8 of 10 people found the following review helpful
A fearmongering pamphlet is no conceptual thought,
Amazon Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy (Paperback)This book is a pamphlet. So do not expect any deep "truth" or reflection. It is extremely superficial and only reactive to a reality the author does not like. Yet it is not all bad nor all good. His defense of intellectual property is interesting and it is a must of the next twenty years. Unluckily the copyright system does not protect the intellectual property and patrimonial rights of the author of the work of art under consideration but only the copyright of the proprietor of the commercial product derived from the work of art itself.
Yes the survival of artists is at stake. No the copyright is not there to encourage artistic creation as some like Dean Baker would contend but to remunerate the artist for his work. It is not an encouragement but an income. So far Keen is right. But he at once gets off the tracks because he considers that only those who are recognized as professionals are entitled to this copyright and the protection that is coming along with it.
Who is to decide who is going to be a professional artist? And here Keen is absolutely and fanatically clear: professionals are recognized by already recognized professional, hence the establishment and the snake bites its tail, its very long tail indeed. If for a journalist to be professional he has to have a job in one major newspaper, then who chooses these recognized journalists in these recognized major newspapers? Keen does not see the vicious circle.
If a research worker can only be professional if he is a member of a recognized academic institution, then millions of research workers of value are just rejected. Keen does not see that innovation can only come, and I insist CAN ONLY COME, from people who are outside the establishment or marginal in the establishment.
If Mozart had only done what he was asked to do, he could never have produced his most important masterpieces that were rejected by the establishment of his time. Keen forget that the average level of the elite depends on the average level of the masses.
The elite of a slavery system cannot think the full democracy of citizens absolutely equal in rights since for them it is nothing but natural to have unequal beings, some, the minority, having citizen rights and the others, the majority, having no rights at all. Calhoun and his democracy based on the right for the minority (understand the salve-owners) to block any decision of the majority is pathetic but absurd. Plato and Socrates' democratic Republic is a sham because it does not state and envisage the freedom of everyone and equal rights for everyone.
An invention in a society is always the answer to a problem the society can afford to consider. Many problems are not considered by all societies if these problems are beyond the various societies' scopes, hence unthinkable for these societies, and the scope of a society is what a society as a whole and what each member of that society as an average, can imagine, conceive, think, envisage, conceptualize. Maybe Wikipedia is not "scientific" and has to be cross-examined in all the data it provides, yet the Internet is providing everyone today with a possible enormous mass of information and because no one will accept to drown in this information, they will all learn, at times by their own means, to swim, that is to say cross examine the information they get, which should eventually develop the critical power of everyone. And here Keen calls for all kinds of restrictive measures. He is wrong.
Intellectual property will be best defended and enhanced in courts just like private property real estate. He is wrong too because the main responsibility in that field is in the hands of everyone, particularly teachers, professors and other educators. Never ever ever ask a student a factual question any more since they can get the answer in seconds on the Internet. Always, absolutely always ask for arguments, contradictory arguments, pros and cons. Refuse the concept of truth, unique, sole, exclusive and detained by some kind of aristocracy whose minds are in the shape of shielded safes.
Today the priority objective of all education is to teach and teach and teach that there is NO unique truth but only relative points of view that we have to collect and confront. Teaching is confronting points of view. Learning is articulating opposite points of view into sensible and rational presentations that you cannot find fully fledged and finished on the Internet because truth is elusive and no one will ever reach it in any historical time.
Then to make his point all the more un-escapable, Keen mixes up the circulation of data and information, the piracy of some as for music and videos, sexual predators, sexual morality, gambling, etc. Then the pamphlet turns sour. It is the market of social experience that will prove ideas and idea-holders true or false, in fact effective or ineffective. All that produces some added value will be recognized as valuable. The rest will be discarded.
No decision of any well-groomed expert can replace this free circulation and confrontation of multiple points of view.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-3 of 3 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 10 Feb 2008 11:19:21 GMT
Alastair Scott says:
An excellent review. I recommend you read "Flat Earth News" by Nick Davies, which is a good follow-on as it shatters the conceptions Keen and some of the others here have about the "professionalism" of journalists. (I suspect that the situation he describes may be similar, if not as bad, in France).
In reply to an earlier post on 21 Jul 2012 08:03:04 BDT
Quantum Mechanic says:
Have you ever heard of paragraphs?
In reply to an earlier post on 21 Jul 2012 08:43:09 BDT
Last edited by the author on 21 Jul 2012 08:48:53 BDT
Jacques COULARDEAU says:
Time is a human invention with its discrete seconds, minutes, hours. The cosmos only knows duration, continuous duration.
Space is a human invention with its meters, kilometers, or inches, feet, miles. The cosmos only knows distance, unquantified distance only realized in attraction, gravitation.
So you can have paragraphs if you like. Thinking is continuous, even when it makes a pause, and I must say Becckett is having a thinking pause or a pause from thinking as reflected in a pause from talking all the time, every three words or so in "Happy Days". Did the heart stop beating during that pause?
Have a good discontinuous flow of time and distance in your eyes and ears.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›