Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: The Da Vinci crock  (Read 76708 times)

Meeting Minutes

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Moses of Michelangelo
« Reply #150 on: November 16, 2008, 07:34:06 PM »

Have you read his paper on Michelangelo's Moses? THEN you'd be right to say Freud is unbelievable!



He completed his paper, "The Moses of Michelangelo," on New Year's Day, 1914; he had been thinking about it for at least 13 years, struggling with it, talking to his colleagues about it. His thoughts reached a pitch of intensity in 1912 and 1913. But once the paper was completed, he still did not want to publish it. Jones, Ferenczi, Abraham, Rank, and Sachs were dismayed. Freud told them he had more doubts about its conclusions than usual; he worried that it might seem amateurish. The paper meant something more to him than other papers had. Finally, he gave in to his friends' good advice, but he still insisted that it be published anonymously! Why? "It is only a joke," he wrote Jones, "but perhaps not a bad one." To Abraham, he also wrote, "It is only a joke." Not for 10 years would Freud publicly admit authorship. 19 years after its completion, he wrote Edoardo Weiss: "My feeling for this piece of work is rather like that towards a love-child. For 3 lonely September weeks in 1913 I stood every day in the church in front of the statue, studied it, measured it, sketched it, until I captured the understanding for it which I ventured to express in the essay only anonymously. Only much later did I legitimatize this non-analytical child."

Every day by himself before a piece of marble for 3 weeks? Love-child? This after 11 years of regular visits to the object of his fascination? And then he was unwilling to put his name to the paper. Freud had had similar uncharacteristic reactions to "Totem and Taboo" and later would to "Moses and Monotheism," two other works he was inclined to publish anonymously. "The Moses of Michelangelo" was more than a demonstration of the application of the psychoanalytic way of thinking, more than a scholarly exercise.  It was a work of art itself, thus a personal statement. But was Freud being self-deprecatory and trivializing when he called it a joke? In "Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious," Freud found similarities between jokes and works of art. What about the "love-child" comment? It appears that child was the product of breaking the rules which purport to separate science from art, rules which would dictate conformity and submission to authority rather than revolution, and rules which call only for conventional solutions to oedipal dilemmas.


I Do, writing is like prostitution. First you do it for the love of it, then you do it for a few friends, and finally you do it for money.

pome

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
  • Machu Picchu
    • View Profile
Re: The Da Vinci crock
« Reply #151 on: November 17, 2008, 08:10:19 PM »
Great periscope, Meeting :)

due2

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: The Da Vinci crock
« Reply #152 on: November 18, 2008, 02:45:00 PM »

Back to the subject :)

Copyright issues have traditionally been not given the importance they deserve. That's have been the case even in the US, let alone in less developed countries. When I was in school in Russia I remember many professiors who'd translate books from English to Russian and publish it as if they had written it themselves, under their own name. We as students would not mind it had the books been translated correctly.. but these "professors" did not even know English good enough!


Not every book that comes out in the US is a candidate for a foreign deal. For those that are however, the overseas market, while not likely to make the publisher or the author rich beyond their wildest imaginations, is definitely worth exploring. And of course by "foreign" I mean a deal made by an owner in the United States with a publisher in another nation. There are essentially 2 and perhaps 3 forms of foreign deals. The first is the right that the owner of foreign rights has to license the translation of the English version of the book into a foreign language. The second is the right to license the reprint of the book in the English language and sell the same in a local territory. There is also an export deal in which the American publisher sells the very same book that is distributed in the U.S. to a foreign publisher at a discount.  The foreign publisher merely is distributing the U.S. book in that territory.

The question as to who owns the right to make these deals is the subject of the agreement between author and publisher. Since copyright initially resides in the creator of the work-usually the author unless it is a work for hire situation-how much of that bundle of rights called copyright the author gives away is what that agreement is all about. Part of the negotiation will involve foreign rights of the sorts mentioned above. However, there are often other parties who may have rights that may prevent the making of a foreign deal including but not limited to artists, illustrators, editors and even, in some instances, distributors and other parties. Therefore, the publisher must carefully review all of its agreements (or the lack of such agreements) to make sure it can actually make a foreign deal.

The normal kind of deal for a book that originally was published in the US generally involves a royalty and hopefully an advance against that royalty. The size of the advance varies depending upon the size of the market and the success or lack of it that the book enjoyed in the U.S.  among other factors. For example, reprint rights to a large territory, such as the UK or Germany, might bring a larger advance than a similar deal for Portugal. The same for translations. And since all books are not interchangeable, the rule of thumb for determining the size of the advance is based upon the "WYCG" approach. "WYCG" is the technical legal term for "Whatever You Can Get." If the buyer feels the book is going to do particularly well in the territory, that buyer may be willing to pay a larger advance for the rights. In all negotiations, the end result depends upon the relative bargaining position of the parties. The advance will be applied against a royalty rate that varies and which is likely to be based upon the retail price or cover price in the market. However, there may be other royalty provisions for foreign book clubs, flat fee licenses made by the foreign licensee and so on. The actual royalties in turn may be subject to other calculations that may reduce the effective royalty from the stated rate and these factors should be the subject of negotiation as well.

http://www.ivanhoffman.com/royalties.html


Royalty rates vary depending on three major factors: format of the book (hardcover, paperback, illustrated, four-color), the buyers (independent bookstores, mass merchandisers, QVC), and the terms on which the book was bought. Anything special the publisher adds to your book -- color, glossy paper, a page that folds out, stickers -- naturally adds to the production costs, with the publisher lowering your royalty. Royalties on four-color (called "full-color") books or books with special features can have their royalties cut in half. The good news, though, is that if your book does well, the initial production costs go down as you sell more copies.

Hardvocer: 10% to 5,000 copies
                      12.5% to 10,000 copies
                      15% thereafter

Trade Paperback: 7.5% for all copies

Mass-Market Paperback: 8% to 150,000 copies
                                         10% thereafter

Often a publisher will reward you with a higer royalty rate if you sell more than a specified number of books. This is called an escalator. For example, if you sell more than 50,000 copies of your book, your publisher might be persuaded to go from a 7.5% trade paperback royalty to an 8% royalty.

Many authors are aghast when they discover that they receive only between 5% and 15% of the sale price of their book, while the publisher keeps between 85% and 95%. However, it might be more shocking to learn that the publisher sometimes earns even less per book than the author does. If your book sells for $15 and the average wholesale price is $7.50, then the remaining $7.50 has to cover all the publisher's costs (your initial advance, your royalty, the production costs, shipping costs, paying for any outside staff who'll work on your book and a very large overhead).

It's not impossible that you will have to finish your book before the contract is done. Talk about an act of extreme faith! This will be sometimes in your best interest. Do not, though, turn anything before your contract is signed, the check has cleared and the money is in your pocket.

Always retain the copyright to your work. Some publishers write in their contracts that they "may" register an author's work. Some say in the contract that they own the copyright. Neither situation is acceptable. Under all circumstances, you want it stated in your contract that the publisher shall register the copyright in your name.

Sub-rights are those rights that are secondary to the primary rights granted to the publisher: rights to the hardcover and/or paperback version of the book that is sold in the US (or wherever the primary publisher is). Sales of the work in a different format -- audiobook, a TV show or a large-print edition -- are considered subsidiary rights. Sales of the work in a different territory like the UK, Japan or Brazil are also considered subsidiary rights, typically covered under the "foreign rights" section of the contract. (Yours first, publisher's second)

  • First serial (appearance of part of your book in a magazine just before or coinciding with its publication): 90/10
  • Second serial (after production): 50/50
  • Book club: 50/50
  • Permissions (use of part of your book by another author): 50/50
  • Paperback: 50/50
  • Special editions: 50/50
  • Foreign-language translations: 75/25
  • UK: 80/20
  • Textbook edition: 50/50
  • Large-type edition: 50/50
  • e-Book: 50/50
  • e-version: 100/0
  • Audio: 50/50
  • Performance: 100/0
  • Calendar: 50/50
  • Commercial & Merchandising: 100/0
Last year I went fishing with Salvador Dali. He was using a dotted line. He caught every other fish.

P e r i c l e s

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: The Da Vinci crock
« Reply #153 on: November 19, 2008, 01:50:10 PM »

Have you read his paper on Michelangelo's Moses? THEN you'd be right to say Freud is unbelievable!



He completed his paper, "The Moses of Michelangelo," on New Year's Day, 1914; he had been thinking about it for at least 13 years, struggling with it, talking to his colleagues about it. His thoughts reached a pitch of intensity in 1912 and 1913. But once the paper was completed, he still did not want to publish it. Jones, Ferenczi, Abraham, Rank, and Sachs were dismayed. Freud told them he had more doubts about its conclusions than usual; he worried that it might seem amateurish. The paper meant something more to him than other papers had. Finally, he gave in to his friends' good advice, but he still insisted that it be published anonymously! Why? "It is only a joke," he wrote Jones, "but perhaps not a bad one." To Abraham, he also wrote, "It is only a joke." Not for 10 years would Freud publicly admit authorship. 19 years after its completion, he wrote Edoardo Weiss: "My feeling for this piece of work is rather like that towards a love-child. For 3 lonely September weeks in 1913 I stood every day in the church in front of the statue, studied it, measured it, sketched it, until I captured the understanding for it which I ventured to express in the essay only anonymously. Only much later did I legitimatize this non-analytical child."

Every day by himself before a piece of marble for 3 weeks? Love-child? This after 11 years of regular visits to the object of his fascination? And then he was unwilling to put his name to the paper. Freud had had similar uncharacteristic reactions to "Totem and Taboo" and later would to "Moses and Monotheism," two other works he was inclined to publish anonymously. "The Moses of Michelangelo" was more than a demonstration of the application of the psychoanalytic way of thinking, more than a scholarly exercise.  It was a work of art itself, thus a personal statement. But was Freud being self-deprecatory and trivializing when he called it a joke? In "Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious," Freud found similarities between jokes and works of art. What about the "love-child" comment? It appears that child was the product of breaking the rules which purport to separate science from art, rules which would dictate conformity and submission to authority rather than revolution, and rules which call only for conventional solutions to oedipal dilemmas.


Excuse my ignorance and laziness to look it up, but what the deal is with Micha's Moses and Freud's interpretation?

inspired minds

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Moses and The Tablets
« Reply #154 on: November 19, 2008, 02:05:56 PM »
Dear Pericles,


Moses and the Tablets, Rembrandt

By all accounts, the revelation at Sinai was one of the great moments in religious history, sufficiently powerful to have transformed a complaining and bedraggled mixture of slaves and rabble into a God-enthused nation dedicated to the ideal of perfecting the world in the kingship of the Divine. The one tangible result of that one-time-epiphany came in the form of two tablets recording the Ten Commandments. After 40 days and 40 nights on the mountain with God, Moses descended from Sinai, carrying "tablets inscribed on both their surfaces ... The tablets were God's work, and the writing was God's writing." However, the Israelites sank to the depravity of worshipping a golden calf when Moses, their leader, did not return when expected. Moses became enraged by the Israelites' idolatry, and he smashed the tablets, written by the finger of God, to smithereens. At the same time, the great prophet-leader of his people beseeched God to forgive the errant tribes, and caused the Almighty to present a second set of tablets replacing the first.

Now Freud contended that while rising and letting the tablets slip, Michelangelo's Moses gained control of his rage; thus, the right hand was retracted in the beard, pulling it along in the wake of his gesture, and clamping down on the slipping tablets along with the tension of his inner right arm. Freud believed that Michelangelo's Moses was and always will be a figure in the act of restraining himself from rising in the anger of his own passion.



good cop bad cop

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Moses and The Tablets
« Reply #155 on: November 19, 2008, 08:57:08 PM »
Dear Pericles,


Moses and the Tablets, Rembrandt

By all accounts, the revelation at Sinai was one of the great moments in religious history, sufficiently powerful to have transformed a complaining and bedraggled mixture of slaves and rabble into a God-enthused nation dedicated to the ideal of perfecting the world in the kingship of the Divine. The one tangible result of that one-time-epiphany came in the form of two tablets recording the Ten Commandments. After 40 days and 40 nights on the mountain with God, Moses descended from Sinai, carrying "tablets inscribed on both their surfaces ... The tablets were God's work, and the writing was God's writing." However, the Israelites sank to the depravity of worshipping a golden calf when Moses, their leader, did not return when expected. Moses became enraged by the Israelites' idolatry, and he smashed the tablets, written by the finger of God, to smithereens. At the same time, the great prophet-leader of his people beseeched God to forgive the errant tribes, and caused the Almighty to present a second set of tablets replacing the first.

Now Freud contended that while rising and letting the tablets slip, Michelangelo's Moses gained control of his rage; thus, the right hand was retracted in the beard, pulling it along in the wake of his gesture, and clamping down on the slipping tablets along with the tension of his inner right arm. Freud believed that Michelangelo's Moses was and always will be a figure in the act of restraining himself from rising in the anger of his own passion.


Is it "tablets" or "tables"?

Non, je ne regrette rien

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: The Da Vinci crock
« Reply #156 on: November 19, 2008, 10:50:41 PM »
Hahaha - you funny, good, I know what ya mean! ;)

fromadistance

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: Moses and The Tablets
« Reply #157 on: November 20, 2008, 06:57:26 PM »
Dear Pericles,


Moses and the Tablets, Rembrandt

By all accounts, the revelation at Sinai was one of the great moments in religious history, sufficiently powerful to have transformed a complaining and bedraggled mixture of slaves and rabble into a God-enthused nation dedicated to the ideal of perfecting the world in the kingship of the Divine. The one tangible result of that one-time-epiphany came in the form of two tablets recording the Ten Commandments. After 40 days and 40 nights on the mountain with God, Moses descended from Sinai, carrying "tablets inscribed on both their surfaces ... The tablets were God's work, and the writing was God's writing." However, the Israelites sank to the depravity of worshipping a golden calf when Moses, their leader, did not return when expected. Moses became enraged by the Israelites' idolatry, and he smashed the tablets, written by the finger of God, to smithereens. At the same time, the great prophet-leader of his people beseeched God to forgive the errant tribes, and caused the Almighty to present a second set of tablets replacing the first.

Now Freud contended that while rising and letting the tablets slip, Michelangelo's Moses gained control of his rage; thus, the right hand was retracted in the beard, pulling it along in the wake of his gesture, and clamping down on the slipping tablets along with the tension of his inner right arm. Freud believed that Michelangelo's Moses was and always will be a figure in the act of restraining himself from rising in the anger of his own passion.


Sincerely, I just don't get why Freud is making such a big deal about it - did not God provide a second set after Moses smashed the original tablets?

It is in his/her interest, after all, for people to have a copy of them!
Tell me lies
Tell me sweet little lies
(tell me lies, tell me, tell me lies)

miska

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: The Da Vinci crock
« Reply #158 on: November 20, 2008, 09:32:28 PM »
The other night I came home late, and tried to unlock my house with my car keys. I started the house up. I was speeding, and a cop pulled me over. He asked where I lived. I said, "right here, officer". Later, I parked it on the freeway, got out, and yelled at all the cars, "Get out of my driveway!"

teafairn

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: The Da Vinci crock
« Reply #159 on: November 22, 2008, 03:24:46 PM »

No more time for the team boys? Getting down to "real" business now that he's getting older?


http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/3301/hbdw634npreviewdf8.jpg


http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/3772/michaelcn4uo3.jpg

You be the judge!


LOL miska - the punch line appears to be "Buy Buy Baby!"