[-empyre-] Creativity as a social ontology: Authorship

[christopher sullivan]

I wish I could place it, I think it was a forward, but I can'y remember which
book, tried to search it out afterwords, and could not find it. 
will let you know if I find it. Chris.

Quoting Yunzi Li <melodyliyunzi at gmail.com>:

> Dear Cris,
> I am very interested in the Isaac Beshevis Singers books about his
> relatinship with his translators that mentioned in your letter, could you
> tell me the name? Thanks.
> Melody
> 
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:27 AM, christopher sullivan
> <csulli at saic.edu>wrote:
> 
> >
> > Hi Scott This is all a lot of energy to argue against something that is so
> > obviously true, singular authors write books... influences, editors,
> advise
> > along the way, is not collaboration. it is very necessary and helpful, but
> > the
> > author is the main voice. why is authorship so threatening? perhaps it
> > implies
> > valuative intellectual skills, and that makes people nervous. Not me I
> like
> > to
> > be put in my place as an active reader, by a great writer, but I am not
> > their
> > collaborator.
> >
> > There is an interesting forward in one of Isaac Beshevis Singers books
> > about his
> > relatinship with his translators, that supports your argument. It is a
> fine
> > piece of writing.
> >
> > Writing is social in it's moment of reception, but not conception. and
> that
> > is
> > fine. Chris.
> >
> >
> > Quoting Scott Rettberg <scott at retts.net>:
> >
> > > Hello again,
> > >
> > > In the next few days I want to pick up more on some of Johannes'
> > > questions and Simon's thoughts and some of the interesting ways in
> > > which the idea of authorship is challenged and reformulated. I also
> > > think there are some things to consider about the economics of
> > > electronic literature (to the extent that there are any). Finally, I
> > > want to say a few words about why I think there hasn't yet been a
> > > great deal of activity in creative writing programs towards developing
> > > curricula for digital writing.
> > >
> > > As I wrote earlier, I think that the conception of authorship as a
> > > solitary activity conducted by the creatively inspired individual has
> > > always been more mythological than real. True, writing is very much a
> > > reflective / recursive process, in which the individual wrestles with
> > > his or her own ideas and then frames them as textual expression. It is
> > > an intensely personal activity. Few print novels or poems are actually
> > > *written* collaboratively.
> > >
> > > But the process of writing involves more than that work, more than
> > > those moments of framing thought. Stories emerge most often from the
> > > examples and archetypes or other works of literature that the author
> > > has read. Stephanie Meyer's Twilight books or JK Rowling's Harry
> > > Potter would not have been possible in the same way without Bram
> > > Stoker's Dracula or Le Guin's Earthsea novels, which might not have in
> > > turn been possible without JRR Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. Works of
> > > literature have always been produced in conversation with other
> > > writing. Most of those writers, in turn, work in conversation with and
> > > in close proximity to other writers. When Tolkien was writing Lord of
> > > the Rings, for instance, he was bringing drafts of it to the Eagle and
> > > Child Pub in Oxford and reading them aloud to his writer's group, the
> > > inklings, which included CS Lewis, whose Narnia books Tolkien
> > > disapproved of at the time. Those readings, and the discussions about
> > > the books the inklings were writing at the time, are undoubtedly a
> > > significant part of the process of authoring those books, regardless
> > > of whose name ended up on the volume.
> > >
> > > The writing process is most often social. The contemporary writing
> > > workshop at American universities is social writing practiced on an
> > > industrial scale. And once the book is accepted by a publisher, this
> > > process continues, with editors, marketers, designers, typesetters and
> > > so forth contributing to the processing of producing, distributing,
> > > spinning the cultural artifact. And today's capital A Authors, those
> > > lucky few who actually live off of the proceeds of their work,
> > > collaborate with Oprah's book club, Charlie Rose, film-makers and
> > > video game producers. The author is not alone.
> > >
> > > I would argue that the reason the name is on the book is in such bold
> > > type is not even really because the author is much more important than
> > > any other part of the process. The name of the author is on the book
> > > because it provides the publishers with an entity to contract, and to
> > > purchase the rights from, and to own the proceeds of, and to sell
> > > again. The author is a signature on a contract as much or more than it
> > > is a human being.
> > >
> > > Another authorship story:
> > >
> > > The writer of digital literature suddenly finds the tools of design at
> > > hand, a global distribution network at a click, and a small but
> > > responsive international audience in the inbox. This is a different
> > > sort of authorship, liberating but unromantic. This sort of author
> > > understands the whole process in a different way, in part because she
> > > is seeing the whole process in a different way, in part because her
> > > audience is seeing the whole process in a different way, and in part
> > > because she is operating in an entirely different sort of environment
> > > and system than she might have been tutored in during her years in
> > > writer's workshop.
> > >
> > > She will never get rich doing this. She will never sell the film
> > > rights. She will never do many things that capital A authors do. She
> > > will likely live a more or less normal life and you will not recognize
> > > her on the street. She will be like many famous poets in this way. She
> > > will on the other hand have the opportunity to work outside of the
> > > system inherited from centuries past, or participate in the building
> > > of a new one.
> > >
> > > She will realize the complex layers of authorship involved in writing
> > > using platforms that are themselves authored.  In doing so, she will
> > > become unauthor as she authors. She will lend, borrow from, steal, and
> > > give in the process of writing and building literary artifacts. She
> > > will be conscious of these acts. She will build with samples and feeds
> > > and the inputs of an unimaginably large choir. She will play in a huge
> > > sandbox with many toys, and quite likely few observers would
> > > understand what she is doing or why. And then, of a sudden, maybe . . .
> > >
> > > This, I think, will be fun.
> > >
> > > Watching these scientists at work, systematically experimenting with
> > > hybrid creatures born of the word and some friends (images, moving
> > > pictures, sound, code), and some other things that just wandered into
> > > the party unnoticed, it will be fun.
> > >
> > > It will be a regenerative period for authorship. It already is.
> > >
> > > All the Best,
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > empyre forum
> > > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> > >
> >
> >
> > Christopher Sullivan
> > Dept. of Film/Video/New Media
> > School of the Art Institute of Chicago
> > 112 so michigan
> > Chicago Ill 60603
> > csulli at saic.edu
> > 312-345-3802
> >  _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> 


Christopher Sullivan
Dept. of Film/Video/New Media
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
112 so michigan
Chicago Ill 60603
csulli at saic.edu
312-345-3802