make pronouncements about how important it is to respect intellectual property, even when not legally required to do so. Here, intellectual property is not being respected, even though there's a decent chance we are legally required to do so in this instance.
And technically lost income does not have to be proven to receive damages, although it certainly helps. It's unlikely that the formalities were met, but statutory damages are possible, as are attorney's fees.
I posted the original as an aside, but I wasn't wrong about it.
quote:I'm pretty sure that was Asimov, in his memoirs. He compared literature to windows. A stained glass window may be lovely and impressive, but it is hard to see through. Perfectly made clear glass that presents no distortions at all is very difficult to craft.
Or so says Asimov. I've never made glass, stained or otherwise. He was implying that his style was perfectly clear prose, with no distortions, which represents the pinacle of the writer's craft. After reading his memoir, I was also struck by Asimov's remarkable lack of humility. But there you have it.
Lack of humility? Its freeking Asimov you are talking about here!
Posts: 14 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I posted the original as an aside, but I wasn't wrong about it."
You're confusing intellectual property rights with copyrights, which are different animals. Pasting a private letter online does not violate copyright, any more than quoting my text in your previous message violated my copyright.
posted
What is your basis for stating that? The letter is covered by copyright. Any posting without permission is a violation unless an exception kicks in.
As I've repeatedly said, there may very well be a fair use exception here. I haven't said it's definitely a violation. But a determination under copyright must made to determine if posting the letter is legal.
If you right a letter, you own a copyright in it (assuming no work for hire situation exists).
If you send me that letter, I own the letter. But you still own the copyright.
I can't do any of the six rights granted by copyright without your permission, unless an exception kicks in.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Myth #8: “Anything mailed or e-mailed to me becomes my property.”
Well, yes, you do own the physical print copy of the letter or e-mail printout. But no, you do not own the copyright for the content, and you may not publish the letter without the consent of the person who wrote the letter, although you certainly may report on what it says, and perhaps even quote from a portion of it to make a point (fair use).
posted
Whenever I read any commentary (introductions, etc.), by Asimov, I am always struck by how full of himself he seems.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Go back and read my post. I said the point was moot because there is no monetary loss by the author of the letter, not that he didn't own the copyright on his letter.
I will also point out that you quoted my post without my express permission, so you violated my copyright. If I were to be so silly as to sue you for doing it, my case would be dismissed out of hand as "moot," since I could not possibly have been damaged.
This argument is moot, as well.
Posts: 80 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Go back and read my post. I said the point was moot because there is no monetary loss by the author of the letter, not that he didn't own the copyright on his letter.
You said "The author has no recourse unless he can prove that he lost income by the posting of his email." This is flat out wrong. At minimum, were this a violation, the author would still be eligible for equitable relief.
quote:I will also point out that you quoted my post without my express permission, so you violated my copyright. If I were to be so silly as to sue you for doing it, my case would be dismissed out of hand as "moot," since I could not possibly have been damaged.
First, not everything that is a violation of copyright has to be the subject of a law suit. Second, by posting in a forum with quoting capability, you have very likely given implied permission to users of that forum to quote your posts within the forum. Third, my fair use criticism/critique argument is even stronger than OSC's. Fourth, if neither 2 or 3 is true, the argument wouldn't be moot because you could compel me to take it down.
quote:This argument is moot, as well.
So basically, I was right, you made inaccurate and irrelevant nits, and now you're declaring the argument moot?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Further, you did not simply state that the point was moot because there were no damages. You said, "Pasting a private letter online does not violate copyright, any more than quoting my text in your previous message violated my copyright."
This is flat out wrong - incorrect. Even if someone cannot state a claim for which relief may be granted because there are no damages, the violation can still occur. Further, as I stated above, you have ignored equitable relief.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Whenever I read any commentary (introductions, etc.), by Asimov, I am always struck by how full of himself he seems.
What a talent he was though. Have you ever read Foundation, or one of his hundreds of other books? He was also a renowned scientist and a great teacher of science.
He wrote what must be thousands of essays, not to mention the introductions to which you refer... All of extremely high quality.
Quantity, Quality and TALENT! - Yes, he deserved to be satisfied with himself. Now, if only our beloved OSC would write a couple of hundred more novels... Posts: 14 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:You're writing would be immensely mproved if you read other authors and genres that you traditionally wouldn't, and then tried not to copy...
Not to be a grammar nazi, but how can anyone expect their letter of literary critique (or whatever the heck it was) to be taken seriously when they make the your/you're mistake? Granted, everyone slips up now and again (until very recently I constantly confused whether it was "forward" or "toward" that had the r in front of the w), but if you're going to write some sort of criticism about someone, especially someone as famous as OSC, take the time to demonstrate some sort of credibility. Jeez.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Has anyone here read Harlan Ellison's horrifying essay "Xenogenesis"? If you have, I'm sure you're not surprised at the behavior of this churl.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm interested in what Tom said up that page...
quote: I think that's why so many sci-fi figures, in particular, wind up eccentric recluses in their old age.
If OSC isn't eccentric enough right now, what kind of predictions can we make as to his future eccentricities(sp!)? I'll bet good money that after his kids move out, he and his wife will get a cabin in the woods somewhere and he'll write essays on story/community theory among the squirrels.
Posts: 353 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
WD - and that cabin will have a herd of pigs that OSC can release on anyone who comes knocking with continuity issues and silly unsolicited literary criticisms.
Posts: 51 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OSC as Terry Pratchett: Ender blew up the bugger homeworld so effectively that it was rather comparable to a chicken's egg being crushed by three houses, a skyscraper, and several dozen watermelon at once.
Posts: 34 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
okay, the best part of this thread is the "OSC as". In reference to the letter, my comment would be that some people simply have too much time on their hands. What a twit. Nuff said.
Posts: 262 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dag -- do you suppose DavidG finally realized he was arguing with a lawyer?
I'm not a lawyer yet.
Normally I don't (or try not to) just fall back on legalese here, at least without explaining it, but it was tempting last night. For those interested, equitable remedy basically means an injunction - in this case, it would be an order to take down the letter and not put it back up. Which is, as I've been saying, unlikely to happen.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
When lawyers talk sometimes I have difficulty figuring out what they're saying, like two expert debaters contradicting each other.
Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
It was a long, cold winter, and the snow was beginning to drift in across the cabin door. Ender JohnPauloVich Xenochruivicho Wigginvich was pondering, with dark despair, the dark deeds of his younger years, years in which the snow drifts had only come to his youthful knees. The years in which his sister Valentine JohnPaulova Demostheneski Wigginova had been youthful and bright like the stark white sun of the Siberian winter. But now, the snow came in deeper, blowing more intensely, piling up against the door of the cabin.Posts: 8504 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
Ender zipped across the battleroom like some mad hornet enraged by some meddling human. He caught a star and huddled behind it, listening to the gentle susurration of his breathing.
Posts: 1269 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
OSC as The Infamous Letter-Writer: You know what Ender's problem was? He should have looked at the way the other Armies were fighting, and tried to expirament with their styles. But he always used the same inventive strategy, which made all the battles really annoying. I mean, the battle against Phoenix Army was the best that ever happened at the Battle School, but he just kept winning! He should have tried losing, and then he could really grow as a leader.
Posts: 34 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: Whenever I read any commentary (introductions, etc.), by Asimov, I am always struck by how full of himself he seems.
What a talent he was though. Have you ever read Foundation, or one of his hundreds of other books? He was also a renowned scientist and a great teacher of science.
He wrote what must be thousands of essays, not to mention the introductions to which you refer... All of extremely high quality.
Quantity, Quality and TALENT! - Yes, he deserved to be satisfied with himself. Now, if only our beloved OSC would write a couple of hundred more novels...
I have not read all ove them, but I have read over 100 of his books. I like them very much. He was a fantastic author.
But every time I read something where he is speaking as himself, I get the definite impression that I would not like like him if I ever met him.
Genius is no excuse for having a fat head.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
oh Pooh, I read all of his introductions as well and the foundation prequels (which we all know is really about Asimov himself ) and quite frankly I found those intros funny, its all false-reverse psycology humility, I'm damn certain Asimov would be a great person to meet, if he was still alive... Posts: 1567 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Card I might be able to help provide some clarity in the motivation of this correspondence. First, I should note that I am not a mental health care professional, merely a student of human behavior.
This is what I see, for good or ill… *grin*
Sane people don’t usually lash out like this unless the outcome of the argument, one sided though this one may be, is so important that it represents their very self-worth. You see violent outbursts such as these in marital disputes, social groups that have a ‘peaking order’ and parent/offspring arguments, but rarely anywhere else. As one of the previous posters implied: Just put the book down!
So let’s try to figure out why he was so heavily invested that he attacked when he could have walked away.
I think we can pretty easily dispose the overt declaration that his issue is with the repetitive nature of your ‘style’, (whatever that means) and must be something significantly more personal to him. By his own admission one of yours is the best book he’s ever read. So what is left to make this poor soul so miserable?
He states that your work is “degenerative of the reader as a person”. Perhaps he meant “degrading to the reader as a person”, which indicates that it’s his internal reactions to one or more of your characters that is upsetting him.
I’m sure you have hundreds of letters from people telling you how you wrote of their hearts. There is a magic to the way that you develop your characters, weave their relationships and tell your stories; leaving just enough to let us put ourselves in their places absolutely. There is no ‘suspended disbelief’; you own the reader’s mind. We would believe even if you told us that trees could will themselves to split into whatever tools we… oh wait, you did do that. But you see- We believed.
Perhaps, with this proof at hand, it is the regularity in which your stories draw him in so profoundly. He wants to be a hero but sees, through the eyes of his interpretation of your characters, his own weakness. (I am what I think you think I am, with a weird kind of internal perversion which amounts to: I am what I think my internal version of your character thinks I am.) I’d bet that this reader loathes the way this internal process makes him feel about himself, which for all intent means that your characters are just to real to him for him to bear. Alas, growth is hard, but at least he has a new goal if he can get over his fear of failing.
So what he is really begging of you is to continue to write great stories, but flatten the characters, don’t develop them so intimately that they seem so real to him. That is a pretty significant tribute to your work!
OR… he might just be a whack job.
BTW, I'm new... or I finally registered because I couldn't resist responding to this. I've been around for quite some time, but you all are so smart I've never felt compelled to do anything but nod and agree. (or in some cases laugh so hard my sides hurt for hours.)
Disclaimer: I'm not a mental health care professional, and I might be blantently wrong.
Posts: 1 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry! I thought the letter writer would have liked one of the "more popular" books or Pastwatch because so many other people say good things about them that I thought the writer would have just gone along with the crowd without thinking. I didn't mean that they were lesser books, and obviously not everyone who likes them is as superficial as this writer.
Posts: 781 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:There are a lot of writers whose work I do not enjoy, but none of them have received letters from me saying so.
(Puppy said that, I think, way back when.)
I'm belatedly agreeing. You're allowed to hate certain books; you're even allowed to hate books that I love. You're allowed to write and publish or post a scathing review (and to enjoy writing it, even). None of these things violate manners or even essential kindness. However, writing someone a personal letter (whether hard copy or online) requires that you work within certain bounds of politeness -- PARTICULARLY if the person you are writing is essentially a stranger.
There are many people who think that being hurtful to others will help them to "grow" in the long run, or that it will somehow help the world in general because they are "just being honest." These are often people who confuse honesty with rudeness.
*sighs*
It's so much easier to be honest in a positive way, too. You can avoid all of the introductory comments like "Don't take this the wrong way" and "You know, as your friend, I'd just like to tell you . . ."
Posts: 834 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
I Doctored the planet of all your mothers and which surely held all your genetic dreams
forgive me
the Game was ao bitter and so low
OSC as Robert Frost:
Whose ships these are I think I know He's hiding out in my room, though; He will not beat my teammates here -- We'll match his cunning blow for blow.
Mazer's trying to make me fear That my own ending's coming near -- That I'm not strong enough to take The challenge of the coming year.
How funny! If for my own sake I fought, I'm sure that I could shake This obligation. But I keep in mind the raft, the girl, the lake.
I would love to rest, and weep -- But I have promises to keep, And more to fight before I sleep, And more to fight before I sleep.
Posts: 834 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I read Ender's Game, I was a high school student with a bright future ahead of me. Since then, I have read virtually all of OSC's books. I live on the street, pan-handling to raise money for internet cafe use and used books. I nap in the public library during the day, and I've trained my children to steal hubcaps and highway overpass rails to pay for their meals and my own.
Is OSC's style destructive? Judge for yourself.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Bean sighed as he watched Petra pull her braid at him. He thought about how Ender would know what to do in this situation, he always seemed to understand girls.
*fastforward* Ender couldn't understand the conflict between Jane and his wife. If only Bean were there, Bean always seemed to understand women.
*edit: is anyone else amused at the number of conversations that are going on in this thread?*
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Orson as Dr. Seuss: "Would you like an Ender Wiggen even if he blows a bugger? What if Wiggen was a third? What if Wiggen saved a herd?
Posts: 72 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you write books about color in a world of color blind (well a majority of the people) all the books would seem the same. How can someone who can't see the color understand the difference between a book describing blue and a book describing red? They would all seem books about this "color" thing. I pity the writer that he is color blind, and am thankful I can see at least some of the colors. I'm looking forward to the Book of Chartreuse with Indian Summer Sky Blue Strips!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) and quite frankly I found those intros funny, its all false-reverse psycology humility, I'm damn certain Asimov would be a great person to meet, if he was still alive... ![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
