Sarcophile!Originally Posted by Vice Nebulosa
Pedophile?
Sarcophile!Pedophile?
To the best of my knowledge, copyright comes into existence the moment you create something. Though it is generally advisable to stick "Copyright John Q. Public 2009" or whatever on it. As for preventing theft, there are a couple of things you can do. On the manuscript, on a random page somewhere within it, simply put a small dot in red pen on it somewhere. Then you can see if they've sent back a photocopy, or if your book ends up published without your consent, I presume you could demand to see their original manuscript and match it against your own. There are, sadly, no guarantees. I suppose the best option is to simply use reputable publishing houses who have a brand and image to maintain.*Nod* Question in that regard, actually (and do note that my ignorance of the publishing process is pretty total). Have you any experience or advice in the matter of applying a copyright or some manner of "plagiarism protection" to a completed manuscript? I assume there must be something in the legal system which prevents someone from the street breaking into the home of an esteemed publisher and walking down to the metaphorical bank with an armful of manuscripts. <_< >_> That being said, I have no idea of what it may be. I am in the midst of such research, but it could certainly be beneficial to have information flowing to me from multiple directions, or for multiple sources to confirm one another . . .
Ahaha, I've rarely seen it put so well! Yes, solidarity and the company of like-minded people is a great boost sometimes, even without direct or tangible assistance for one another. I can understand the feeling that one's work is inadequate, but I can't understand that desperate air some have. I enjoy what I create. I hope others do but, if they do not, that will not diminish what I feel. It cannot be diminished, only potentially enhanced.Best of luck, and whatnot. Although beyond knowing that there do exist certain allies in this world of ours, even for the most obscure of us (to quote Sharon den Adel, sort of an "If I don't make it, someone else will" type of image), we are probably not of much use to one another. Still, even this conversation has served to improve the current mood somewhat; I feel I am talking to a genuine writer at this point. The enduring characteristic of those posting on the fiction message board I have referenced was panic ("help me; my story is too long/short", "help me; I think my plot is too derivative", "help me; no one will publish my book", etc.), and it is refreshing to see that I am speaking to another who is not so easily shaken. There is trepidation in me, dread perhaps, but fear in this matter I feel not.
Ohohoho, one of those types, are you? xD Well I'll just have to convince you otherwise! Yes, I'm an inveterate optimist about pretty much everything. For me, it's downward progress which is the anomoly; the arc of history has always between towards greater complexity, greater prosperity, and greater liberty. I'm entirely unconvinced that there are any insurmountable obstacles in the universe, I'm afraid*Smirk* Optimist. Albeit an unusually articulate one.Everything decays, mate, be it matter, man, or memory; energy, relationships, or the universe itself. Any progress upward is purely incidental and entirely temporary; the curve downward to oblivion endures.
Ahaha, no, he and I are friends. What is friendship without a little teasing here and there? For instance, Rantzien is not a pedophile but he is Swedish. Though who among us can say we are not in love with the President of France?Have you two been at one another's throats or something? :chuckle: That seems like it could be an argument worth witnessing. But then, imagined conflicts are invariably better than the real thing . . .
Apologies for not responding (and any errors in what I have written) to everything you said, but it's far, far too hot in here and I feel rather cheated because it was quite cool earlier, but along comes nighttime and with it, an insufferable rise in temperate. I may go and douse myself in cold water, if I can find any.
Damn, Vice I'm an author too, but I don't go posting a whole novel about introducing myself to a forum. I could welcome you, but you just have to promise not to do that ever again.
I love to write, but having the linguistic dexterity of a snail basking in the sun, I’m not one to share it. It’s for my own pleasure, really.
Not that... oh dear, here it comes again.
I like you. You are not permited to ever leave us or Demon Dame will cry.
welcome to eoff!
I hate to be a downer, but I get this feeling that college will completely change your outlook on this writing and publishing etc and make you rethink your posting style. But for now, I appreciate the infusion of youthful ambition! Fly high, :albatoss:
That was not only the largest introduction post on this site, but contends with the sites longest post I'd imagine.
And for a couple of quick comments to your post, while sometimes you can get away with it, word count is going to be a major factor in whether or not a Novel gets published, and even quality works have probably been rejected because of it. It's a sad but true fact. Luckily the book I'm writing will end up in the acceptable range anyway.
And while they may want changes that are more mainstream, it is entirely possible to keep the books original intent there, and make for a great expression of whatever you were trying to express. It's all about if you have the ability to do so. There are more then one way to express the same thing.
That asside, welcome to our ranks fellow writer. ^_^
I'm not reading that but welcome to EoFF!
I wrote some things once. Welcome to EoFF.
I only write love letters to myself.
Welcome to the forum and stuff!
Say what? ~_^ Just "stick it on" to your manuscript yourself? I.e. "Copyright John Q. Public"could feasibly be written in a mahogany shade of crayon? Somehow I have a difficult time believing such a thing has any legal value . . .
Or am I the one being naïve here, and it was implied by your statement that a legal institution would be responsible for issuing the copyright?
Rather clever, actually, if crude. I seem to remember hearing the tip before; very . . . makeshift. The law is forever a step behind its breakers, no?
Oh, the sense of inadequacy is definitely understandable (we are none of us capable of surpassing our predetermined human limits, after all; it is simply that some of us are born with the potential and mental faculties that enable the Beethovens of the world to achieve a certain amount of momentum without much effort, and others may break their backs with the effort of reaching a mere fraction of such ability, even at their own maximum momentum). Hell, how can one not be occasionally frustrated that one's best work may be effortlessly surpassed by a child who was (seemingly arbitrarily) endowed with the capacity to do so? That I comprehend, no trouble. It has to do, likely, with unwillingness to admit one's own insignificance.
But the "desperation", as you put it . . . yeah, that is a strange one. What really got to me, actually, was a thread on the forums entitled "Is my plot too derivative?", in which the author basically outlined an entire science-fiction plot (kind of cheesy, but all brilliant ideas originate somewhere, and gems are oftentimes embedded in tons of useless rock). This too is strange. The answer, naturally, can only come from the author ("did I, as the author, derive my plot from others for lack of ideas, or does something remain to be said about the derived idea?"); an original idea is not nearly so important as an original perspective, and one does not go online and discuss that. <_< >_>
*Reaches for nearest object that could conceivably be raised in a toast; in this case a nectarine -_-*
To that sentiment, then.
*Feh* "One of those types", he says.Although I suppose you are only playing turnabout (I did, after all, label you with all the connotations of the word "optimist"; presumably you are simply meaning "pessimist" on my part), which is most certainly fair play.
This "type" of mine needs "fixing", does it?
Eh, I am inclined to separate "liberty" from the remaining two criteria. Democracy (and the individual liberty it enables) may be more prevalent currently than it ever was, but it is hardly "the way of the world". We are right now witnessing the profound rise of a communist dictatorship as a world superpower; suppression of individual liberty in favor of collective gain is far from dead. One perspective will not "disappear" while the other remains; they exist and will continue to exist in a certain balance, dictated officially by the relative sizes of the militaries involved, but an Earth ruled by those who view individual liberty as a petty, meaningless luxury before the glory of the entire species always has potential energy -- the potential for rebellion, and a return of individual liberty, and vice versa. We are simply in an intermediate stage at this point, wherein the battles for and against liberty occur on a national and continental scale and not a planetary one.
As long as morality is subjective enough that neither view is entirely "right" or "wrong", I see no reason that "liberty" should be seen as an indefinitely escalating phenomenon. Granted, it will rise, but it will also fall when sufficient decay has occurred and something new is constructed. To suggest otherwise implies that human nature is undergoing some kind of "evolution", which I seriously doubt. Regardless of the fabrics in which we clothe ourselves and the raw data we amass and store in our brains, we are still the same basic creatures who routinely destroyed other organisms in order that they as hominids might survive. Consider war: two World Wars have been wrought by German hands, both with the perceived goal of "dominating the planet" in political, military, and ideological terms. And yet, why? If one "ruled the world", one would be stuck with the abhorrent responsibility of ensuring that six billion humans (or some chosen fraction thereof) is fed and sheltered on a daily basis. There would no longer be anyone to conquer, and everyone to fear as a threat to your power. I doubt anyone truly wants to "rule the world" (destroy it, maybe, but not babysit); they simply, like their primitive ancestors, enjoy the feeling of bludgeoning rivals to death with clubs. Exchange "club" with "AK-47" or "nuke", or whatever new invention our self-destructive minds envision next and cannot refrain from testing, and we have a problem.
Human nature is not evolving, to my mind, and its ideals such as "liberty" are thus not evolving beyond their normal constraints, either. We are repeating certain cycles because we know how to do nothing else in a universe that would frighten us terribly if we did not believe science was the key to omniscience and immortality (neither of which I can possibly imagine anyone truly desiring, either).
As for your "tendency to greater complexity and prosperity" assertion, I agree with you to a point. Naturally the sophistication of mankind and its prosperity on this Earth will increase if given unlimited stimulation, but only until we run out of water or something.
[/rant] -_-
Meh; we in Canada are largely immune to such attraction. We tend to be a bit jaded regarding the French in general, what with Quebec being the juvenile squabbler that it is. <_< >_>
Unnecessary, but acknowledged. I have no intention of responding to every facet of your every comment, either.
Where is "here", in climatic terms, out of curiosity?
Wasn't aiming to impress anyone, mate; just a tad confused about the boards' introduction process and in serious need of some indiscriminate venting.
No can do, mate. <_< >_> Greetings nonetheless.
This Demon Dame is rather "all over the place" is he not? :laugh: When I arrived, he promptly indicated he had achieved an erection, and he will collapse emotionally if I should leave. Huh.
Much appreciated, Remus. ^_^
Interesting. Can you explain further?
Seriously? :Eek: Back on my previous boards, the membership would regularly double-post during larger discussions (granted, we were working with a mere 10 000 character limit, and this may well vary from EoFF), and range into triple and even quadruple posts when working with our variation of an "RP Thread" (which was of unusually high quality, given that I was working with at least one author who I would regard as an "equal" in terms of literary style). This is all fairly commonplace to me, to be honest. <_< >_>
But totally without merit, was my point. The length of a piece of literature is not a legitimate indicator of its quality -- there is really no challenging such a blatantly obvious piece of logic. It is an interesting and sometimes unfortunate culture to reside in, that places businessmen between artists and their audience; wherein economics actually take priority over the artistic concerns which are the reason the business exists in the first place. =\ Makes one long for the principles of the ancient culture of the Greeks, in some ways . . .
Granted. This means that an editor/publishing company is justified in advising the writer. That they should instead be given the authority to override the enduring intentions of the writer to suit their own subjective little perspective on what is "culturally acceptable is preposterous. Anyone with an iota of artistic potential in their mind probably knows this, whether consciously or not, but it is a fact which our culture chooses to ignore.
Would that it were so simple. As discussed in my inaugural post and certain of Couger on the Prowl's statments, "ability" should be the only prerequisite to artistic recognition. Again, however, the publishing business appears to introduce the principle "it is not what you do, but who you know", and "the shelves may burst with dreck" because of it.
Pleasure.
Amusing. :laugh: Poor, horribly depressed Lucca sprite.I only write love letters to myself.
BIG ASS POST
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
