|
LITERARY COPYRIGHT
LITERARY COPYRIGHT CHARLES DUDLEY WARNER This is the first public meeting of the National Institute of Arts and
Letters. The original members were selected by an invitation from the
American Social Science Association which acted under the power of its
charter from the Congress of the United States. The members thus
selected who joined the Social Science Association were given the
alternative of organizing as an independent institute or as a branch of
the Social Science Association.
At the annual meeting of the Social Science Association on September 4
1899 at Saratoga Springs the members of the Institute voted to organize
independently. They formally adopted the revised constitution which had
been agreed upon at the first meeting in New York in the preceding
January and elected officers as prescribed by the constitution.
The object is declared to be the advancement of art and literature and
the qualification shall be notable achievements in art or letters. The
number of active members will probably be ultimately fixed at one
hundred. The society may elect honorary and associate members without
limit. By the terms of agreement between the American Social Science
Association and the National Institute the members of each are 'ipso
facto' associate members of the other.
It is believed that the advancement of art and literature in this country
will be promoted by the organization of the producers of literature and
art. This is in strict analogy with the action of other professions and
of almost all the industries. No one doubts that literature and art are
or should be leading interests in our civilization and their dignity
will be enhanced in the public estimation by a visible organization of
their representatives who are seriously determined upon raising the
standards by which the work of writers and artists is judged. The
association of persons having this common aim cannot but stimulate
effort soften unworthy rivalry into generous competition and promote
enthusiasm and good fellowship in their work. The mere coming together
to compare views and discuss interests and tendencies and problems which
concern both the workers and the great public cannot fail to be of
benefit to both.
In no other way so well as by association of this sort can be created the
feeling of solidarity in our literature and the recognition of its
power. It is not expected to raise any standard of perfection or in any
way to hamper individual development but a body of concentrated opinion
may raise the standard by promoting healthful and helpful criticism by
discouraging mediocrity and meretricious smartness by keeping alive the
traditions of good literature while it is hospitable to all discoverers
of new worlds. A safe motto for any such society would be Tradition and
Freedom--'Traditio et Libertas'.
It is generally conceded that what literature in America needs at this
moment is honest competent sound criticism. This is not likely to be
attained by sporadic efforts especially in a democracy of letters where
the critics are not always superior to the criticised where the man in
front of the book is not always a better marksman than the man behind the
book. It may not be attained even by an organization of men united upon
certain standards of excellence. I do not like to use the word
authority but it is not unreasonable to suppose that the public will be
influenced by a body devoted to the advancement of art and literature
whose sincerity and discernment it has learned to respect and admission
into whose ranks will I hope be considered a distinction to be sought
for by good work. The fashion of the day is rarely the judgment of
posterity. You will recall what Byron wrote to Coleridge: "I trust you
do not permit yourself to be depressed by the temporary partiality of
what is called 'the public' for the favorites of the moment; all
experience is against the permanency of such impressions. You must have
lived to see many of these pass away and will survive many more."
The chief concern of the National Institute is with the production of
works of art and of literature and with their distribution. In the
remarks following I shall confine myself to the production and
distribution of literature. In the limits of this brief address I can
only in outline speak of certain tendencies and practices which are
affecting this production and this distribution. The interests involved
are first those of the author; second those of the publisher; third
those of the public. As to all good literature the interests of these
three are identical if the relations of the three are on the proper
basis. For the author a good book is of more pecuniary value than a
poor one setting aside the question of fame; to the publisher the right
of publishing a good book is solid capital--an established house in the
long run makes more money on "Standards" than on "Catchpennies"; and to
the public the possession of the best literature is the breath of life
as that of the bad and mediocre is moral and intellectual decadence.
But in practice the interests of the three do not harmonize. The author
even supposing his efforts are stimulated by the highest aspirations for
excellence and not by any commercial instinct is compelled by his
circumstances to get the best price for his production; the publisher
wishes to get the utmost return for his capital and his energy; and the
public wants the best going for the least money.
Consider first the author and I mean the author and not the mere
craftsman who manufactures books for a recognized market. His sole
capital is his talent. His brain may be likened to a mine gold silver
copper iron or tin which looks like silver when new. Whatever it is
the vein of valuable ore is limited in most cases it is slight. When it
is worked out the man is at the end of his resources. Has he expended
or produced capital? I say he has produced it and contributed to the
wealth of the world and that he is as truly entitled to the usufruct of
it as the miner who takes gold or silver out of the earth. For how long?
I will speak of that later on. The copyright of a book is not analogous
to the patent right of an invention which may become of universal
necessity to the world. Nor should the greater share of this usufruct be
absorbed by the manufacturer and publisher of the book. The publisher
has a clear right to guard himself against risks as he has the right of
refusal to assume them. But there is an injustice somewhere when for
many a book valued and even profitable to somebody the author does not
receive the price of a laborer's day wages for the time spent on it--to
say nothing of the long years of its gestation.
The relation between author and publisher ought to be neither complicated
nor peculiar. The author may sell his product outright or he may sell
himself by an agreement similar to that which an employee in a
manufacturing establishment makes with his master to give to the
establishment all his inventions. Either of these methods is fair and
businesslike though it may not be wise. A method that prevailed in the
early years of this century was both fair and wise. The author agreed
that the publisher should have the exclusive right to publish his book
for a certain term or to make and sell a certain number of copies. When
...
|
