Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, July 1, 2009
Books No More Rye Impostors
Posted by Paul Constant on Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 3:55 PM
NYTimes says:
In a victory for the reclusive writer J. D. Salinger, a federal judge on Tuesday indefinitely banned publication in the United States of a new book by a Swedish author that contains a 76-year-old version of Holden Caulfield, the protagonist of “The Catcher in the Rye.”
Is it just me, or does it feel sort of weird to celebrate a judge indefinitely banning the publication of a book?
1
I think Salinger has a stick up his ass, and banning this book is a strike against creative freedom.
Exactly how is writing a new book about a 76-year-old Holden Caufield dissimilar from sampling a James Brown beat AND an anonymous 17th C poem to record Sinéad O'Connor's "I Am Stretched On Your Grave"? Or borrowing a rhythm track from one song to make a brand new song in Reggae culture? Or even the many "toasting versions" of reggae songs out there? Or writing a new book called "Wicked" about a young Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of the West?
Mix, mix, remix... that's how culture evolves.
Exactly how is writing a new book about a 76-year-old Holden Caufield dissimilar from sampling a James Brown beat AND an anonymous 17th C poem to record Sinéad O'Connor's "I Am Stretched On Your Grave"? Or borrowing a rhythm track from one song to make a brand new song in Reggae culture? Or even the many "toasting versions" of reggae songs out there? Or writing a new book called "Wicked" about a young Elphaba, the Wicked Witch of the West?
Mix, mix, remix... that's how culture evolves.
3
I have no idea what it does feel like, but I can certainly agree that it would feel very weird to celebrate something like that, yes.
4
@ 1 Try reading up on copyright laws.
You would have to pay the person that owns the master recording rights to James Brown's beats to sample them and anonymous work can be ripped off without paying because it's anonymous and in your example part of the public domain due to it's date of publication as is "The Wizard of Oz."
There's creative freedom and then there is infringing on another artist's right to earn income off their characters and work. This seems to be a case of the later to me.
Sidebar: Doesn't Holden Caulfield kill himself at the end of the original book in question?
You would have to pay the person that owns the master recording rights to James Brown's beats to sample them and anonymous work can be ripped off without paying because it's anonymous and in your example part of the public domain due to it's date of publication as is "The Wizard of Oz."
There's creative freedom and then there is infringing on another artist's right to earn income off their characters and work. This seems to be a case of the later to me.
Sidebar: Doesn't Holden Caulfield kill himself at the end of the original book in question?
5
I think it's dumb to block the publication. Either:
1) The book sells and is good, in which case there is a renewed interest in Catcher that makes it more relevant than its current position in 20th C canon, or
2) The book sucks and it goes away and no more is heard from it.
I hope that our young Swede starts right in on the sequel to Moby Dick. There's plenty to steal from Ishmael, and it's in the public domain.
1) The book sells and is good, in which case there is a renewed interest in Catcher that makes it more relevant than its current position in 20th C canon, or
2) The book sucks and it goes away and no more is heard from it.
I hope that our young Swede starts right in on the sequel to Moby Dick. There's plenty to steal from Ishmael, and it's in the public domain.
6
Perhaps the Swedish author can come up with his own ideas instead of piggybacking on an established and famous author.
7
what an asshole salinger is being, the swedish guy should just change the name by a few letters (eg Colden Haulfield) and publish it anyways.
I agree with the analogy to remixes and sampling. This should be considered fair use, maybe just put a disclaimer that it was not authorized by the original creator of the character or something.
I agree with the analogy to remixes and sampling. This should be considered fair use, maybe just put a disclaimer that it was not authorized by the original creator of the character or something.
8
Nono, the Swede is guilty, but not of copyright infringement. He's guilty of thinking that such a shitty, overplayed, poorly executed crapfest like 'The Catcher in the Rye' is in any way relevant in any shape or form to anyone other than aging baby boomers or fans of a dumb Mel Gibson movie. Seriously, anyone past the age of 15 who still fawns over this book is probably emotionally stunted and keeps it on the shelf right between Khalil Gibran and Nietzsche for Dummies.
9
I'd enjoy it if this author decided to distribute it for free as a gigantic fuck you to Salinger. Since he's not going to be getting any money out of this whole deal, why not add to his notoriety and fame now, and develop buzz for whatever books he may write in the future?
10
@6: Ironically, Disney, which has done most of the lobbying to get the copyright laws to be as restrictive as they are now, built their fortunes by borrowing characters and stories from other works. Would you have the same advice for them, that they go come up with their own ideas and stop recycling stories?
11
@10, Correctamundo. Disney made it's fortune from the public domain, and now refuses to give back. Fuck them.
@6, Show me one "original" thing, and I'll show you how it is actually dependant on someone else's previous creative effort.
@4, I'm well aware of copyright laws, AND how anti-creative-cultural-evolution they actually are.
@7, Or perhaps change the name to D. J. Sackofshit... :D
@6, Show me one "original" thing, and I'll show you how it is actually dependant on someone else's previous creative effort.
@4, I'm well aware of copyright laws, AND how anti-creative-cultural-evolution they actually are.
@7, Or perhaps change the name to D. J. Sackofshit... :D
13
Quite apart from the out-of-whack copyright system, if the Swedish author had really done something new and innovative, then maybe his work would have passed the copyright test (cf. "The Wind Done Gone"). But, like most "art" produced from the comfort of a welfare state utopia, the Swedish author's book failed that test miserably. The judge ruled correctly.
14
This is an abuse of copyright. This book would not have taken away from sales of Catcher, and therefore it should have been allowed. Copyright law needs to be reformed to make clear that it protects only an author's right to make money off his/her work and not the right to tell other writers what they can and can't do with their brains.
16
I don't really see that the blocking of the book is "celebrated" in the Times article.
And if Salinger wants to protect his copyright, why the hell not? Why should he have to have unauthorized sequels to his work if he doesn't want them?
He could have gone the other way, though. The Nabokov estate allowed publication of LOLITA'S DIARY, on the condition that half of the profits be paid to them.
And if Salinger wants to protect his copyright, why the hell not? Why should he have to have unauthorized sequels to his work if he doesn't want them?
He could have gone the other way, though. The Nabokov estate allowed publication of LOLITA'S DIARY, on the condition that half of the profits be paid to them.
17
Judge should have allowed publication and then let Salinger sue for royalties and damages. Prior restraint: BAD.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Pill The Homos! by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
Because Guns Make Us Safer by Goldy
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
Gay Kids Are Still Killing Themselves by Dan Savage
-
Gregoire: "This is signed!" by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (17) RSS