Word-whore. I write 'em. I talk 'em. Information, politics, media, and the cybers. I drink. I use bad words. All publication is a political act. All communication is propaganda. All art is pornography. All business is personal. All hail Eris! Vive les poissons rouges sauvages!
“Just how many people can you pack into one tiny art gallery,” I wondered as I squeezed through At The Vanishing Point‘s winding displays to find a drink.
The launch of the inaugural Marrickville Contemporary Art Prize was an upbeat but slightly chaotic affair last night, with 61 works packed into a narrow gallery space and probably every contemporary artist in the village jammed into a narrow corridor trying to reach the dodgy chardonnay and too-few spring rolls being served in the back yard.
I don’t normally review films. But this isn’t so much a review of the new Lady Chatterley but a review of the audience.
The film is based on D H Lawrence’s 1927 book John Thomas and Lady Jane, the first and less-well-known version of the story which was re-written as the controversial Lady Chatterley’s Lover and published in 1928.
Controversial? Oh yes! Explicit sex scenes, four-letter words, and perhaps the most scandalous aspect: the love affair was between an aristocratic woman and a gamekeeper. Crossing class boundaries! England shall fall! Read all about it.
Now you may think that society has changed since 1927. But no, our audience proved otherwise.
No, this isn’t something from Thunderbirds, but a new radio studio complex in Krakow, Poland. Thanks Richard.
Will the Internet help the essay make a comeback as an art form? Paul Graham’s essay on this point is almost 3 years old, but I reckon he’s right.
In most countries, copyright in creative works lasts for 50 years after the death of the creator. In the US, the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 extended that protection to 70 years for works created by individuals and 120 years for corporations. But a new paper by Cambridge University PhD candidate Rufus Pollock reckons copyright terms should be reduced, not extended [PDF file, 256k] — to just 14 years.
The US copyright extension was widely criticised as the Mickey Mouse Protection Act. Walt Disney’s Micky Mouse would have otherwise entered the public domain in 2003 — depriving the Disney corporation of income. Critics said the Act was nothing but more corporate welfare from the Bush II government.
Pollock’s paper argues that the optimal duration of copyright falls as the cost of producing and distributing creative works goes down. But since copyright laws are created through political lobbying rather than “a benevolent and rational policy-maker”, copyright terms steadily increased through the 20th century.
Politically it’s hard to remove rights which have already been granted — unless, of course you can pretend there’s some terrible threat such as terrorists or black paedophiles — so Pollock notes:
It is prudent for policy-makers to err on the low side rather than the high side when setting the strength of copyright.
Somehow, given the media industry’s current terror (!) of falling revenues thanks to that very process of falling distribution costs, and their close connection to political power, I just don’t see Pollock’s arguments winning any time soon.
Thanks to Ars Technica for the pointer.