Bibliographica – for the collaborative development of bibliographies

Lists, lists and more lists

As someone engaged in research in the humanities I find that I am often making lists of books about particular authors, periods, and themes. A single publication will often appear in more than one list. For example, I may wish to include Frederick Beiser’s The Romantic Imperative in a list of books about Novalis, a list of books about Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel, a list about the Early German Romantics, a list of books about German philosophy to be recommended to a non-specialist reader, and so on.

It is not only individual researchers who make such lists. Those who teach often create and update lists of publications for their students. Large bibliographic indexes, such as the subscription-based Philosopher’s Index, are useful references for those looking into what has been published on a given topic. Books, articles and personal websites contain lists of related or recommended publications. These can be alphabetical, or organised by subject or author. They can be annotated with comments and summaries or left alone. They can be actively curated or printed and never revisited.

Though they may be easy to overlook, lists of publications are an absolutely critical part of scholarship. They articulate the contours of a body of knowledge, and define the scope and focus of scholarly enquiry in a given domain. Furthermore such lists are always changing. Books and articles are published and translated all the time. Works fall in and out of fashion. ‘Secondary’ reference works can become obsolete – considered interesting more for what they say about a particular intellectual period than what they say about their subject matter. (As an aside: I always wanted to scan and compare reading lists from the Cambridge Philosophy Faculty Library for as far back as they exist – to get a sense of the changing zeitgeist at an influential department. Lists of publications are presumably an invaluable resource for intellectual historians!)

On beyond paper: from books to bits

Until recently bibliographies had to be compiled and printed in physical dead-tree volumes. This limited not only how often the bibliographies could be updated, but also how the items contained within them were organised. Items would have to be placed in a definite sequence, perhaps according to some rigid taxonomy. At best dead-tree bibliographies may skew the selection, presentation and ordering of works according to one of many possible interpretations of a body of scholarship. At worst they may shoehorn individual works into an arbitrary scheme so they fit the expectations and contrivances of the bibliographer. For example, for the sake of taxonomical integrity Johann Georg Hamann is classified by Jules Michelet, a nineteenth century historian, as an example of Glaubensphilosophie, a term which became popular many decades after the former’s death and which Hamann and those who knew him almost certainly wouldn’t apply to his work!

In the last few decades we have moved beyond print bibliographies and card catalogues to more fine-grained and (sometimes) more sophisticated bit-based systems. These allow lists of publications to be sorted, searched and queried in all kinds of interesting ways, and to be annotated and updated on-the-fly. For example, websites like Library Thing and Amazon allow people to create arbitrary lists of books – as well as to rate and comment on books. Software packages and services like Mendeley and Zotero allow people to manage and share collections of links, documents and sources. We are seeing the emergence of new kinds of technologies that transform the way we work with lists. One thing that the web currently seems to be very good at is allowing people to create and curate various kinds of lists – from lists of links to lists of encyclopedia topics. Lists can easily be kept near-comprehensive (but – and this is a virtue – never quite complete), very up to date, and do not have to be shoehorned into any particular pre-determined structure, unlike their paper counterparts. Diderot would have been jealous!

A case study: the genealogy of stories

Recently I was talking with my dad about his new research centre, the Sussex Centre for Folklore, Fairy Tales and Fantasy. A little while ago I proposed that a useful output of the centre could be a large multilingual, collaboratively edited bibliography (or bibliographic database) of publications related to folk tales, fairy tales and fantasy. Naturally one that would make the likes of Herder, Brentano, Arnim, and the Grimms proud! This would include:

  • primary sources for fairy tales in different countries (e.g. Giambattista Basile, the Brother’s Grimm, Charles Perrault, …)
  • secondary commentaries (e.g. Vladimir Propp, Jack Zipes, …)
  • new literary tales and new reworkings of old tales (e.g. Ludwig Tieck, E.T.A Hoffman, George MacDonald, Italo Calvino, …)

Ideally the database would be able to give answers to questions like:

  • What has been published about Giambattista Basile in German in the last 20 years?
  • Which Italian folktales and fairy tales have been translated into Norwegian?
  • What was published about Charles Perrault in English between 1850 and 1900?

Among other things it could be useful as a scholarly tool to compare translations, reworking and editions of particular tales – as well as as the basis for serious source criticism and comparative scholarship, looking at the transmission and influence of different tales across different regions.

I’ve been looking around to see whether there’s anything which fits the bill, but have been unable to find anything that seems quite right (if you know of anything please let me know!). Meanwhile, I’ve put together a preliminary specification for an open source web service tentatively dubbed ‘Bibliographica’ to scratch the itch. So far I’ve used the Sussex Centre project and examples from my own research to illustrate the project, but the idea would be to create something generic which could be used in lots of different domains – not just for philosophy or folktales!

Library

Bibliographica: what lovely features you have

Overview

A list of desirable features (in no particular order):

  • Free, open source and easy for for anyone to set up their own branded instance of the service at their own domain name (e.g. biblio.york.ac.uk or books.example.com)
  • Easy to import and export data in a variety of common formats (including from existing online sources of open bibliographic data such as the Open Library)
  • Fully versioned so that all changes to the bibliography can be tracked and, if necessary, reversed
  • Allows different read/edit permissions to be assigned to different users and groups (e.g. individual researchers, research groups, …)
  • Allows users to easily create their own lists of publications (e.g. for a taught course, for an article, book or thesis, …)
  • Allows users to easily create new ‘record’ for a publication
  • Allows users to search, sort and query records by author, title, subject matter, language, country/region of origin, date of publication, date of subject matter, and so on
  • Uses existing technologies such as OpenID
  • Support for arbitrary, user-generated tags of authors and works
  • Well documented API
  • Allows users to see which works are in the public domain in their jurisdiction (using a series of public domain calculators)
  • Allows users to find digital copies of works which have fallen into the public domain – as well as links to online journal archives, library catalogues and so on

Data elements/model

This would be, to the greatest extent possible, based on and compatible with existing bibliographic data standards including MARC, FRBR and Dublin Core. Below are some rough ideas for fields that might be included. Any and all suggestions welcome in the comments below, or via email! This is intended to be a work in progress…

Author:

  • ID
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Date of Birth
  • Date of Death
  • Place of Birth
  • Place of Death
  • Area(s) lived in
  • Country(/ies) associated with
  • Which users/groups can edit (optional)

Work:

  • ID
  • Title
  • Author
  • Language
  • Date of Publication
  • Country/region of origin
  • Country/region of subject matter
  • Which users/groups can edit (optional)
  • Author(s) it is about
  • Subject matter (perhaps based on Library of Congress Subject Headings)
  • Medium/type of work (book, article, audio recording, film, …)
  • URL (if relevant)

List:

  • ID
  • Works in list
  • Title
  • Description
  • Comment/annotation associated with a given work in the list
  • Which users/groups can edit (optional)

User:

  • ID
  • User name
  • Contact details
  • Description (bio, links, …)
  • Authors edited
  • Works edited
  • Lists edited

Group:

  • ID
  • Users
  • Title
  • Description
Posted in bibliography, fairytales, ideas, philosophy, projects | 9 Comments

Leibniz’s Funny Thought

Last night I went to the 25th annual Long Night of Museums in Berlin, where over 125 museums, galleries and archives are open until the early hours of the morning for live music, films and talks.

Lustgarten during the Long Night of Museums

As well as some Javanese gong music and a rendition of Philip Glass’s Dance 2 in the Berliner Dom, I went to an exhibition in the Altes Museum about a new cultural institution which will be housed in the reconstructed Berlin City Palace.

The Humboldt Forum exhibition, which opened last month, presents the vision for the forum from its three main users: the Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin, the Humboldt Universität zu Berlin and the Zentral- und Landesbibliothek Berlin.

Humboldt Forum exhibition

The exhibition cites three historical examples as influences on the new Forum:

The conception of the Humboldt-Forum is informed by three historical examples:

  • The concept of a knowledge theatre as conceived by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz with regard to the Kunstkammer of the Berlin Palace is fundamental. For Leibniz, this collection, which marked the origin of Berlin’s museums, was a site that unified universally oriented collecting and research, exhibition and spectacle.

  • The second conceptual foundation of this unique project is constituted by the ideas of the Humboldt brothers: Their enlightening gaze at the cultures of the world as well as Wilhelm’s notions on education and museum-related politics.

  • Finally, recollections of the rich tradition of ethnological collecting in 19th century Berlin that culminated in the establishing of the Royal Museum for Ethnology by Adolf Bastian in 1873 refer to the collection history of the material that will constitute a large portion of the exhibits in the newly constructed City Palace.

The first of these, Leibniz’s idea for a ‘new sort of exhibition’ is laid out in a short piece from 1695 called Drôle de Pensée, or ‘a funny thought’, which was written after he saw a machine which ‘walked on water’ at an exhibition in Paris.

He says the exhibition would be a big undertaking, requiring significant capital and the assistance of ‘painters, sculptors, carpenters, watchmakers, [...] mathematicians, engineers, architects, boat builders, fools, musicians, poets, bookbinders, typographers, engravers and others’, coordinated by two or three highly inventive directors.

He then launches into a long and fragmentary list of weird and wonderful attractions that could feature at the exhibition:

  • des Lanternes Magiques (magic lanterns)
  • des vols (flights)
  • des meteores contrefaites (artificial meteors)
  • toutes sortes de merveilles optiques (all sorts of optical marvels)
  • une representation du ciel et des astres (a representation of the sky and stars)
  • cometes (comets)
  • Globe comme de Gottorp ou Jena (a Gottorf globe)
  • feux d’artifices (fireworks)
  • jets d’eau (fountains)
  • vaisseaux d’estrange forme (vessels of strange shapes)
  • Mandragores et autres plantes rares (mandrakes and other rare plants)
  • Animaux extraordinaires et rares (extraordinary and rare animals)
  • Cercle Royal (royal circle)
  • Figures d’animaux (figures of animals)
  • Machine Royale de course de chevaux artificiels (royal machine with artificial horses racing)
  • Prix pour tirer (archery prizes)
  • Representations des actions de guerre (recreations of actions of war)
  • Fortifications faites, elevées, de bois, sur le theatre, tranchée ouverte, etc. (elevated fortifications made of wood, cut open, etc.)
  • Guerre contrefaite (artificial war)
  • Exercice d’infanterie de Martinet (infantry exercises of Martinet)
  • Exercice de cavalerie (cavalry excercises)
  • Bataille navale en petit sur un canal (small naval battles on the canal)
  • Concerts extraordinaires (extraordinary concerts)
  • Instrumens rares de Musique (rare musical instruments)
  • Trompettes parlantes (talking trumpets)
  • Chasse (hunting)
  • Lustres, et pierreries contrefaites (chadeliers and artificial gems)
  • Theatre de la nature et de l’art (theatre of nature and art)

Humboldt Forum exhibition

  • Luter (lute)
  • Nager (swimming)
  • Danseur de cordes extraordinaires (extraordinary rope dancer)
  • Saut[s] perilleux (perilous somersaults)
  • Faire voir, qu’un enfant leve un grand poids avec un fil (seeing a child lifts a great weight with a piece of string)
  • Theatre Anatomique (anatomical theatre)
  • Jardin des simples (medicinal garden)
  • Laboratoire (laboratory)
  • des petites machines de nombres (little number machines)
  • tableaux, medailles, bibliotheque (pictures, medals, a library)
  • Nouvelles experience d’eaux, air, vuide (new experiments with water, air, vacuums)
  • la machine de Mons. Guericke de 24 chevaux (Guericke’s machine with 24 horses)
  • l’operation de transfusion, et infusion (operations of transfusion and infusion)
  • Item pour congé on donneroit aux spectateurs, le temps qu’il fera le lendemain, s’il pleuvra ou non ; par le moyen du petit homme. Cabinet du pere Kircher. (Item for visiting spectators who would be told the weather the next day – whether or not it was raining – by a small man. Office of father Kircher)
  • l’homme qui mange du feu etc. s’il est encor en vie (the man who breathes fire, etc. if he is still alive)
  • la lune par un telescope aussi bien que d’autres astres (the moon and astral bodies by telescope)
  • un beuveur d’eau (a water drinker)
  • des machines, qui jetteroient juste, sur un point donné (machines which project things at a given point)
  • Des representations des muscles, nerfs, os, item machine representant le corps humain (representations of the muscles, nerves, bones, a machine representing the human body)
  • Insectes de Mons. Schwammerdam, Goedartius, Jungius. (insects belonging to Schwammerdam, Goedartius, Jungius.)
  • Myrmecoleon (an ant-lion)
  • Disputes plaisantes et colloques (funny and colloquial disputes)
  • des chambres obscures (a camera obscura)

Humboldt Forum exhibition

  • Peintures qui ne se voyent que d’un costé de certaine maniere, et d’un autre de toute autre (paintings which show one thing from a certain angle, and from another angle something different)
  • Rejouissances publiques (public celebrations)
  • Des grotesques peintes sur du papier huylé et des lampes dedans (grotesque pictures on oiled paper with a lamp inside)
  • Ballets de chevaux (ballet of horses)
  • Machine des arts (artificial machines)
  • Force du miroir ardent (force of a burning mirror)
  • Feu Gregeois de Callinicus (liquid fire)
  • Jeu d’Echec nouveau d’hommes sur un theatre. Comme dans Harsdorffer (game of chess, young men on a stage, like in Harsdorffer)
  • Auffzüge à la mode d’Allemagne (procession in the German style)
  • d’autres especes de jeux en grand (other kinds of great games)
  • une comedie entiere des jeux plaisans de toutes sortes de pays (an entire comedy of fun games from all different places)
  • une nouvelle espece de jeu utile (a new kind of useful game)
  • Comedies des metiers; une pour chaque metier, qui representeroit leur adresses, fourberies, plaisanteries, chef d’oeuvres, loix et modes particulieres ridicules (comedies of different occupations, showing the aims, deceptions, amusements, main works, laws and ridiculous peculiarities of each one)
  • Dragons volans de feu, etc. (fire breathing dragons etc.)
  • Moulins a tout vent. Vaisseaux qui iroient contre le vent (windmills, ships that can sail against the wind)
  • Instruments qui joueroient eux mêmes (instruments that play themselves)
  • Carillons etc. (carillons)
  • Machine de Hauz d’une cavalerie et infanterie contrefaite, qui se bat (the machine of Hauz of an artificial cavalry and infantry which is fighting)
  • L’experience de casser un verre en criant (the experiment of breaking glass by shouting)

Humboldt Forum exhibition

The piece goes on to describe the potential value of the proposed exhibition – saying it would stimulate and instruct people with beautiful and amazing sights. It would become a clearing house for all inventions and a theatre for all things that can be imagined (un theatre de toutes les choses imaginables). People would be awed and inspired, and the whole enterprise would have ‘good and important’ consequences.

He then returns to the detail of the exhibition, suggesting it could be spread out across a city or in different rooms in a palace before going on to discuss mirrors and pipes, dancing, pygmy ballets, fountains, lakes, sea battles, marionettes, shadows, somersaults, apparitions, small figures, and so on – all accompanied by music and singing. If its anything like Leibniz’s vision the new Berlin palace sounds like it will be incredible.

Humboldt Forum exhibition

For more see:

Posted in events, intellectualhistory, leibniz, philosophy | 2 Comments

The Construction of Immateriality

The International Society for the History and Theory of Intellectual Property (ISHTIP) was launched last year at the conference for copyrighthistory.org, a digital archive of primary sources on copyright. In addition to the history of copyright, patents and other rights, the society aims to examine:

[...] the diverse “roads not taken” in the evolution of these legal structures; of contemporary countertrends; and of the laws and norms that have been devised in non European cultures around the world to manage intellectual production and exchange.

The first annual workshop took place on 26-27 June 2009 at Bocconi University, Milan. The theme for the event was “The Construction of Immateriality: Practices of Appropriation and the Genealogy of Intellectual Property”:

This workshop will explore the making of “intellectual property”, understood broadly as the myriad legal and non-legal processes by which individuals and groups are credited with, and rewarded for, the authorship of intangible creations, while others are condemned or penalised for using or claiming such creations as their own.

While most contemporary discussion focuses on the legal regimes of copyright, patent and trade mark (and corresponding legal wrongs of piracy and counterfeiting), the premise of this workshop is that these constitute only some of the many ways in which ‘creations’ are identified, and entitlements relating to such creations are recognised or generated. For example, groups from chefs to magicians regulate the creative activities of their members through bodies of customs and less formalised norms, while other institutions and groups (from universities, to the Church and to medical associations) offer their own systems of sanctions against those who are considered to have made use of intangible material in an ‘inappropriate’ manner. Equally, specific traditions have developed for attributing authorship of publications and inventions amongst scientific researchers, while astronomers, meteorologists and botanists confer rights to name particular phenomena on those who are viewed as having ‘discovered’ them.

What is the source of these diverse mechanisms? How is it that some intellectual artefacts have come to be identified, abstracted from their material reality, mapped and their authorship attributed to particular individuals or groups whereas others circulate socially without such attribution? To what extent are the processes by which ideas and information are transformed into discrete ontological entities historically specific? What, precisely, are the social and other conditions that render such processes possible? Why have different intangible artefacts been treated in different ways? And how have they operated historically to facilitate, or impede, intellectual production and exchange? How have legal and non-legal “intellectual properties” interacted? To what extent can the shape of contemporary legal intellectual properties be explained by reference to social norms (either as pre-cursors to formal laws, or as alternatives to and limitations upon such laws)?

By focusing on the heterogeneous roots of our present intellectual property regime the workshop aims to foster richer contextualization of this regime than can be provided by legal history working alone. To this end it will assemble scholars from across the disciplines – from anthropology, economic and business history, the history of science, literary and cultural history, as well as from legal history and theory.

The programme contains links to abstracts and full versions of many of the papers.

Overall it was an enjoyable and truly multidisciplinary event – with a rich mix of input from lawyers, economists, historians, social scientists, and others.

Conference notes

Following are some partial, impressionistic notes from the conference. If you spot anything that you think should be amended, please get in touch!

Gustavo Ghidini (Università degli Studi di Milano), Introductory remarks

  • Welcome to ISHTIP. Aim is to support scholarly investigation not only into established national and international regimes but also into possible future regimes. To look at norms and practices across different cultures. To examine the past, present and future of intellectual property.

Michael Birnhack (Tel Aviv University), Copyright in Mandate Palestine: Nationality and Authorship

  • Scope: Jewish Yishuv. History of Israeli copyright law.
  • Timeline of major historical events:
    • 1917 British takeover. Military administration.
    • Then in 1920 a civil administration.
    • 1922 Mandate.
    • 1948 Israel.
  • Timeline of events of direct relevance to copyright:
    • 1910 Ottoman Authors’ Rights Act.
    • 1920 British Copyright Ordinance.
    • 1922 same legal framework, instructed to turn to English Law and Common Law.
    • 1924 Act of 1911 + Ordinance.
    • 1930 first copyright case: PRS v. Zion Theatre.
    • 1932 Telegraphic Agency Case.
    • 1933 PRS v Grand Cafe.
    • Mid 1930s – establishment of radio.
    • 1937 first case between Jews Margolin v Schocken.
  • Why was there a gap between first act (1910) and first case (1930)?
  • Few lawyers. Train in Turkey, Jerusalem, Germany.
  • Law schools. Jerusalem Law Classes: British, practical. Didn’t teach any IP until 1940s. Law & Economics, Tel Aviv: didn’t teach copyright until 1940s. Libraries did not have current editions. Copyright literature: Russian, Jewish. Popular press about copyright: foreign stories. Hence one explanation of why late to bloom.
  • Cultural field. Only in 1920s was there a change. Authors and publishers immigrate in 1920s. 1921, 1926: Authors’ Association. Growth of reading audience. Yiddish was fought against – considered old. Hebrew – language and culture.
  • Image of the author. Authors were narrators of story of Zionism. Self comparison with Halutz. Admired new Hebrew Zionists. Intellectual pioneers. Author as part of the collective. Collective before the individual. Also romantic notions of authors as poor, hungry, wants to be heard. Authors were well organised.
  • 1910 Ottoman Act. Limited in scope. Life + 30. Formalities. No moral rights. Infringement was criminal matter.
  • 1920 Copyright Ordinance. Photographs, records. Life + 50. No formalities.
  • 1911 Act. Published only in 1934. Did not go unnoticed that it was not published. Petitioned for publication but denied as it was ‘too sophisticated’. Berne compatible.
  • 1924 Copyright Ordinance: criminal aspects.
  • Foreign transactions. Book published in Germany. Author, publisher immigrated. Infringement in Palestine.
  • Foreign infringements. Translated and printed abroad. Copyright relations with US only established in 1933.
  • Author publisher relationship. Moral rights.
  • Authors (late 1920s). Public assertion of moral rights. Shaming the infinger (publisher, theatre). This was effective. Publishing notes in newspapers declaring infringement. Public apologies.
  • Publishers. Announcing ownership. We have bought rights of X, and are working on a translation. Warning other publishers.
  • Lessons. Foreign law imposed but not used until early 1930s. Foreign players used the law. First cases were from London. Technology triggers the law. Establishment of the radio. The British did profound and detailed work before they established radio. Allocating time to the minute. Concerned about copyright issues. Placed radios in public places. This counts as performance. Lots of correspondence with BBC and UK Government. On the one hand the British thought that Jews were organised more like Europeans and that their music was like European music. Based on PRS model. On the hand they thought that the Arabs were less well educated, that their music was popular and hence there was no copyright there.
  • Image of the author. Romantic with national undertones.
  • Overtones of Orientalist approach towards Ottomans and towards Arabs.

Questions

  • Q: Two questions.
    • (i) Question about globalisation. British law wasn’t applied for 20 years or more. Wasn’t considered important?
    • (ii) Moral rights. Romantic author. Connection between moral rights and notion of romantic author.
  • A: Re: (ii) some authors did care about integrity and attribution. Asserted rights. Strong sense of being part of the collective, but inferior to real pioneers. Speculative response is that many came from Central and Eastern Europe. Not sure what copyright attribution practices would have been. Re: (i) because copyright was not used by industries. People copied all over the place. Everybody infringed everything all the time.
  • Q (Lionel Bently – LB): Romantic notion of the author. Translation into Hebrew from Eastern European languages. Author had role in relation to building of nation. Translator as author.
  • A: Reading audience was not large enough in 1910s for authors to make a living. Zionist agency initiated translation project. Training people to read in Hebrew (which served nationalist agenda). Translating in Hebrew – even though not originally in Hebrew. Getting material in Hebrew and a job for authors. Translated classic texts from French, German, Hungarian, etc. into Hebrew. Translators played an important role in Ottoman Law.
  • Q (LB): Complex relation between nationhood and authorship. Simplification of notion of authorship.
  • A: Literature on authorship has given more attention to romanticism than to nationalism. National identity might be relevant to the cultural construction of the author.
  • Q (Eva Hemmungs Wirtén – EHW): 1911 Act contained lots of mistakes. Could you expand on that?
  • A: The Act’s translator’s theory of translation. Sometimes it should be literal, sometimes should be interpretative. Translated ‘to reproduce’ as ‘to perform’. Translated ‘to engrave’ as ‘to tattoo’.
  • Q: (Martin Kretschmer – MK) Could you say more about norms?
  • A: Did have copyright practices. Norms. Contracts going on. 10% rule. How much. In terms percentage. Did not discuss ownership, new editions or new forms of technology. Contracts were very simple. You may translate, reproduce, etc. 10%.

Friedeman Kawohl (Bournemouth University), Copyright History as a Means to Justify Current Positions on Copyright Politics

  • Stepping back to 19th century.
  • Dispute between publishers and librarians on subject of double prints. Double prints are nearly identical but with extremely minor variations (typography, etc.).
  • Librarians claimed that publishers had produced double prints to concel number of copies from authors.
  • Auflagen (impressions) and Ausgaben (editions). According to Milchsack, the difference between impression and edition was ficticious.
  • Reset. Not photo based reproduction (which didn’t happen until 1870s).
  • Voigtländer. Publishing firm later became Springer. (One of biggest journal publishers today.)
  • Booksellers expected to return unsold copies or pay for them. List of booksellers who defaulted. Mechanism for reminding booksellers.
  • Voigtländer created book on copyright legislation and sample publishing contracts. Big hit with publishers.
  • Voigtländer’s copyright agenda. He thought copyright law was biased towards authors and against publishers.
  • Voigtländer described four different modes of cooperation between authors and publishers.
    • (a) Author offers work without suggestion by publisher.
    • (b) Author acts on general suggestion.
    • (c) Publisher commissions author for a project. Author works within general framework.
    • (d) Acquires cooperation for a commercial book project (e.g. translation, etc).
  • He argued that law focused on (a) and (b) but not enough on (c) and (d).
  • Copyright in newspaper/encyclopedia consists of copyright of parts, not whole.
  • Voigtländer interested in copyright history. Particularly interested in Prussian Statue Book of 1794. History as something to be proud of and to learn from. Righteous publishers had overcome pirates. Basic rules to ban pirating had been agreed upon by publishers. Saw later legislation as reinforcement of their rules.
  • Voigtländer published multivolume history of booktrade. Founded a journal on the same topic.
  • Milchsack was an important librarian. Milchsack covers problem of double print. Question arises whether later book is later impression or later edition. Argued that many books said they were later impressions, but were really later editions. Authors reserved right to be remunerated for subsequent editions. Publishers created new editions, but did not let authors know.
  • E.g. Tacitus edition. Two versions. Imprint is similar. One says first impression, the other says second impression – both say 1801. Says they are in fact two editions. Two volume work of over 1000 pages is unlikely to be printed in one year. Identifies small deviations is typesetting. When new impression is made the author keeps the type set (prototype?). Many old mistakes were corrected and new mistakes arose. Börsenverein not pleased by this.
  • If a new unmodified print is undertaken this is an impression. If it is reprinted from scratch, this constitutes a new edition. If new contract does not explictly specify number of impression – then publisher may reprint without permission. If contract does specify, then publisher must seek permission. Few authors had bargaining power to cap number of impressions.
  • Börsenverein publication on rights of authors and publishers.
  • Voigtländer said double prints were legitimate within the business practices of the time. Alluded to Prussian Statute book. Milchsack said distinction between impression and edition had no meaning prior to Prussian Statute book – hence was excuse for publishers.
  • 1898 Voigtländer writes he hopes that publishers who commission works will be taken account of. Nicholai exerts influence on legislation. Played trump card – acquaintance with editors of law books.

Questions

  • Martin Kretschmer: Contextual comment. 100 years after Prussian Statute Book. First case of regulating contracts directly. Can’t publish new edition without contract with author. Reconstruction of this paragraph was subject to much debate.
  • Q: Origins of Prussian law. Revisionary right. Idea of Statute of Anne. Had that filtered through?
  • A: Not that I’m aware of.
  • Q: Is there German copyright law that predates printing?
  • A: Didn’t find anything.
  • Q: Relationship between copyright history and copyright activists. This episode is a wonderful example. Any contemporary cases?
  • A: I’d like to ask the audience for their views. Academics biased towards authors. Media biased towards publishers.

Jaime Stapleton (Birkbeck College, University of London), The Immaterial Image: Creative, Legal and Economic Theory 1435-1607

  • Part I: rereading of history of privileges in Venice
  • Pre-history of copyright?
  • Internal and external demand.
  • Printing not controlled by guild until 20 years after printing. Equilibrium model. Limiting level of labour meet demand. Guild ensures control of level of labour. How do you suck in enough labour to satisfy external demand? Disequilimbrium model.
  • How do you increase volume of trade rather than limit supply of labour?
  • Massive external demand. Want to increase volume of trade, not limit supply of labour. More trade means more revenue through taxation for the government.
  • There are some craft guilds which have large export markets (non-equilibrium market). Reason guild structure applied to them was that printing was an imported industry. Historical reason for there to be guilds.
  • How printing privileges are used.
  • 1492 opening up of printing. Often portrayed as a landgrab. Assets which are desirable. More complex than that.
  • Main regulatory issue is to increase volume of trade. Pre-existing system of granting privileges. Way of limiting competition. By not having a guild you do not limit supply.
  • Market for prints. Market based on commission, and market based based on speculation.
  • Regulatory problem – how do you increase supply of labour, machinery, etc. and prevent competition ruining the industry.
  • Protect stock, protect images. Purposes not a landgrab so much as remedial action for situation where prices are collapsing.
  • 1474 Statute on Industrial Brevets. Said by some (perhaps dubiously) to be origin of patent law.
  • Encourage diverse publications. Different kinds of publications. Not everyone printing the bible.
  • People writing patents are not idiots, they are fairly sophisticated in their economic comprehension.
  • 1496 De Spira Privileges.
  • 1517 Decree of Press Affairs. Going to revoke all previous privileges. Way its traditionally read is abuse of previous privileges. Why then would they bring them back again? When you see it as an attempt to divide price competition from innovation competition. (Cf. Schumpeter on price competition and innovation competition.) Competetive on price for some works and promotion of diversification on other works (not new works, but previously unpublished works). No point in doing this in modern terms. Works when industry is very big, and external market is very big.
  • Not remedy for abuse of privileges, as sets up another set of privileges.
  • Different system. Limit of supply. (Similar to limit of supply of content on the internet – which has ISPs worried.)
  • Further reforms 1534 & 1537.
  • 1545 – decree on author printer relations
  • 1549 decree establishing the venetian guild of printers and booksellers
  • 1567 decree (of 1549) enacted
  • 1603 guild copyrights
  • Paul David (economic historian) wrote interesting account of this. Says of 1445 decree on author printer relations prompted by continued unauthorised printing of works for which copyright had been granted.
  • But this is not what text of decree actually says. Dispute between particular well-placed and anonymous author. Work has been taken and printed without permission. Argument not between printers (regarding pirate and authorised texts).
  • Attempting to bring diversification into the market. Insufficient supply. Printers are sitting on privileges and not printing. Printers are leaving the city as there isn’t enough stuff to print. No printing unless there is a letter from the author to the printer authorising.
  • Why form a guild? After 80 years of experiments with free market and various levels of control, regulation. Possibly related to censorship? Difficult to find authors? But there is a 17 year gap before it is enacted. Rather guess that there is a rise in printing around Europe. Levers don’t work. Nobody was sure that it was going to work. (Cf. Elizabeth Armstrong’s book – which is an interesting source.)
  • Copyright historians ask – why start medieval guild in 1603? One reason is guild has right to control imports.
  • Section II
    • 1492 Pietro Francesco de Ravenna Privilege
    • (Bernardino Banalio privileges 1500-1529)
    • 1500 Anton Kolb Privilege
    • 1504 Benedetto Bordon
    • 1506 Durer v Marcantonio Raimondi (dispute)
    • 1514 Zuan da Brexa (da Porexa) Privilege (‘right of justice’ arising from dispute)
    • 1516 Ugo da Carpi Privilege
    • 1566 Titian Privilege (in expeption of dispute)
  • Rhetoric: Memory, invention and arrangement
  • Older translations of 1474 law say that Venice has within it men who ‘imagine and discover’. ‘Excogitate’. Very important for art.
  • German scene. No privileges or guilds. Cut throat competition.
  • Images are not marginal to the system. Have the idea that author is at the centre – but images were very important too.
  • Dürer comes to Venice to complain about reproductions of his work. Unfortunately no documents remain.
  • Case of Zuan da Brexa’s Privilege. Asks for privilege to continue to print series.
  • Titian Privilege. People who copy use little effort and might damage name of the author.
  • Where does this notion of right develop? In 1474 – mentions words ‘discover and excogitate’.
  • Important works:
    • Aristotle, Art of Rhetoric
    • Cicero, De Oratore & De Inventione
    • Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate
    • Leon Battista Alberti, De Pictura (1435)
    • Giogio Vasari, The Lives
    • Federico Zuccaro, L’idea de pittori, scultori, e architetti (1607)
  • Aquinas – discussion of deduction and induction. Drawing on Plato and Aristotle. Innate idea. Also product of your experience of the world. People can have great ideas, even though there is only one great idea in God. Architect must think out form of house before they build it. By means of excogitated form that you build up in your head. Through this process you can form your own quidities (or essences). Composition and division made way into medieval language theories. Fallacy of composition = induction. Fallacy of division = deduction.
  • Forensic rhetoric – rhetoric taught to lawyers. Practically all the training there is. Hence importance of the manual.
  • Process of discovering facts which can be arranged in an argument.
  • Observation and arrangements are induction. Ideas related to deduction are given from God.
  • Invention means discovery.
  • Invention in modern sense comes from Francis Bacon in 1605. To him invention is discovering new facts, rather than those already in the mind.
  • Alberti talks about induction. There is no model of beauty in nature that is really perfect. Artist must take a hand from here, an idea from here, and create ideal beauty. Beauty from deduction.
  • Hands are words, sentences are arms, etc.
  • Giorgio Vasari. Notion of creative labour established by Alberti. By time Vasari comes along in mid 16th century.
  • Two forms of labour. A priori mental labour. Not idea given by divine right of God, nor a neo-Platonic idea. (In reformation need to re-theologise practical ideas of induction.)
  • Two artists who exemplified theory in Alberti’s text are Piero della Francesco and Mantua Andrea Mantegna.
  • Mantua Andrea Mantegna. Complaint to Ludovico – who commissioned Mantegna.
  • Composition is something can be owned. Notion of invention and arrangement.
  • “… as communal things are the property of all, and each may use them freely, possessing a part of them as the wealth of the republic, yet no one may become their absolute master except the Prince himself; in the same way we may say that, since the intellect and the senses are subjects to Design and concept, Design, as their Prince, ruler and governor, uses them as his property” (Federico Zuccaro)

Questions

  • Q: Legal and economic approach. Not sensitive enough to which value is attached. Talking about reproductions, copies and so on. Mantegna is a court painter. Produces things which are not movable. Need to have permission to go to court, need to know people. Not talking about piracy, not copying DVDs. No erosion of original. Medals are another way of achieving same goal. What we are dealing with is not debate over piracy. Debate about control of quality. Not trying to make money. Trying to produce his fame. Sometimes in these early issues we are not talking about property we are talking about proprietry (as Mark Rose discusses).
  • A: There are problems with quality. Issue about copying is important. Argument between Dürer and Marcantonio. Images are ones that Durer took and secured privileges – not ones he created. About ‘AD’ logo, not about property.
  • Q: Two questions
    • (i) Problem with interpretation of guilds as regulating labour. They had many other functions – quality and so on. Some guilds take 50, 60, 70 years to be created. You need a certain number of people.
    • (ii) People presenting legislation. Often overlooked. People who present law are trained humanists. Venice was run by nobles with different agendas.
  • A: (ii) In the full version of the paper there is a lot on the humanists. (i) What you say about guilds is very interesting. Economic historians view of guilds. Views in “Guilds and civil society” and of Karl Polyani. Enough people to develop a guild. Arguments related to knowledge transfer. More subtlety in full text. By and large agree with both comments.

Martin Kretschmer and Sukhpreet Singh (Bournemouth University), The Paradox of Television Formats: Why pay for of something that is free?

  • Background. Part of grant. Useful for industry.
  • Website: http://tvformats.bournemouth.ac.uk
  • What is a format? Structure of program. Music, competitions, … Video on various understandings of formats.
  • Format type disputes. Later we will see how certain plots and dance routines are subject to legal protection.
  • Top Global Formats. Who Wants to Be a Millionaire (Celador) is top.
  • TV Formats Disputes Database. 59 disputes from various jurisdictions.
  • Fields: ID, year, issue, jurisdiction, claimant, defendant, grounds of dispute, actual legal action (Y/N), judgement, remarks/comments.
  • Sometimes settle out of court and hence we do not know what happened.
  • Methodological issues. Absurd to do empirical research – as we do not know what effect ruling has on these issues. Precedent.
  • Format disputes per year. Reported in trade press.
  • Today information flow is much more regulated.
  • Type of format disputes (nature of claim). 80% copyright infringement. 8% breach of confidence. 5% contract. 2% passing off. 5% other. E.g. ‘inappropriate boxing procedure’ claim in US.
  • Copyright infringement was upheld in 12% of cases. 37% rules in court. 50%/50% rulings in favour of claimants and defendants.
  • Used this data for semi-structured initerviews at trade fairs.
  • Patterns leading to stategies.
  • Importance of brand. Same format, logo, set design, music, … One of benefits of strong brands is opportunities for merchandise.
  • Identified 14 patterns.
  • Model of TV format exploitation and protection. (Given absence of protection.)
  • Formalising & transacting know-how. Confidentiality/non-disclosure agreements. Production Bibles. Production elements. Flying procucer systems.
  • Brand management. Trade marks. Pre-localisation. Localisation. Innovating and extending the brand.
  • Social & distribution networks. Trade fairs. Local production base/affiliate offices. Speed to market. Meditation (E.g. FRAPA).
  • Intelligence gathering. In house legal expertise (dubious legal letters).
  • To what theories does it make a contribution? Social norms. E.g. magicians.
  • Unclear what a social norm is. Etiquette norms. Religious norms. Throw them all together and call them ‘social norms’? May be unproductive.
  • Material has many potential applications. Many possibilities. Not decided what to do with it yet!

Questions

  • Q: Where is the author in your research? Role of organisations like format Author Association?
  • A: Registration mechanism for formats. Agreement that none use other members’ formats. Not a success. Speed is important. Infrastructure to deploy quickly. FRAPA. Lots members, lots not, lots can’t be part of FRAPA. FRAPA had a bad reputation. BBC are not part of FRAPA. BBC said they did not want prescriptive solutions. In industry’s interest not to be formalised. Want semblance of IP rights without too much regulatory intervention. Want rhetoric of IP rights.
  • Q: What happens in absence of clear legislation is that large players are favoured. Insufficient regulation has caused lack of diversity.
  • A: Both seem to be reasonable points. It seems to be historically that if you leave things unregulated then there is movement towards cartels or bullying by the big players. Formats work as insurance. Big players are able to make them successful because of strategies such as those we’ve described. Because of nature of product. Smaller players can’t compete.

Emanuela Arezzo (Luiss Guido Carli, Roma), Towards a New Definition of Technology and towards a Broader Definition of the Term Invention?

  • Term ‘invention’. Substitute term ‘invention’ with ‘product’ or ‘process’. Too strict to cover future technology. List of things which cannot be considered to be inventions.
  • Hard to find criteria to cover subject matter for Article 52. To be comprehensive.
  • Sense of what is technical from German jurisprudence. Invention is technical when it uses natural forces to produce an alteration in something. Roman law. Taking raw material he does not own and transforming it – grants him property rights.
  • German/Latin doctrine.
  • Framework of European Parliament Office. New inventions. Mixed type. Software, DNA, algorithms, business methods.
  • European Patent Office has concentrated on software. Software is in non-patentable elements. Some inventions contain inter alia software.
  • EPO has radically changed its mind. New cases which is changing doctrine. Made a big mistake.
  • Mistake made as merging two different kinds of analysis.
  • Concept of technical character.
  • Lax definition of technical character impacts on definition of invention.
  • Leave EPO train. Lots of things we take for granted as if codified law.
  • Interpret term ‘technical’ in a way which is based on certain types of technologies.

Questions

  • Q: Interesting paper especially for those who teach patent law. What isn’t invention. Makes a nonsense of EPO. Wider social reason why we need notion of invention. Is the problem the coherence of this law or is there a wider social impact?
  • A: Nervous of making definition too strict. Danger that there may be no boundary at all.

Alain Pottage (LSE) and Brad Sherman (University of Queensland), Reproducing Nature

  • Two parts: (i) Construction of immateriality, (ii) history of practice of depositing
  • Nothing ontic about material/immaterial
  • US law. Patent treatises.
  • Patent was not a single document that could be perused and comprehended. Rather it was an assemblage of elements, documents and things that were kept in different places.
  • We must include patent, specification,
  • Patent certificate (only with short description). Specification kept separately.
  • Concept of enclosure, concept of invention.
  • William Robinson’s formula. Distinguising between form and functionality. Forms (e.g. sculpture). Functionality. Instrumentality is performative, dynamic, transitive, trace. Machine abstracted from its ends. Invention is way the machine interacts with natural forces. Not the machine, not the natural forces – but the intangible trace of interaction.
  • This means that it is a recipe – a recipe you employ to elicit a particular effect from nature. Not just an idea of means, but an idea as means. What is the thing to which a recipe refers – arguably nothing. What is being disclosed is not a thing – but what is being communicated is a recipe. Invention is a procedure, not a things.
  • In practical terms this means that it doesn’t matter what medium is used to disclose the invention. What the invention is is the idea that it is possible to recollect the invention. The inventor should not only conceive, but perceive. Recollection with a view to communication. (Could go off on separate path – invention is prototextual.)
  • Fast forward to 1980s. Sequence inventions. Notion of invention falls apart. You suddenly have a thing which can be described. Gene sequence is matter and form, instrumental agency. It is the dream invention, except that it doesn’t work with the inherited scheme.
  • Practice of depositing started in 1949. Antibiotic compounds. Not compound but procedure to produce compound. Found and then accrue them. How do you satisfy examiner? Deposit micro-organism. Same time as compounds are being patented, they are also being trademarked. From point of view of commodity, trademark is doing more of the work.
  • Practice of depositing was for taxonomic purposes. Biological products being produced by corporations, rather than bespoke by scientists working on cultures. Research tool culture starts in 1930s. Depositories are one part of that mode of transaction. Less interested in commodification side, more interested in standardisation side. Everyone can be sure that particular tools can be tested within certain degrees of tolerance. ATCC (American Tissue and Culture Collection). If you look at ATCC’s activities it is a huge trademark. Bio-Escrow. Everything is trademarked – with a view to extracting recognition for the work that goes in.
  • Materials which are engineered to be engineered. Synthetic biology. Bio-bricks enterprise. Similar mode of parts or organisms. Open source approach being undercut by DNA sequence practices.
  • Everything happens on a screen. Manipulated on a computer.
  • Developments in taxonomic practices in late 19th early 20th century. Prerequisite of naming new plant is depositing specimen at recognised place. Can’t seek patent protection until named first. Microbiologists cared less about naming. Deposit schemes were developed for taxonomic practice.
  • Other questions. Where is the invention? In patent document, or in depository somewhere?
  • What law effectively did was to develop hologram of plant. ‘Gloriously epidermal’. Surface of plant. Specication was a signpost to physical deposit. For taxonomic purposes have to deposit to assign a name.
  • Deposit gives rise to certain practices – which had important ramifications for way law recognised invention in different contexts.

Questions

  • Q: What about revisiting Wittgenstein? Or at least Stanley Fish? Language games which are transforming? Old cases where you had to teach invention.
  • A: Two points. One more abstract the other more practical. Abstract point: reason Wittgenstein is wrong person is that we are not talking about actual interpretive community. Talking about normative shortcut. Practical point: not actually an issue. Possession is cipher for recollection, what can be held in the hand. Doesn’t go much further than that. Writings on function of patent law. Redundancy that gets you somewhere.

Jose Bellido (Birkbeck College, University of London), Copyright at a Distance: From Action to Management (1880-1910)

  • Descriptions of the intangible: who describes? what is being described? where is it being described?
  • Routines and legal technologies relevant to copyright in Latin America.
  • Projection of Spanish copyright to Latin America. Involved practical problems.
  • Exploitation of literary and dramatic piezas.
  • Circuits, alliances and affairs. Tension over rights acquired.
  • Spanish saw transatlantic copyright as adventure full of risks that needed to be secured.
  • Case in Mexico of copyright agent seizing script from theatre company. Theatre company performed work from memory without aid of text. Piracy by memorisation. Problem when there was no underlying text to confiscate.
  • Political profile of copyright registries. Censorship.
  • Different issues in territories still qualifying as Spanish territories, from elsewhere in Latin America.
  • Complex formation of dealings evident in documents, some of which lacked international recognition. Fragmented ownership.
  • Private arrangements. Few contracts were public. Authenticating provenance with witnesses and a notary. Stamped paper functioned as a tax. Output was sensitive. Requesting documents in Spain was straightforward, but abroad required affidavits and diplomatic arrangements.
  • Interdicts. Fast, aggressive, efficient and avoided legal confrontation. Considered unsuitable. Legal defences were remarkably successful – mobilising arguments around when, where and how property connections had been made.
  • Protecting rights abroad and minimising impositions from other countries.
  • Introduction of bodrereaux. Spread through continent. Information included dates, title of performances, number of tickets sold, etc. Shift from obligation to habituated practices. Legal to social obligation. Professional standards. Data relevant to copyright management.
  • Ernesto Quesada, one of most important copyright scholars in Latin America.
  • ‘Abyss’ and ‘labyrinths’ of pseudonyms.
  • Copy office. Clerical staff. Flood of material. Attaching works to authors for collecting purposes. Cheap and fast collection. Trusted in good faith of theatrical companies and actors.
  • Practical intelligence and social engineering. Solved controversies. From legal and communication problems to regular reporting, clearance sheets and bordereaux. Notions such as ‘author’ and ‘work’ needed reliable network to be secured abroad. Charts of established rates replaced negotiations and modified the way money, people and copyright were related.
  • Auditing practices and regulatory process of collecting societies. International societal alliances. Instead of increasing numbers of representatives abroad, societies of authors were affiliated and copyright became more international on the ground.

Kathy Bowrey (University of New South Wales), Entertainment Rights in the Age of the Franchise: Audiences, Ownership and the Fictional Universe

  • Intersection between property, technology and culture. Evolution of forms of commodification. Three year research project. First year looking at conceptual background. Second year looking at customary legal practices. (Like Martin’s work.) Third year hoping to host an international workshop – looking at comparative cultural aspects. New forms of franchise, user generated content, … Interested in Japanese and Korean use of franchise rights.
  • Dispersed legal construction of rights associated with TV format. Empirical work is really valuable to see how important nominally peripheral legal practices are.
  • Evolution of new paradigm of property. Protection operating at a much higher level of abstraction.
  • Cultural development. Who we are, what we collectively place value on. Learnt to valourise creativity, innovation.
  • Different from cult of personality. Original attraction to creative personality – able to be detached and attached to a whole plethora of different rights.
  • Harry Potter as a kind of franchise. Fandom. Role of mass communications.
  • E.g. with ‘Idol’ the brands are not ‘Idol’ but company behind it. Main customer not the viewer, but relatively small group at trade fairs.
  • Most commercially valuable rights are not those related to fandom – but the passive forms of franchise such as merchandising.
  • Computer animations, Disney on ice, retail stores, etc. All depend on characters.
  • In 21st century not entirely clear what the primary asset is. Not book, script of a play, etc. It is the immaterial plot, characters, etc.
  • IP + marketing pretend that artefact is still important. More extensive rights than fixed expression.
  • Not driven by multinational greed or opportunism, but coming from the logic of the conditions of production. Marketing from the outset that drives decision making.
  • Place significance on secondary products based on primary characters, plot, etc.
  • Most retail have loose relationship with creativity. Most households with children have big array of random merchandise.
  • In 1997 Microsoft took on Netscape. Browser wars. Attempt to have Star Trek content behind Microsoft firewall. Marginal legal arguments about interactions between fans.
  • Right to own a fictional universe. What is protected is ambit and potential ambit of ideas. Not just the tales, but the series. Books were discrete tales, not a series. Many fans have not read all the books. Franchise mainly from film, not books. Books treated as secondary.
  • Protection of artistic ouevre beyond individual literary works? Why can’t Dali and Breton ‘own’ surrealism. Why can’t Duchamp own the concept of the readymade? Similarly with Harry Potter as a conceptual universe. Major galleries are organised around central artists.
  • Comes back to mass media point. Selling customers. Television networks, selling customers’ attention via advertising.
  • New media and social networking. Role and importance of new media, social networking, etc. Assume more permissive legal practices. Attempts to control fan activity will put them off. This is a bit naive. Case study of viral marketing of Harry Potter produced by marketing department. Leaked and generated interest in theme park. Human interest stories of Harry Potter fans. Another version of Microsoft Star Trek deal – attempt to commercialise fans and fandom.
  • Not arguing that there won’t be a re-alignment of IP category, nor that these won’t be important. More traditional forms of IP less important. New property of franchise is activity and relations with consumers.

Questions

  • Q: Fan and creative culture. Franchise owns the material. Might say its marginal – but it is important. E.g. fan video games, which have been re-packaged and sold by Lucas Arts.
  • A: Agreed.
  • Q: Totalised entertainment concept. Can we any more make distinction between primary creative level and level of commodification?
  • A: Think it is collapsing. Seeking investment has changed. Investigative journalism has changed. Celebrity authorship is primary commodity.
  • Q: 25 years ago there used to be 5 biennale, now there are well over 300 biennales. Not enough work to fill the shelves. Strange aspect – huge focusing on opening. Opportunity to meet the artist. Different platforms. Is there a relation here?
  • A: Similarity between the developments, though they are different phenomenon.
  • Q: In Edinburgh J.K. Rowling cafe is now a tourist attraction! Poor author is important image for copyright.
  • A: If you take author away there is no other referent. No other point.
  • Q: Why not character?
  • A: Author, character, play same function.

Peter Decherney (University of Pennsylvania) Gag Orders: Chaplin, Comedy, and Copyright

  • Role of public shaming, community policing, etc.
  • Copyright law failed to recognise vaudeville. Seemed to fall below the line. Interpreted to require writing – though many vaudeville performances were spectacles.
  • How a French Nobleman Got a Wife Through the New York Herald Personal Columns, 1904, Edwin S. Porter.
  • 1920s, main case is Charlie Caplin. Started in vaudeville, moved to film in 1910. Director, actor, distributor, scores, owned his own studios. Went fishing to find ideas in a lake or pond. Imitative genius. Originality came from his ability to mimic others.
  • Charlie Chaplin lookalike competitions. [Photograph of 100s of children dressed up as Charlie Chaplin.]
  • Bilie West is most successful Chaplin imitator. Laurel started out as Chaplin understudy. Harold Lloyd. Unlicensed Chaplin cartoons. Remixing of Chaplin films.
  • First case against Chaplin mashup – argued Chaplin owned character. Court didn’t uphold argument about owning character, but did rule that advertising shouldn’t be deceptive.
  • Difficulty in identifying what was original about his performance. Came up with nothing. Ineffable quality of Chaplin’s genius. Clip of film in decision as ‘no words could describe’.
  • Not like later character copyright.
  • Devices and costume used for centuries, court jesters, etc.
  • Protecting audiences from being duped. Protecting reputation of famous comedians. Power of mass media.
  • “Its the hat.” image – Hitler and Chaplin.
  • When was participatory culture lost? When does it become piracy?

Questions

  • Q: The protection of characters? Characters are on stage and on film…
  • A: Not until 1950s when you see effective character copyright litigation. Confusion about lots of different kinds of copyright which became separated later. Character, reputation, personality, etc. Personality and persona of Chaplin. Different roles, different characters, but same image.
  • Q: Is there a term for this?
  • A: Star. Different character, but same star. Still Charlie Chaplin. Similar with Carey Grant. Retains ‘Carey Grant-ness’. Like John Wayne. Different characters but always the same.
  • When Chaplin film was shown, auditorium was always full. When imitator, only half full. Audience was predominantly aware of distinction. Second tier of Chaplin imitators. Not negigible. Where Harold Lloyd was trained, where Laurel and Hardy were trained. Harold Lloyd looks like Chaplin for first dozen films. Only later when he develops his own appearance. Like painting. Old masters would study and imitate the great works before developing their own style.
  • Q: The term used in the case?
  • A: Character. But perhaps a less confusing term would be persona. Many different characters but same persona (as above). The type. E.g. ‘the tramp’. Function of mass media that same person can occupy many roles. Can Chaplin own ‘the tramp’? Can Breton own surrealism? Or rather, can a very late surrealist painter own surrealism? Difference between character and persona don’t exist in this period. Lots of legal distinctions we now have that didn’t exist then.
  • Q: Difference between Chaplin’s time and now is that now there is a requirement that persona is consistent.
  • A: Not sure difference is so great. Chaplin was romantic figure. Artistic reputation with cultural critics. Adorno loves Chaplin. Why? Becuase he met Chaplin in a party and he imitated him. Seeing Chaplin as coming from clown and vaudeville tradition which he surpasses.

Margaret Chon (University of Michigan Law School) Marks of Rectitude: Coda

  • “Marks of rectitude” already published. Coda to this. Interrogation of own work.
  • Marks of rectitude is about transformation of norms into law.
  • Sustainability standards. Consumers and farmers. Ethical responses to global trade. Moral economy. Retailers and other suppliers.
  • Culture as method. Want to avoid talking about legalistic mechanism. Talk about other aspects. Differentiation of products from each other. Competition with each other.
  • How domestic schemes – certification marks connect to larger trade frameworks.
  • International trade. Longer supply chains. Europeans think of GIs geographic identification. But less about locality. Longer supply chains. Increasing complexity of products. Increased division of labour. International organisations. ISO and its funny links with WTO.
  • Global Legal Pluralism (forthcoming 2009). New normative. Actors (focus moves away from state), directions (away from top down forms of regulation), away from narrative of innovation and hard law.
  • Actors. Industry associations, firms. (Global Gap. Starbucks, etc.) Public interest NGOs, individuals. Scholarship does not pay so much attention to these. Fair trade labelling organisation. Also states and international organisations.
  • Who determines the meaning of the standard? Consumers, producers, certification mark holders, third party certifiers, others in the value chain (retailer, exporter, …), standard setting bodies, governments.
  • Hard law (treaties) to soft law (non-binding but persuasive). Voluntary norms (FLO, fair trade, standards). Mandatory norms (ISO standards, Quality Assurance – QA, ..) Voluntary norms (TBT Article 2 standards), mandatory norms (technical..).
  • Regime shifting. Tend to think of WIPO, WTO, etc. But would suggest that there is a much more distributed way of looking at governance. Multi-stakeholder or multi-interest governance. Historical examples. E.g. Jack Valenti in US. Standards setting organisations as standard setting entrepreneur.
  • Certification is a largely invisible process. Arguably bottom up. But to what extent is there participation from, e.g. consumer groups.
  • Domains/standards. Innovation/Open Source. Digital education/CC licenses. Climate change/Clean Development Mechanisms(CDMs). Public health/food safety. Human rights/social performance.
  • Since 1980s proliferation of standards based on intangibles.
  • Some of the labels for food and agricultural products. Consumers may not recognise many of the labels.
  • Consumer confusion. Too much information.
  • History of fair trade. 1946: Edna Ruth Byler (Akron). 1996: Craft of the world becomes Ten Thousand Villages. 1965: Oxfam schemes.
  • International fairtrade certification standards. Fair trade/free trade.
  • [Arabica Coffee Market Graph 1989-2007]
  • FLO Generic Standards Flow Chart.
  • Trader standards (pay minimum price, pay fairtrade premium, …). Hard to monitor.
  • Comparison of environmental protection of Fairtrade Labelling Organisation (FLO), UTZ, Intelligentsia Coffee & Tea Company, Counter Culture Coffee. You may not care, but if you do its hard to find this information out.
  • Comparison of labour standards, direct benefits to consumers.
  • Fair trade has specific meaning.
  • Basis for discussion or critique of other work. A lot of space for new regulatory entrepreneurs. No monopoly on regulation by the state. NGOs can get involved.
  • Potential postitive: decentralised, grass roots (social movements, …), possible method of tech transfer, new export markets for South, possible check on abuses of outsourcing,…
  • Potential negatives: Lots of different domains, ethical fig leaf (equality gap), accountability, transparency, quality?
  • M. Polanyi, The Tacit Dimension. Tacit thought forms an indispensable part of all knowledge. Knowledge production and knowledge communities may or may not be transparent.
  • Map out softer regulatory systems.
  • Global legal pluralism and standards. Cover on ‘law’. Meidinger on ‘regulation’. Same kinds of arguments apply to standards?

Question

  • Q: Marks reverse assignment of meaning. E.g. Coca Cola. Consumer assigns meaning. Certification marks are assigned by organisation. Point out that consumers assign meaning to standard marks. Organisation who gets to decide what mark means may be doing something else. Same symbol being assigned different meaning by different parties?
  • A: This is one of the points I make in the original paper. The meaning of certification marks is very opaque. Standards don’t have marketing budget. Murkiness of meaning is attributable to lots of different things. Marks have different meanings for different groups simultaneously. Disjunction between understanding of what is going on in different part of supply chain – Milan and Madagascar.
  • Q: Law and standards?
  • A: Focus on ‘soft law’. Norms. They do structure relationships as effectively as laws do. Arguing for shift towards looking at soft law. But also maintain that the distinction is important.
  • Q: What do you think about notion that mandatory corporate reporting is the site for explaining benefits to alleged beneficiaries. Corporate Social Justice literature says that corporate reporting is important.
  • A: Different for different groups (corporations, non-profits, …).
  • Q: Certification marks and geographical indicators. Similar scheme in Europe. GIs are supposed to have certain policy benefits. One of key issues here is whether there is a way of settling this. Benefits of increased price falls not to farmer but to wholesaler. Need to get empirical handle on governance of mark. Do we have a fundamentally flawed instrument?
  • Q: Re: confusion of consumer, there was an idea that more choice will create more growth in market place. Less choice? Re: IP. Wall marks used as forerunner to this. Tacit knowledge as knowledge held in community. Turned into positive law. How that flow of knowledge operates. Crude version of how norms moves into concrete frameworks and back into tacit.
  • Q: What is ‘culture as method’?
  • A: International law compared to international relations. In IR it is focusing on non-state actors, person to person relationships. Borrowed concept and used in relation to international law, not only non-state actors, but also in relation to ‘hard law’.

Mario Biagioli (Harvard University) Nature and the Commons: The Vegetable Roots of Intellectual Property

  • Read a shorter version of paper that has been posted on the ISHTIP site.
  • Most frameworks to counter restraint of IP on research and so on depend on images of commons. Contrast between green imagery and technological infrastructure that researchers depend on.
  • Advocates of CC frame their work as ‘opposite of IP’. James Boyle’s new book has dark tunnel, broken gate, beyond which are meadows and so on.
  • Cultural environmentalism is analogy between commons and public domain and environment. Protection against excessive privatisation.
  • But these metaphors are part of problems they are trying to cause. Use ends up reinforcing counter-productive binary opposition between nature and society.
  • Second enclosure movement. Problem not so much with privatisation per se.
  • Application of model of sustainable development to IP. Goes back to David Lang. ‘We used to think there were plenty of Buffalo – look now’. Framing IP in environmental terms.
  • What is problem? Images of nature always been directly involved in creation narratives about property, especially intangible property. Going back to Locke.
  • Those struggling with establishment of concept of literary property, depended on image of originality. Metaphors of land and organic growth. Agricultural growth as metaphor for literary growth. Agricultural logic of intellectual property.
  • Edward Young’s Conjectures of 1759. One of birth places of modern copyright.
  • Do not believe that flash of genius is accurate image of cultural production – but neither is other image.
  • Young’s text suggests original works are of a vegetable nature. Original works are like vegetables, imitations are like artefacts. Original works grow but can not be made.
  • Genius is external to human consciousness. Like oyster that doesn’t know it contains a pearl, or rock doesn’t know it contains a diamond. Genius is conscious. Hence is not an artefact. Unconscious, therefore not an artefact.
  • Original compositions difference from imitative ones. He turns genius into a plant, or a face. Smart move as organisms of a species never look the same. You can be sure there will be some difference.
  • Lines and features to characterise face and to distinguish it. It is unique. Produced by nature. Face analogous to plant as natural product.
  • While face can be seen as emblem of personal expression – whereas in fact, according to logic of this argument, it is expressionless.
  • Young can only illustrate invention with recourse to the vegetable – i.e. with recourse to discovery.
  • Crucial difference between invention and discovery for patent law.
  • Wording of patent law: “bred or discovered”, “invents or discover”.
  • Footnote: same slippages can be found in GIs. Protected entity is mixture

Questions

  • Q (Martha Woodmansee – MW): Methodological question. Young does not talk about intellectual property?
  • A: He only mentions it in passing. Distinct future of authorship.
  • Q (MW): I was very careful not to mention Young. Debate between ancients and moderns. You are doing interesting riffs, but not sure you would want to commit yourself to historical interpretation. His point of using that metaphor of plant, like Goethe, was that the plant dips into the earth and processes it (as Fichte says its own little brain), and produces something.
  • A: That is originality. You have cast Young as main source of originality. Not reading text historically. Looking at discursive and logical tensions. Not even saying Young’s text important for the development of IP in England, as he wasn’t. Just picking out tensions.
  • Q (MW): Wrote in 1982. One would hope that in interim that someone would read it non-anachronistically. What you are doing is riffing on it.
  • A: That is called re-construction.
  • Q: (MW) That is anachronism.
  • Q: (Jamie Stapleton – JS) Understanding of commons metaphor. History comes from political history. Notion of enclosure. Common land. Economics concept called the tragedy of the commons. Publicly justified process within English parliament. William Foster Lloyd. Tragedy of commons in relation to population theory. Then picked up by Harding in 1960s as ecological metaphor. Not organic metaphor. Trying to draw rhetorical connection between people being thrown off land.
  • A: If you read texts by cultural environmentalists they pick up on this discourse. They present themselves as fighting the same battle. When you apply to information it is different – intangible goods, nonrivalrous.
  • Q (JS): But you play down political force of commons as a metaphor.
  • A: Point taken.
  • Q: Limits of metaphor.
  • A: More sympathetic with cause than e.g. Elkin-Koren. Discourse is problematic. Branding their cause. Astute politics. Discourse is no longer critical in way it was in 1980s. No longer critical type of discourse – being replaced by sustainable development type approach, which means that you accept the rules of the game. Logic of discourse is problematic. Not reading Young’s text historically, reading it anachronistically. Exercise in reconstruction is to demonstrate that this way of thinking is problematic.
  • Q: You ought to face nature/culture directly. Cultural environmentalists are not environmentalists. Commons folks don’t get what is at issue with traditional knowledge.
  • Q: Organic metaphor – can this not be applied to law itself? Long term animation of plants? Transmission?
  • A: Don’t believe that genius is a plant. Not that I want to say that it is not the romantic author it is the plant.

Rosemary J. Coombe (York University, Toronto) and Andrew Herman (Wilfrid Laurier University) Theories of Authorship, Ownership and Value in Networked Sociality

  • Family photo posted on social networking sites ended up in billboard in Prague. They thought it was thrilling, flattering, perplexing and creepy.
  • Facebook. More than 200 million active users. Mark Zuckerberg is core persona.
  • Notion of performativity in cultural studies.
  • Autonomism. Negri and immaterial labour.
  • Produsage.org.
  • IP discourse in web 2.0 masks how yet another example of corporate good will.
  • Facebook new terms of service. Rights based discourse. Privacy. Pages of debate in emotionally laden and superfluous terms. Official response – Facebook’s goodwill.
  • Hegel’s theory of property and its relation to personality.
  • Legal subject is impoverished. Only capable of exchange, not of being a mother, lover or artist.
  • Objectification of subjects and subjectification of objects. Inappropriate dignification of objects.
  • ToS disputes are not rites of exchange, but about inalienable rights.
  • Facebook’s ‘Statement of Rights and Responsibilities’.
  • Facebook is primarily interested in persona – user generated intellectual property. Thats what make its sticky. Digital identity.
  • Facebook Data Team. This is what allows them to sell attention to advertisers. LivingSocial.
  • Microtargeting of advertising. Finely calculated economy of desire.

Questions

  • Q: Two questions: (i) Characterises digital as an organic life. Recombinatory operators. Collapse of biological into inorganic. (ii) Hegel forefather of virtual sociology. Subjectivity is always vanishing and never achieved.
  • A: (ii) Yes. Spent term reading Phenomenology of Spirit and never looked back. (i) Yes.
  • Q (MW): Do you mean that those of us posting on Facebook are working for free?
  • A: Yes.
  • Q: Discourse of digital rights groups and privacy?
  • A: Yes. One of dominant rhetorical tropes. As quickly turns to debate about rights, quickly individuates. Whole series of red herrings that keep emerging.
  • Q: What is the main point?
  • A: Information capital is based on pleasure of people sitting at their keyboards – providing ‘the good’ for free. Not new. What is new is the technological means are available to do this on a massive scale. Facebook is 7th biggest country. Hints of all kinds of things. People are stuggling for a new language with which to speak. Emergent communities. Social responsibilities are being obscured. Language of public responsibility. May be a form of ideological dispossession.

Concluding remarks

  • Concluding remarks from Lionel Bently and Martha Woodmansee.
  • ISHTIP: started in London. No funding so dependent on people’s effort.
  • Process of building up websites. Would like to see links, bibliographies, primary sources, projects, teaching tools, syllabi, calendar of relevant events, discussion space and so on. Hoping that everyone will be able to post up on it.
  • Hosted in Venice next year.
  • What would people like to see?
  • Hoped to have an annual workshop. Worried that it was going to be paper after paper. Turned into more of a workshop. Is it sufficiently workshop like? How can we make it more workshop like? Good length of time to discuss papers.
  • Topics or themes?
  • Bibliographies? Shaping tradition?
  • Boot camps?
  • Bringing in people from other regions to give papers? Requires funding.

Related Links

Posted in conferences, copyright, edwardyoung, events, history, intellectualhistory, law, legalhistory, notes | 1 Comment

The Magus in New York

Johann Georg Hamann

Johann George Hamann, “the Magus of the North”, was a minor civil servant working in tax administration, a Lutheran pietist, prolific lettrist, and polyglot. He is best known for his short, rhapsodic, densely allusive and often pseudonymous dispatches – on everything from erotic love to the importance of the letter ‘h’ – and for his influence on later figures such as Herder, Goethe, and Kierkegaard.

Lisa Marie Anderson (who translated Hegel’s essay on Hamann) organised an international conference, Hamann and the Tradition, which took place in March at Hunter College, New York:

Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of scholarly interest in the work of Johann Georg Hamann, an interest which is spreading among scholars of world literature, European history, philosophy, theology, and religious studies. New translations of work by and about Hamann are appearing, as are a number of books and articles on Hamann’s aesthetics, theories of language and sexuality, and unique place in Enlightenment and Counter-Enlightenment thought. As such, the time has come to reexamine, in light of recent work, the legacy of Hamann’s writings, which have influenced such diverse thinkers as J.G. von Herder, F.H. Jacobi, J.W. von Goethe, G.W.F. Hegel, Søren Kierkegaard, and Walter Benjamin, to name only an obvious few.

Hamann, Nietzsche and Wittgenstein on the language of philosophers

I gave a paper looking at some of Hamann’s allegations regarding how philosophers misuse and misunderstand language. It also examined how his work anticipates later claims to this effect – in particular those made by Nietzsche and Wittgenstein. The slides are available at:

I am very grateful to the Conference of University Teachers of German in Great Britain and Ireland (CUTG) who awarded me a Postgraduate Travelling Scholarship to attend the conference.

Conference notes

Following are some partial, impressionistic notes from the conference. If you spot anything that you think should be amended, please get in touch! Full papers will be published in forthcoming conference proceedings.

John Betz

John Betz, Reading Sibylline Leaves: Hamann in the History of Ideas

  • After introductions from Lisa Marie Anderson and Saul Fisher the first talk was from John Betz, Assistant Professor of Theology, Loyola College, whose book on Hamann After Enlightenment: Hamann as Post-Secular Visionary was published last year.
  • His paper looked at the reception and influence of Hamann’s work in the history of ideas.
  • He alluded to Kierkegaard’s comment that Hamann was the “greatest humourist in Christendom” and discussed his influence on Hegel and Schelling – and his reception in the English speaking world via James O’Flaherty and Isaiah Berlin.
  • He asked why Hamann is still relatively obscure, despite his huge influence on 19th century thinkers – and posited that the most obvious explanation is the difficulty of his style.
  • Lessing: “I would not presume to understand Hamann in all respects”. If it was difficult for his contemporaries and immediate predecessors to understand him – it is much more difficult now, and this difficulty will only grow with time.
  • In reaction to what he saw as an overblown confidence in reason – Hamann emphasised fallenness, and strove to expose the blind spots and dogmas of modern rationalism. He saw the German enlightenment of his day as a ‘cheap’ enlightenment.
  • Early reviews of Hamann said that he was dark and impenetrable – that his allusions hung on his prose like ornaments. Hamann anonymously endorsed the ‘Hamburg review’, calling himself ‘dark, unintelligible, and deranged’.
  • Hamann confessed to Herder that he was addicted to his cryptic style. But was he a bad writer? He was perfectly capable of limpid prose. Scattered throughout writings are succinct jewels.
  • The next generation pored over them as oracles, worried for loss of his corpus. Hamann’s writings are powerful and strangely beautiful communications. Jean Paul said they were like ‘suns in patches of nebula’.
  • Goethe admired Hamann’s novelty in this regard: the totality of his style.
  • Light in darkness of Hamann’s style: the self understanding of a Christian author. Johannine light that shines in the darkness. Defies rational comprehension. Contains wisdom and power of God. His style is informed by his conversion. The form is Christological. Hamann is concentrated in a single word.
  • So how did he make his way into the history of philosophy? This was delayed, mediated by Herder and Jacobi.
  • Hamann introduced Kant to Hume and was an important influence on the critical turn of Kant’s philosophy. Questioned Kant’s critical philosophy. Emphasised that reason is product of tradition. Kant’s supposedly neutral critique is employed in service of prior political agenda.
  • In some respects he anticipates Nietzsche.
  • It is through Herder that Hamann reaches philosophy. Herder’s own Metacritique.
  • Jacobi and Hamann: represent two very different strands – like Hegel and Kierkegaard.
  • Hamann left a deep impression on Schelling. Schelling’s exploration of ‘relationship of plastic arts to nature’. Thanks Jabobi in a footnote for introducing him to Hamann. Urges him to publish an edition of Hamann’s writings. Schelling’s discovery of Hamann’s thought. Creation and revelation. Emphasis on passions – against Stoic tendency to denigrate them.
  • Difference between Hamann and Fichte in their views of nature.
  • The most important insight that Schelling picks up from Hamann: profound revelation. God who exceeds reason’s grasp.
  • The long awaited first edition. 1828 – Hegel’s two part review. Translation by Lisa Marie Anderson.
  • Lutheran faith. Theology based in feeling.
  • Hegel’s opinion of Hamann is mixed. He admires him calling him ‘an original’ but criticised him for failing to develop his ideas into genuine system. Hamann’s work could only result in humour: self-satisfaction, subjectivity, triviality.
  • Hegel fails to appreciate that Hamann’s prose is not self-centred. His writings are carefully crafted mirrors of introspection crafted for particular readers he has in mind.
  • Hamann is utterly relevant to Hegel’s philosophy. But Hegel doesn’t mention Hamann’s work on the history/genealogy of reason. Or the kinosis of the divine logos.
  • Hamann stands in background of whole of German idealism.
  • Kierkegaard was the most important interpreter of Hamann after Hegel. Keenly appreciated that Hamann’s work was grounded in Christianity – and Hamann’s sense of humour.
  • Examples of Hamann’s humour. His pseudonyms – e.g. ‘lover of boredom’. Anonymously reviewing his own pseudonymous works. Suggested the name ‘bathhouse quackeries’ for his collected works. Suggested the name ‘first little tub’ for the first volume.
  • For Kierkegaard the Christian world view is essentially humorous. Liked Hamann’s naturally humorous sensibility, his appreciation of genius, and so on. Said that Hamann was ‘the greatest humorist in the world’.
  • Later Kierkegaard turns away from this view – detecting a noble pride behind folly. He was troubled by Hamann’s humour. Why? Hamann seeks truth in the world, in the sensible, in the sinful. Kierkegaard thinks Hamann goes too far – indulging irony to the extent of blasphemy.
  • However one judges Hamann – his importance should be clear. He was by no means an irrationalist. The great luminaries of the age found him alluring.
  • What was content of message? It is impossible to reduce his work to any one particular thought.
  • To Kant he introduced Hume. To Herder and Hegel he indicated reason’s historical and linguistic basis. For Goethe he pointed towards a German literature away from French literature. To Jacobi he points beyond nihilism. To Hegel and Schelling he pointed to new and grander possibilities of philosophy. To Kierkegaard he gave pseudonymous authorship, the notion of indirect communication and the infinite difference between the human and the divine.

Questions

  • Did Hamann craft his style? For Hamann writing was like digestion. He used all his senses. Laborious and experimental. Deep silence some days, then burst out. We know about how he developed his writings as there are several versions of things he has written. He was a big letter writer. Not so much lyrical outpourings as very carefully crafted pieces.
  • Question about the general project of drawing parallels between Hamann and other thinkers. Apart from small mentions here and there, how far can we get in playing this kind of game? If we identify themes – we have something. Identify themes in Hamann, regardless of the extent to which people allude to him. At a certain level this remains very general – and must remain so. Subterranean. Hamann was like a dark centre of gravity – attracting other things, but remaining unseen. He was like a black hole – a powerful but invisible field.
  • But when it comes to textual connections, do we get citations of Hamann? Gwen Griffith Dickson: following on from that, he did all these pseudonymous writings. Readers are affected and internalise insights in Hamann. Not so much that there are concrete chunks you can lift out. Makes harder to cite quotations. Point taken but would argue that influence was much more internalised than fragments that can be quoted.
  • Hence, how far can we go vis a vis intellectual history? Another form of German philosophy. Sense of humour. Against big system builders.
  • How would you recover Hamann’s response to reconstructions? E.g. Jacobi/Kierkegaard. Logical extension of reason is nihilism. Ultimately concerned with faith, with heart. Not about a big system. More Socratic.
  • What is reason for Hamann? What is faith for Hamann? Light of revelation appropriated. So basically classic.
  • Hamann affecting Goethe’s theory of nature? Hamann certainly has notion of recovery of nature. Hamann is no Spinozist – and Goethe is a professed Spinozist. Possible influence through Princess Gallitzin – who Goethe knew.

Gwen Griffith Dickson, God, I & Thou: Hamann and the Personalist Tradition

  • Next talk from Gwen Griffith Dickson, author of Johann Georg Hamann’s Relational Metacriticism, Director at Lokahi Foundation, Visiting Professor at King’s College London and Emeritus Gresham Professor of Divinity.
  • Gwen specialises in philosophies and theologies of different faiths. Wonderful thing to have Hamann conference in US.
  • Core of the thesis in a few sentences, which will be expanded. Like speed dating, if you don’t fancy it you can nod off.
  • Hamann’s picture of the human being. Human beings are fundamentally related to others (humans and god). Part of a fundamental ontology. Relational ontology – from sexuality to textuality. Above all seen in phenomenon of language.
  • These particular ideas about language come into their own in 20th century. First part of talk will be about Hamann and the second part about other thinkers.
  • Approach to understanding human person. Language and the divine. Relationships and relatedness are fundamental features of our being. We are created for and by our relationships.
  • Area treated by philosophers. Self-knowledge. In order to make easier knowledge of own self – my own self is reflected in every neighbour. God and my neighbour are part of self knowledge/self love.
  • Socrates via St. Paul. Self knowledge comes from being known by another. Divine other – being known by god is ground of self knowledge.
  • Sibyl. Self knowledge only came through love, sexual knowledge, knowledge of another. Principle remains: self knowledge through other
  • Socratic Memorabilia: midwife/sculptor. Aesthetica in Nuce: self knowledge through tradition. Revelation and tradition.
  • Hamann: human nature consists of gaps and lacks. Gaps and lacks demonstrate inter-dependence. Relates us to nature and one another.
  • Flurry of metaphors – knowledge as promiscuity. Truth defending herself against highwaymen.
  • Knowledge less epistemological mechanics than ethics. Principal vocation of epistemic nature. Encounter with Hume.
  • Pure idealism to separate feeling from thinking. Companionship. Things without relations, relations without things.
  • Testimony of sense convinces neither rationalist nor sceptic. Knowledge/faith rest on foundation of trust, not indubitability. Both are perpetually provisional and contain contradictions. Our knowledge is piecemeal. Through reason skepsis itself becomes dogma.
  • Language is not a system of universal signs, but images. Images – later formal abstraction. To trade in abstraction is to deal a death blow to true language.
  • Hamann introduces critical aspect – against Herder’s close association of language and instinct.
  • Relation of language to thought and reason. Language and philosophy are grounded in tradition – community in its temporal aspect. Relationship with nature and relationship with author of nature. Easy exchange between human and divine. Reasoning relates us to God.
  • God, relation and reason = light, eye, what the eye sees = text, author, reader.
  • Unbridgeable chasm between us and god is replaced with easy intimacy. Because of God’s grace and compassion.
  • Language arises on God’s side to address his children and on human side to understand God’s address. To facilitate relationship.
  • Fast forward to personalists, philosophers of encounter: Martin Buber, Ferdinand Ebner, Franz Rosenzweig, …
  • Salient features: human person cannot be viewed in isolation, being is constituted by relationships.
  • Buber in I & Thou. Entering relations with other persons. Rejection of essence or substance as philosophical categories. ‘In the beginning is relation’.
  • Rosenzweig. Only scholastic reason divides itself – contradicts its unity.
  • Opened his mouth: became human being. In and through language that we are human. ‘I speak therefore I am’ or ‘I am spoken to therefore I become’.
  • Theological significance. Mere existence of human other reveals existence of divine other. From experience of meeting another.
  • All these thinkers confess a powerful dependence on Hamann. Hamann’s reaction to these thinkers may be like his reaction to Herder and Jacobi. They absorb something but also miss something.
  • Anecdote of Picasso and Braque hanging a picture and asking: do her armpits smell? In Ebner there are no smelly armpits whereas in Hamann there are lots. Better stop the metaphor.
  • Relationship with divine is constituted in language.

Lori Yamato, Hamann’s Fables of Dismemberment

  • Fables of dismemberment. Role of the fable in the 18th century.
  • Enigmatic contribution. Hamann’s comments on fables are indirect contributions to direct comments. Protests categorisation of fable.
  • Lessing takes up legend of Tarquinius. He looks at action, not narrative.
  • Hamann is also very keen on legend. Brings back literary aspect of fable – rather than using it as an illustration. Features in Aesthetica in nuce.
  • Book on the way crusaders constructed labyrinths.
  • Story without set moral – allowable for any usage. Symbolic story that admits interpretation – moral – but also an enigma. Story in its brevity. Acts in similar manner to Nuce. Little piece that is supposed to sprout.
  • Playfulness – beheading flowers and the decapitation of citizens.
  • ‘[The rhapsodist] has with the petit-maîtres and sophmores of his time written ******** and ——— obelisks and asterisks.’
  • Footnoting and marginalia gets dragged out into page. Distinction between obelisks and asterisks is not so important? Dashes, obelisks, asterisks are cuts, daggers and stitches.
  • Disjecti membra poetae has become a common phrase. In Horace, Satires, I.iv.56-62. Come to mean ‘scattered fragments’, but Hamann re-introduces a macabre connotation.

Kamaal Haque, Hamann, Goethe and the West-östlicher Divan

  • Kamaal is Visiting Assistant Professor at Dickinson College.
  • Goethe’s admiration for Hamann. Notion of unity.
  • Goethe’s West-östlicher Divan. Collection of poems.
  • End of Hamann’s Cloverleaf of Hellenistic Letters. Misri Effendi and the Mufti. Misri was accused of secretly harbouring Christian thoughts.
  • Aesthetica in Nuce – “by making pilgrimages to Arabia ..”
  • Henkel on Goethe and Hamann.
  • Superiority of Ancient East to Classical West. Greece is relegated to forming sculpture. Eastern poet can create poems out of water, dynamic poetry.
  • In part an attack on Michaelis. Arbitrary convention of human language. Hamann and Herder on language.
  • In a 1823 essay Goethe states: ‘motifs, legend, ancient stories, impressed upon me that I kept them in my mind’. Aesthetica in Nuce is one of those works that he kept in his mind.

Katie Terezakis, Is Theology Possible After Hamann?

  • Katie is Assistant Professor at Rochester Institute of Technology and author of Immanent Word: The Turn to Language in German Philosophy, 1759-1801.
  • If theology is writing about God, then Hamann is writing about theology. Hamann denies that he is doing theology – which he says is hubris. If Hamann says his work is not theological – can his work be appropriated by theology?
  • Characteristic of Hamann to take theological notions seriously as a point of departure for epistemology.
  • Self-limitation. We can say nothing about what motivates or exists before self-limitation.
  • How can our claims to knowledge be established? Hamann challenges the ground of any theory of knowledge.
  • Hegel’s system attempts to integrate Hamann’s metacritical position.
  • The possibility of theology.
  • Kant inappropriately flushes out contingencies from reason.
  • Language is shared root of sensibility and intuition. Language’s credentials are tradition and usage.
  • Turn to language is the distinguishing theme of Hamannian authorship.
  • Primacy of language. Any attempt to transcend linguistic traditions can only revert back to these traditions. Any formal system attempting to act as a metalanguage will fail.
  • Hamann not only rejects theology, but says all God talk is just talk. We will find with certainty only a reflection of ourselves. We can’t know from what being has been translated to appear to us as it does.
  • Three different types of theology: traditional theology, negative theology, radical orthodoxy. Not making claim that these are exhaustive, nor chosing them just because they allude to Hamann.
  • Radical orthodoxy – John Milbank, very detailed reading. Interest in Hamann stems from his critique of philosophy. Dualism of reason and revelation.
  • Linguisticality of reason, existence before essence. Looks as though assimilated within philosophical tradition.
  • Hamann tackles dependence of his thought on language.
  • One does need faith to eat an egg.
  • Cognitive instinct.
  • Analogy and regulative positing.
  • Hamann has difficulty with Kant’s claims of certainty for moral law.
  • When metaphors do their work, they achieve condescension. Multitude of meanings condensed into single image.
  • Language is root between beings and being.
  • Hamann’s sensuousness, tradition, desire.
  • Milbank rejects Hamann’s notion of the regulative based on his own theological conservatism.
  • Hamann learns, following Hume, that one can never know absent things or connection between things.
  • Nihilism is result of independent secular reason reserving a space apart from God. Grounding disciplines on nothing. Transcendental categories are illusion thrown up by the void. In Hamann there is no void – hence no need for defensive posturing against nihilism. Milbank repeats cliche about Ding-an-Sich.
  • Hamann read Kant more carefully. Regulative as act of human freedom.
  • Though Hamann ruthlessly challenges Kant’s certainty, and argues for linguistic bases of reasoning. Deepens thrust of critical project.
  • Radical Orthodoxy urges us not to reserve space outside of theology.
  • Mediating participatory sphere – led by knowers, elite class of mediators.
  • Milbank on radical orthodoxy: “a project made possible by the self conscious superficiality of today’s secularism”. He says the “nihilistic drift of postmodernism is unprecendented opportunity”. But far from being radical it is reactionary and ultraconservative.
  • If Hamann candidly rejects theology – how can we explain his allusion to the theological? Revelation happens in and through tradition and language. Brash humility and demanding epistemic constraint.

Oswald Bayer, God as Author: The Theological Foundation of Hamann’s Autorpoetik

  • Dr. Oswald Bayer is Professor of Systematic Theology & Philosophy of Religion, Universität Tübingen, author of Vernunft ist Sprache: Hamanns Metakritik Kants, and co-editor of a book of Hamann’s Londoner Schriften.
  • What is it in Homer that makes up for ignorance of Aristotle? Or Shakespeare’s transgression of critical laws? Genius!
  • Forerunner of romanticism and Strum und Drang.
  • Freedom of genius is creative genius. Structured genius.
  • Authorial poetics is theologically grounded.
  • God himself is an author!
  • Learning by suffering. Genius is a crown of thorns.
  • Compelled to name the animals – contradiction to Platonic idea of preformed.
  • Hamann was acquainted with notion of mimesis.
  • Hamann expresses his authorship in three classic passages.
  • Aesthetica: analogy of human being with creator… divine seal, that we are his offspring.
  • Philological Ideas and Doubts: political animal – human stands in relation to animals like prince to subjects
  • Aside: ‘This theology is given to me. It is a sign of the divine. It is given. This passivity.’
  • Misuse of language and its natural testimony is perjury.
  • Authorial poetics.
  • Kierkegaard’s concept of indirect communication. Continuity that obtains within.
  • Hamann expreses importance of self knowledge from early writings and continues to do so throughout his authorship.
  • Deep fountain of truth that resides in the spirit.
  • ‘Speak that I may see you’
  • Authorial poetics of human beings. Authorship of God himself.
  • Analogy of human and divine: invisibility of man and God only becomes visible in the world.
  • Only communicated in speaking and writing in space and time.
  • Human life seems to consist in a series of symbolical actions …
  • Sturm und Drang could see this as a manifesto.
  • Faculty of judgement arising from the head and the heart.
  • Hamann’s unique concept of style in way he understands style of God himself.
  • God’s style remains for Hamann the only style, and God the only truly original author.
  • Authorial poetics – recognises it in gratitude and not embarrassment.
  • Brides from virgins, authors from readers.
  • Idea of reader is author’s muse.
  • Could Hamann could be described as a postmodern thinker? Though on face of it is an anachronism. Masks, collage, allusion – alienating effect.
  • On the one hand Hamann ensures distance between author and reader. Also avoids either/or with respect to authorship.
  • One would also have to point out embodiment, senses, incorporality.
  • Hamann’s Metacritique of modernity. Nachprüfung – re-examination. Also pre-modern. Hamann is both author and reviewer, both creative writer and art critic.

Kenneth Haynes, Tradition and Testimony in Hamann

  • Kenneth Haynes is Associate Professor of Comparative Literature and Classics at Brown University and editor of Hamann: Writings on Philosophy and Language on Cambridge University Press.
  • Kierkegaard quote about ‘poor Hamann’: “With all his life and soul, to the last drop of blood, he is concentrated in a single word, the passionate protest of a highly gifted genius against an existential system. But the System is hospitable; poor Hamann, you have been reduced to a paragraph by Michelet. Whether any monument has ever marked your grave, I do not know; whether it is now trodden under foot, I do not know; but this I know, that you have been with satanic might and main forced into the paragraph-uniform, and stuck into the ranks.” (Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript (1846), trans. Swenson and Lowrie).
  • Talk will look at how Hamann was incorporated into history of philosophy. His reception in textbooks, history, lectures. Reception history.
  • Rift between 18th century philosophy and subsequent histories. Hamann shared reception fate of other 18th century writers.
  • Michelet – Hegelian philosopher and historian of philosophy.
  • Parallels between ‘poor Hamann’ and ‘poor Jacobi’ (“Poor Jacobi! Whether anyone visits your grave I do not know, …”). Hamann assimilated to Jacobi. Hamann is a kind of Jacobi with a weirder style.
  • Intense personal/philosophical encounters and history of philosophy.
  • Mentioned in 1846 by Kierkegaard in Concluding Unscientific Postscript.
  • After 19th century see him linked with Herder (Dilthey …).
  • History of philosophy used to served anti-Enlightment ends.
  • Hamann polemically described as unique expression of the German spirit.
  • Herman Nohl – student of Dilthey – ‘most irrational man that ever lived’ (compliment).
  • Rudolph Unger – counter enlightenment polemic.
  • Berlin drew on Nohl.
  • Why study historiography of philosophy?
  • Natural bent towards reception history.
  • To count as philosophy means you have to have a place in the history of philosophy. In past you have to insert yourself into master/disciple relationship – a sect. If not you would be an isolate.
  • Hamann rather than being failed resistance, turns out to be prophet of true resistance.
  • History of philosophy has a history. Bibliographical work.
  • Brooker – canon for 19th century.
  • History of philosophy as gradual development of reason. Scepticism is engine that drives philosophy through development.
  • “Manual of the history of philosophy”.
  • Reconstructive and logical history.
  • Retrospectively evaluating philosophers – how far did they succeed in reacting to scepticism.
  • Hamann shows up in 5th edition – linked to Jacobi.
  • Wit and wisdom of Hamann. Sloppy historian.
  • Philosophical histories of Schelling and Hegel.
  • For Hegel recent German philosophy depends on Jacobi.
  • Hamann’s absence noticable since Hegel gives Hamann has such detailed treatment later.
  • 1833-34. Hamann gets 3 paragraphs.
  • Evoked along with Pascal as isolated figure.
  • 5th edition of Tenemann’s manuel – Michelet.
  • Took over lectures upon Hegel’s death. History of latest philosophy in Germany.
  • Michelet does a bettter job as an encyclopedist than as a philosopher.
  • Danger for distortion comes from with what Michelet takes for granted.
  • Hamann, Herder, and Jacobi (counter-enlightenment). Michelet’s 1837 edition of The History of the Latest System of Philosophy in Germany from Kant to Hegel mentions them together under Glaubensphilosophie – ‘faith-philosophy’.
  • The term ‘faith-philosophy’ applied to Jacobi and others – but doesn’t seem to appear in Jacobi or very much in 18th century.
  • Irrationalist mystics and faith-philosophers.
  • Projection of German Idealism on 18th century.
  • ‘Subject-centred epistemology’ doesn’t work for Hamann.
  • Unbelief and superstition.
  • Further distortions: Seeing trio as trio (Hamann, Herder, Jacobi). They disagreed more often than they agreed. Trio as nationalist claim. Schelling has chapter on this. Michelet says they unify Prussian state.
  • “The stamina and the menstrua of our reason are thus in the truest understanding revelations and traditions which we accept as our property, transform into our fluids and powers…” (Philological ideas and doubts)
  • “Is all your human reason anything other than tradition and inheritance…” (New apology of the letter h)
  • “It all comes down to tradition in the end, as all abstractions to sense impressions.” (letter to Herder, April 20, 1782)

Manfred Kuehn, Hamann on Reason, Hume, and Kant

  • Manfred Kuehn is Professor of Philosophy at Boston University.
  • Hamann on reason, Hume and Kant.
  • Kant’s notion of ‘good will’ is just as questionable as ‘pure reason’.
  • No extended discussion in Hamann that would treat ‘good will’ in the same way that he treats ‘pure reason’.
  • No extended metacritique of critique of practical reason.
  • He was ill and died before he could write it, but it is doubtful if he would have written it if he did.
  • Hamann took interest in literary feuds (his main distraction, like TV).
  • He speaks of another chimera – ‘good will’.
  • Language is at root of moral concepts. Morality is nothing but syntax. Correct language is a fundamental feauture of ethics.
  • Deeds are more important than maxims.
  • Hamann is accused of being an egoist.
  • Hamann anticipates Hegel’s critique of Kant.
  • Kant is one of our sharpest minds – but his acuity is as evil demon.
  • Kant’s moral philosophy is not essentially different from Mendelssohn, Lessing, …
  • Very different from the way Kant is usually seen. Most think Kant’s moral philosophy is a radical departure from all that went before. Hamann indicates that this isn’t the case. Kant’s moral philosophy must be seen as the continuation of a tradition.
  • Hamann must have thought that he criticised Kant’s moral philosophy in critique of Berlin enlightenment.
  • Mendelssohn – rights based account. Kant – duty based account.
  • No inner dignity in our nature.
  • Idea that maxims could be conceived of as containing virtue by means of categorical imperative is flawed.
  • There are no necessary truths of reason. Just rational beliefs.
  • Hamann approvingly cites Herder.
  • Did Kant or Mendelssohn hate Christianity?
  • Open intolerance for concealed intolerance of Enlightenment.
  • Successfully creates alternative to Enlightenment.
  • His alternative became irrelevant to philosophers.

Johannes von Lüpke, Metaphysics and Metacritique. Hamann’s Understanding of the Word of God in the Tradition of Lutheran Theology

  • Dr. Johannes von Lüpke is Professor for Systematic Theology at Kirchliche Hochschule Wuppertal.
  • Metaphysics and metacritique in tradition of Luther.
  • Concept of metacritique – invention of Hamann. In response to Kant.
  • 7th July 1782 – first appearance of term in letter from Hamann to Herder. Then brought into philosophical discourse primarily by Herder.
  • Commonly used when first level critique is subject to second level critique. Hence critique of critique.
  • Hamann’s goes beyond this. Hamann’s conception is claim of theological truth. Both analogy and antithesis.
  • Hamann in tradition of Martin Luther’s theology.
  • Hamann re-iterates a critique of metaphysics.
  • God’s perfectness based on word.
  • Luther did not condemn philosophy along metaphysical preconceptions.
  • Reformatory theology perceives tensions in this relationship – and seeks to enlighten reason by light of word of God.
  • Contrasts message of God with God’s first translation.
  • Athens and Jerusalem.
  • Last sheets commemorates Pascal’s last memorial.
  • Reason starts to idolise itself.
  • Misses true God who descends to lowliness of his creation. God at beginning of sentence. Underlines God as an individual. God discloses himself in human language.
  • Agreements between Hamann and Luther. Both are theologians of the cross. Challenge wisdom of world with foolishness of the cross. True relationship between God and man. Cross is place where reason is judged and ordered.
  • Luther: without God best things used as worst. Hamann applies this to language
  • Reason and commandments are God given assistance for mankind. Both reason and law can be corrupted and can become corrupted.
  • Hamann’s goal is to point out the inner lies and contradictions.
  • Theologians recognise reality of God, mankind and the cross.
  • Hamann aims at realism that restores correct relationship between God and mankind.
  • Hamann is not against reason, but he tries to restore true relational reason.
  • Make use of reason. Reason knows nothing but the law.
  • Reason connected with law is supposed to enable to great things – science, technology and art. But gives nothing but that which is earthly.
  • In order to witness reality of God and God’s action in and with his creation.
  • Different kind of word, different kind of reason required.
  • Reason requires enlightenment by light of gospel.
  • Supreme individual reality of God – only possible by listening to his word.
  • Not enthusiasm (sturmerei).
  • Metacritical enlightenment of reason.
  • Reason itself is aware of limited scope of its methods.
  • This can only succeed in comprehensive understanding if perceives word of God.

Concluding remarks

  • First Hamann conference in US. Next Internationales Hamann-Kolloquium will take place in Halle.

Related links

Posted in events, hamann, nietzsche, philosophy, talks, wittgenstein | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Interview with Peter McElligott of Berkeley Tool Library


Peter McElligott

Pete McElligott was instrumental in setting up the Tool Lending Library at Berkeley Public Library. The Tool Lending Library is one of the oldest and most popular services of its kind – offering thousands of tools to local residents – from pipe cutters to carpet knee kickers, from lawn mowers to demolition hammers. I spoke to Pete about how the library got started, unusual uses of the tools, recycling culture, and living in Berkeley through the ’60s and ’70s.

What made you want to start a tool library in the first place?

Well, it’s not as though it were my idea. I was just the person who got hired to actually make it happen. I had a background in building maintenance and had also been working for the library previously as a janitor and a building maintenance person. The idea for the tool lending library came about as a result of the person who was the director of the Berkeley public library at the time (around 1975 or so) having seen a television news programme about a place called Cohoes, New York, where there was a tool library in existence already. It was at a time when there was something called the CETA programme which was the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, which Congress had passed around ’74 or ’75 for the purpose of improving employment prospects for people who were traditionally unemployable for whatever reasons. So there was Federal money from that programme and then there was the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) programme which was designed to provide remedy for urban blight and housing rehab in poor neighbourhoods. He [the library director] saw that as a model for something he might want to do in Berkeley.

So it almost started off as more of an urban regeneration and employment initiative than a library initiative per se?

Right – though I think someone saw the connection, saw the library as a tool. So there was that association of the utility of libraries and of books. They thought it was an interesting thing to do and so somebody wrote a grant proposal and the thing became an ongoing concern. They were granted some funding, but they didn’t have a person to run it. When the job became available I thought, well, gee this would be an interesting thing to do and I’d like to do it. So I was applying for the position, but before anyone could be hired there was this thing called the Jarvis-Gann property initiative (Prop 13), which happened in 1977. A couple of basically right wing Republican political types had an initiative campaign put before the voters to drastically reduce property taxes. It was passed and resulted in huge cuts to municipal and public resources. So the library was faced with having to close its branches. And there were severe cuts to schools and to city governments as the tax revenues were rolled back to some really ancient level – I don’t even remember the details of it. You know in some ways the Californian economy is still reeling from that – and that was 30 years ago. Anyway at that point the tool library was temporarily scuttled – they put it away. They had begun to purchase some tools but they didn’t hire anybody. They put the tools in storage and put the project on hold until such time as some temporary bail out funds were made available for the library to maintain its branches. The thing about it was that the tool library was going to be located at one of the branch libraries and they didn’t think they could really have a tool library when one of the branch libraries was going to be closed – so for that reason it was put on hold for about a year, a year and a half. When the dust settled after all of that they started up again. So they hired me and then it was my job to continue buying tools and to procure a mobile office unit- sort of a trailer, like you see at construction sites-to house the library. It was was quite small. We parked it in the parking lot of one of the branch libraries.

What date was this?

Well we opened in January of ’79, so during the fall of ’78 was when I was doing this. I think I came on board in October ’78 and started putting the thing together: marking the tools and buying more tools, building shelving for the interior of the trailer, putting some skirting around the bottom of it to hide the wheels and all that kind of stuff. By January of ’79 we were ready, and that’s when it started. It was quite small and quite limited as to what we had and what we were able to offer. The quality of the tools was not what it is now. We tried to make the limited funding go as far as possible. We were funded by this block grant Federal funding and it had a lot of strings attached to it. They wanted us to keep statistics about who was using the tools: how many people of such and such income level, how many single parent families, how many different types of minorities…

Does that information exist anywhere still?

I don’t think anybody really thought it through. It was all a political thing. We just played the game as best we could. That CDBG programme had something called the Neighbourhood Strategy Area and it was based on census tracts within the city of Berkeley. If the median income in a particular census tract was below a certain level then it was considered part of the Neighbourhood Strategy Area, i.e. a low- income area. So we were sort of under a mandate to make sure that at least fifty percent or more of our patronage was from those areas. At the same time I don’t see how it possibly could have been successful if we kept it restricted to those areas. At some point we developed a plan where people who were not in that area would pay a small fee – like fifty cents or whatever – and the people within the Neighbourhood Strategy Area would get it for free. So that’s how we were able to keep it more or less within the mandate. I also used to have to provide little statistical reports, monthly reports to break down our numbers…

Do you remember anything of those early numbers?

I don’t. I really don’t. Most of our people did come from that area because that’s where we were located- but plenty of people came from elsewhere. Property owners pay a hefty tax in Berkeley for the support of the library. That was another issue – the library had a special tax initiative to make up the shortfall from the Proposition 13 thing. There was a special parcel tax that was unpopular with some property owners who resented having to pay it . So we didn’t want to tell them they couldn’t use the tool library. We didn’t have a huge majority. It was more like fifty -fifty, owing to the fact that a lot of people would have to drive some distance. People who were up in the hills would have to come along a long way to come to the tool library, whereas the people in the lower income neighbourhoods were right there. But there were people who were doing some extensive remodelling – who owned homes and were working on them. So we had a mix of everything. On top of that we had a fair number of people who were using the tools for self-employment – like handymen and things like that. Small time, not anyone who was a major contractor, but for some of the things that we had… obviously there were great savings to be able to borrow them for free.

Especially with the more expensive items.

As we began to get a more sophisticated inventory of things – some of the more expensive tools – it became quite an advantage to be able to borrow something that would have cost you thirty or forty dollars a day…

It would be a great asset to the community I imagine?

Yeah, yeah. Well it became quite popular and it’s been there a long time. In the beginning I don’t think I would have ever thought it would have lasted this long because it was so… Well, we used to have to go before boards and make presentations. The way the thing was while we were on the CDGB – every year we would have to go before something called the Housing Advisory and Appeals Board (HAAB),which was an advisory board to the city council. Any project that wanted to be funded – and the funding was year by year – had to go back to make a report and ask for the funding to be renewed for another year. Occasionally there was some minor opposition by some local political group to the tool library. For a while there were people that were mad at the library because the library had passed this initiative to get its own tax money. One year one of the hostile council people succeeded in getting the funding cut nearly by half, but the library was able to make up the shortfall using carryover funds, which were funds that other CDBG projects had not spent the previous year. So we weathered that storm. After about ten years the library was under pressure to take over the funding of the tool library and get away from the CDGB funding. At that point the old trailer we had was in danger of becoming condemned. They weren’t going to let us keep it there any longer. It was getting dilapidated. Its little aluminium shell had been broken into several times. It was getting beat up. In 1988 or ’89 the library took over the funding – and we were no longer using the Federal funding.

How did that integration occur – between the Tool Lending Library and the Berkeley Public Library?

All along they had provided accounting and administrative services – and that was important. Also we were right next to the South Branch library and one of the librarians made a special bibliography regarding home repair projects and different types of things that would be of interest to people who were borrowing tools. From the beginning there was a book budget – to get DIY type books to use in conjunction with the tool library. Over the years we were not really using that too much. It soon became necessary to spend almost every penny we could to maintain the tool collection. Gradually the library just took over the function and made sure that there were plenty of the kinds of books people needed anyway. That part of the integration wasn’t so bad. The funding would come to the library and then our budget was basically worked out with the person who was the accountant at the library, so he was able to help us keep an eye on what we were spending and how we were doing. Later the library took it over and it became a little problematic because they put us the position of having to make sure we collected enough fines to replenish the budget. The fines had to be somewhat painful. For some of the tools we were charging as much as five dollars a day. Now some of the tools have as much as a fifteen dollar a day overdue fine – because it’s a substantial advantage that people are getting. A lot of it gets forgiven one way or another. There again that has fluctuated too, depending on who is in charge of the library. Some have wanted to crack down on people to make sure that we collect every penny that we can. There have been a couple of changes in administration of the library that have made a big difference in the atmosphere.

I popped into the library yesterday and saw how neatly they’ve integrated the tool library lending system with the public library circulation system – which must be fantastic from your point of view as it cuts down on administrative overhead and so on.

Yeah, sure, yeah. Well back in the day when the library became computerised in the mid ’80s – in the tool library we were doing everything on paper for the longest time. I had binders with little papers and dividers for different due dates. It was just a mess. It was all on paper. They finally gave us one terminal, but it wasn’t enough and we just had to fight to have anyone consider getting us a second computer terminal. Now we’ve got three and its all integrated and all works well – except when it goes down and then we go back to paper for a day or so. [Laughs]

I guess paper is very reliable at least… In terms of your acquiring new tools and having a strategy for your purchasing – was that demand led? How did you go about developing the collection?

Yeah – it’s pretty much demand led – it is. It depends on what people ask for and what sense we have of not having enough of. For instance, back in the days after the 1989 earthquake there was a huge surge in people wanting things to be able to bolt their houses to the foundations – you know, seismic retrofit. And so we ended up having to get a lot more of that stuff, as there was this huge demand for it. Generally we get a feel for the sorts of things that go out the most, what sort of things we run short of, things that break down or are stolen or lost – which is normal-a normal part of any such thing. We have to be able to budget for it. We seem to be in pretty good shape right now. The prior administration to the one that’s there now – they were occupied with doing a major renovation of the central library in Berkeley so they were very tight with the money and made it very difficult to do any purchasing. They made it very difficult for us to forgive anybody’s overdue fines or anything like that. They kept a real tight control over everything. At some point the person in charge during that period left or was forced out or something – I wasn’t around to take you over the details of it. Once this person was gone they hired somebody else and everything loosened up again and it was great. But there were people who were writing letters to the editor about, you know, the tool library isn’t the same as it was, the atmosphere is really not as nice as it used to be. Not as friendly or whatever. A lot of it had to do with the culture of the library that was going through sort of a hiccup so… Being part of larger organisation – such as public library or a public library system – thats the sort of thing you have to deal with but then again that’s the only way you’re going to have a lot of funding. The thing I noticed from hearing about tool lending libraries that have started up somewhere else is that they are difficult to sustain. It’s almost like an”only in Berkeley” sort of thing – as Berkeley is a city where there’s a real interest in having community things.

That’s another thing I was wondering about – in terms of how it started off and how well it was received – how the tool library fit in with the kind of liberal culture you’ve got in Berkeley, particularly in the ’70s?

Well Berkeley has only reluctantly gotten out of the ’60s. They’re still trying to kick the Marine recruiters out of town and all this. [Laughs] There’s always that. So there’s always a lot of people who think it’s a great idea on principle. Then there are people who actually use it a lot and have strong opinions on how we should do it – because they’re there all the time. It’s an interesting thing. They tried to do it here in San Francisco. I was consulted on that. I came here and had a talk sort of like this. Well, it wasn’t even like this, really. I sat in on an interview where they were interviewing organisations that wanted to run it. They were offering the tool library contract – so to speak – to community groups. One of them was Christmas in April – which is a non-profit organisation that did home repairs for seniors and others. Once a year they would get some candidates of people who were unable to fix up their home, that had special needs and they would gather up contractors who would donate their time. There was another one called the San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners – SLUG. They were the ones that ultimately got the contract. My friend Adam got hired for a while to work there. That happened under Willie Brown. Something happened and somehow it didn’t last. They weren’t able to make it work. Of course San Francisco is a big place and it was in a specific neighbourhood – over in the Portola district on Silver Avenue. For some reason it didn’t last there. I’ve heard of others – there was one in Eugene, Oregon that was there for a while. Another in [Ashland], Oregon that was there for while – gone. I think the one in Berkeley is the probably the longest continuously…

It seems like it might be quite subtle. Do you think there’s a magic formula?

There’s got to be a spirit of it somehow. It almost becomes like a cafe or a bar or something where people come and you become familiar with people that come. If it’s a pleasant place to be – a lot of people just come and talk. It has to be comfortable and it has to be patronised. It has to be kept going. Of course Berkeley – being a university town – has a huge turnover of people coming in and out. There are some people that have been coming there for twenty years or so. And yet every year or every six months there is a sizeable bunch of new people who haven’t been there. People are always moving in and out – a lot of people. I think that’s to do with the association with the university. You get kids in the dorms once in a while. Somehow or other there’s a turnover of people – so you’re always getting new people.

Residency is one of the criteria for membership – I guess students qualify for this?

It is. They do. Residency is the main thing. They like to say its because they pay taxes – but its also just a practical thing. You just don’t want to.. I mean it happens anyway… I”ve had to go and rescue tools… I had people get a drill bit stuck in a piece of concrete or something and I had to go all the way out to some outlying community to rescue it… [Laughs] Once they leave the tool library you don’t know where they’re going. You don’t need to know – as long as you get them back.

What do you think were the main problems? One can imagine that breakages and theft could be problematic.

Well actually in the very beginning there was an effort to co-ordinate with the CETA programme, as I told you earlier. We hired a guy who was an ex-felon and it turns out he had a heroine habit and all these things were disappearing. People were coming and borrowing things after I had left and these people turned out to – well it turned out they didn’t exist. He was selling the tools after hours and covering it with some story. Once we were on to him he disappeared but he had some keys and somebody came in the middle of the night and opened up the place and just about emptied it out.

What a blow..

Yeah. It was a blow. But – ah – we recovered from it. [Laughs]

When was this?

This was during the first year. It was in 1979 and ’80. It was in winter following the time we opened up that it actually happened. We began to get a nose for that sort of thing. You know somebody comes in and they want all the most expensive tools that we’ve got and they don’t seem to have any clear idea what they’re going to do with them. It’s kind of like being a shopkeeper or someone who runs a cafe or a small business where people come in.

Do you have any idea how many tools have gone through theft?

Well, over the years.. hundreds. Every year I would say.. [Crashing noise as old lady's shopping cart falls over - Pete and I go and help her]

Danger…

You can’t leave one of those things alone! [Laughs] Anyway – where were we.. It happens. Of course people’s houses get broken into, their cars get broken into. We lose stuff that way. People make good on it for the most part. People are responsible for the tools once they have them. Some people have to pay us for something that’s been lost.

Just like with a regular library.

Yeah exactly. Some of the things are quite expensive you know. Five, six hundred dollars, or more. [Move inside the cafe]

You were saying about the losses and breakages and all this kind of thing.

Yeah. It’s just part of the process of doing it. You try to minimise it. In the beginning there was a big concern. Way back they were arguing about whether they should fund such a far out idea in the first place. Whats going to happen? People are just going to take it all. Particularly being in a low income, high crime neighbourhood. And there was a certain amount of it. But… I like to think that it became popular in that community. There was a certain amount of respect for it. A lot of the people that we would have thought might want to take the stuff into their pocket didn’t at all. Although Berkeley is becoming increasingly gentrified over the years… Anything in Berkeley is expensive to buy any more. I think there are fewer lower income people in Berkeley now than there were before. Anyway they still have losses you know – but I really don’t know how much any more.

It would be interesting to know as a percentage…

You might have better luck talking to Adam [who currently works at the tool library] about this kind of thing. I can give you his number.

Just to get an idea – what was the budget initially and what is it now and how did it change?

That’s a good question. I wish I could remember. The largest part of the budget was for personnel costs. Hiring me and paying for my benefits as a city employee. I’m trying to think how much we had to work with for the equipment. It couldn’t have been more than ten thousand dollars for tools.

Was that on an annual basis?

Yeah.

That doesn’t seem like bad going to maintain and develop the collection…

Right. I’m trying to remember. Somewhere that stuff exists. It was all on paper in those days. I don’t know if it does exist anymore. There were boxes of stuff that got thrown out when they remodelled the library. There were boxes of paper… I don’t know whether any of that stuff is available.

So in terms of a legal framework – I guess you have the contracts or terms and conditions which patrons sign or agree to?

Oh yeah. Well we have rules and regulations. And something called a waiver and indemnification form which is supposed to provide protection against liability. I’ve been told, and I’m sure you’re probably aware, that there’s no way to sign away your right to sue – if something happens to you. This makes it a little more difficult. You sign something that says that in consideration for being able to borrow these tools you agree to hold harmless the city and the authorities and all this sort of thing if there’s any injury to you or anyone else and so on. We have people sign that.

In terms of legal representation? In the eventuality of legal issue you would be represented by…

The city attorney. That’s another advantage of being part of the city. Yeah. Otherwise it would be pretty expensive. I mean liability insurance would be prohibitive.

But nobody has ever tried to take legal action?

No, no. Not as far as I know. As far as injuries – I’m not aware of… Well, actually I heard there was one guy who cut a couple of fingers off but was able to get them reattached – or parts of his fingers. But that’s quite recent. During the time that I was there I never had anything serious happen. One person cut themselves with an electric saw but they didn’t think it was our fault it was something that happened. It wasn’t a serious cut. But other than that I don’t remember. Of course there’s luck involved there. [Laughs]

I guess also this feeds back into the user community and contributes to the sense of responsibility.

You have to agree you’re going to take responsibility. It’s funny – when I go back as a substitute there are people I don’t know anymore who have come there since I have left. So I get introduced to them. They are all quite familiar with the people who are working there now. It’s a very mellow kind of a scene. A lot of people need advice and have problems. And any time you can help someone solve some kind of a problem they are always grateful. So it becomes a place people enjoy being. They can’t always get what they want when they want it – that’s the other thing. There’s often a waiting list. You can’t be sure you’ll get it. And there again we have to stay on top of it. The people who put through requests, we have to honour them and call them and tell them its available. That was always a source of tension. If we didn’t have enough of something then people would get pushed out of shape because they were waiting to get this thing and ‘why isn’t it back yet?’. If someone else hasn’t returned it they get really angry because they’ve been waiting and waiting. You can’t have something that is so popular that people are going to be fighting over or you can’t afford to have enough of. In other words the decision to get some terribly expensive thing that is a huge advantage to be able to get – if you only have one then it really becomes a problem. For example the little things for trimming grass – particularly during the growing season, in the summer, everybody wants one. And for that reason they can’t be reserved. For some things you can’t really have a reserve list because the list gets huge and impractical – and doesn’t work anymore. You presume to have to wait a few weeks or a month for your name to come up on the waiting list and of course by then you’re not going to still be waiting.

And what’s the duration of the loan period?

Well when I started out it was three days. There have been several changes and permutations over the years. Part of the problem with being tied to the library computer system is that each item has an item type, and the item type in the computer system determines its overdue fine and its loan period. So we have some things that go out for three days and have a five dollar fine, some go out for seven days.. Nowadays we have three-day tools and seven-day tools, and that’s all there are… In the past there used to be two-day things and three-day things and a couple of seven-day things with different fine amounts. It’s complicated for things to make sense. In other words you can’t cut it too fine because of the computer system. You have to have just one or two types of tools. Now we have three-day and seven-day tools. Some of them have different overdue amounts depending on how desirable or busy they are. Now they have things that are three days with a fifteen dollar fine, some things that are three days with a five dollar fine… Then there are seven-day things with a one or two dollar fine. And of course because we’re only five days a week rather than seven – if you’re able to get something say on a Thursday you’re allowed to keep it until the following Tuesday as we’re closed on Sunday and Monday. So there’s jockeying for position when people try to get something for the weekend. It’s all an active thing.

Is there also workshop space at the library?

No. That’s a problem too because of liability concerns. The library doesn’t really want people to be doing work on the premises. Occasionally there have been workshops – to show people how to do something or to discuss something. It’s always been something the library would like to happen – but the resources are always at the edge of what’s possible. There are some changes in the works. I don’t know what’s going to happen or when – but they’re planning to move the South Branch Library which is where we are now to a different location. There’s going to be a big project built near the [Ashby] BART station. Its going to be a center for disabled people. There’s going to be space for the South Branch Library in that building – but the tool library is not going to be able to go there. So the Tool Library may end up taking over a larger part of the library building that exists there now – or something new may be built, I haven’t heard the latest. So some changes are in the works and it may be that there’ll be a larger space. The other thing is it’s a small space. It’s like having ten pounds worth of stuff in a five pound bag. It’s jammed together and it’s disorganised – it’s very difficult to keep it organised. I’ts like your house or your room – you know where things are but it’s still a mess.

Tool libraries seem like such a great idea. Can you think of any way in which the model for the Tool Library in Berkeley can be generalised to be exported elsewhere? Is there any advice you would give to people trying to start a tool library elsewhere?

Well.. I suppose there’s resistance to it from the business community. There was a small commercial tool rental place that is no longer around – but of course a lot of that has to do with the general contraction of the economy since the ’80s because all kinds of things went out of business in the late ’80s and early ’90s that were there and all of a sudden they’re not. A lot of people thought we were taking a lot business from the commercial rental place. I can’t see how that really could have been the case because we were still pretty small and they had stuff that we couldn’t afford to have.

Also it might encourage people who used a tool to rent or buy it…

Of course, of course! We refer people all the time. Nowadays we have lists of what is available at local rental places and what the prices are and all that kind of stuff. It’s sitting on a bulletin board so people can check it out. There’s also just competition for funding.

Presumably local libraries and local authorities are often reluctant to take on things that they perceive as being beyond their remit.

Exactly. Its the same thing that happens in municipal government. Or anything that requires parceling out of available resources. People are reluctant to fund something unless… you, know, it has to have advocacy. That’s the thing that happens usually. There’s usually one person who is very enthusiastic or responsible for keeping things going. And if that person is no longer there then it sort of starts to fall apart. Unless there’s some sort of collective or collaborative organisation of people who are dedicated to it. Even that’s hard to sustain because everything always comes down to certain people to press a case to certain other people. One thing about it is the Berkeley culture. Berkeley feels responsible for having a certain personality as a community.

How does this personality relate to the library?

Berkeley has always had a lot of activity. For example there’s always been a lot of activity around the disabled community in Berkeley. We have this thing called the Center for Independent Living. They have wheelchair maintenance things and ramp-building… In the early days they were building wheelchair ramps all around to make accessibility for disabled people. There’s a lot of different stuff going on. People tend to have opinions about things. Any time there’s been talk of reducing or getting rid of the tool library people have been up in arms. People go ballistic and start writing letters to the editor. That’s the kind of place it is. It’s relatively small geographically. The whole of Berkeley could fit between here and the beach!

So the circumstances which allowed the tool library to get going under a Federal grant and which saw it being integrated into the Public Library, combined with the demand from Berkeley citizens, are really what have helped to ensure its stability and allowed it to flourish?

There was always huge competition for Federal funding. People wanted us out of the game so that they could get their hands on that money for their projects. There was always that pie that we were getting a piece of and somebody else would just as soon have it – for some other project. It was good for us to get off of that one – so someone else could do something with it. What makes it possible for it to happen in other places? I think there just has to be some sort of a community spirit somehow. You should definitely talk to Adam. People have come from Japan, Oregon, Washington and other places. There’s a Tool Lending Library in Missoula, Montana, which is a university town too. There are a couple of them up in Seattle.

Berkeley was one of the pioneers?

It certainly wasn’t the first – but it is one of the longest enduring. I’ve heard that there was one in Berkeley in the late ’40s or ’50s that was part of the Co-op. The Co-op movement had a big Berkeley component because there was a large Finnish community and a Norweigian community that related to the Co-ops in the mid-West. All during the ’60s the Co-op was the place to go. You know, it was like the Berkeley Bowl or the Whole Foods of the time. The Co-op had various different programmes going on and at one point they had a tool library. I don’t know how you would research that… Of course they were all considered a bunch of communists. It was sort of a socialist sort of a thing. That’s what Berkeley is famous for.

And I guess there were also groups like the Diggers in San Francisco – free shops and so on?

Well they originated in the Netherlands right? They used to have food things back in 1966 and ’67. I think they started in Amsterdam or some such place. I’m an old man – I can remember way back! [laughs]

There’s a now a growing DIY culture – things like the Maker community – which might contribute to a sense of demand for things like tool libraries.

Well it’s like an affinity group. I read something in the paper about that… It was very interesting!

I get the impression there’s also a growing culture of people wanting to repair the things that they have and look after them – rather than replacing them…

I know, I know… I subscribe to Harper’s magazine and there were some photos in there that just blew me away in the last issue. These guys took photographs of excess stuff. There was this photograph of smashed cars and it was a wide angle photo. You realised that there were probably five or six hundred cars. It looked like layers of apples in an apple pie. There was another one with cell phone chargers and it looked like a bunch of snakes and worms. You realise how much stuff there is. It makes you think about the stuff there is in your own house. We just had a garage sale at our house last week… I had a plastic bucket full of old phone chargers, computer cables, transformers, etc….

My friend’s father is a farmer and he has big barns with boxes of different stuff – which he uses to make things and repair things. He’s so adept at it – it’s amazing…

It takes a certain sort of person to do that… an artist! It’s amazing. Just to be able to have an idea of what to do with the stuff…

There’s a big culture of repairing electronic stuff in Brazil – with cannibalising broken equipment, re-soldering tiny components…

Around here if something goes wrong with your computer you can’t afford to have anybody fix it. So you throw it away. It’s bad.

I guess the problem is storage. I keep thinking that it would be great to have some kind of shared storage facility for recyclable junk, electronic stuff, salvage and so on.

There’s a place in Berkeley called Urban Ore. They basically started taking removing useful stuff from the trash. Now they have a huge warehouse full of stuff. Its mostly building materials, old plumbing fixtures, mouldings, doors, windows… But now they’ve also got a big storage facility with all kinds of strange stuff for sale. I don’t know what they are going to do with it. I wish there was some way they could convert it into food or something! [laughs]

I wonder if you know about tool libraries in countries with more limited resources, where there might be more of a stronger demand?

There is a guy who comes into the Tool Library from a local Rotary Club that’s adopted a community in Mexico and has helped them to get a tool lending library set up. I haven’t heard much about it lately – but Adam could tell you something about it. He went down there to help get it started

Do you have any interesting stories about unusual uses for the tools?

I know that some of the tools were used to pull up some railway tracks. There was some big political thing in the ‘80’s where people were trying to stop weapons shipments to a naval depot at a place called Port Chicago. There was a famous case where a guy’s legs were cut off by a train. Anyway people were demonstrating at Port Chicago. Trains were coming through with munitions, and people were blocking the trains by sitting on the tracks, and at one point a guy actually got run over and lost his legs. After that there was a lot of rage and a couple of the tools were used to tear up the tracks. That’s what I heard anyway. There was another case where people were occupying vacant buildings. Being Berkeley, people were making a big deal out of it. One of our tools got confiscated by the police and put into storage.

Presumably mostly people are doing DIY stuff?

Oh yeah. People are always doing stuff in their homes. A lot of people have ongoing projects and you see them every few days for a month or two and they’re gone and you don’t see them for six months or a year and then they’re back doing something else.

Do people also make things with the tools?

Yeah. There are a certain number of street sellers and people who make craft items that they sell. There was one guy who made African instruments – kalimbas, shakers, and stuff out of gourds. He sells them at local craft fairs. He’s been using the tools for years. There are various artists that use the tools for their work. There are a lot of people who I have no idea what they are doing.

And what is your own background?

I came to Berkeley as a student but I never finished. I dropped out and traveled to Europe for several months. This was during the Vietnam war years and I lost my student deferment. I had to hurry back and re-enroll in school, but then I had a love affair that was going bad and… So I allowed myself to get drafted. Like I was going to go and join the French Foreign Legion… [laughs] .. to cure my broken heart and I said to hell with it and I went. Then I got into the army and I realised it was a big mistake. I went in and I got myself out… by refusing to co-operate. I was lucky…

So you went to Vietnam?

No I didn’t. I got out before I finished my basic training. I refused to co-operate and they finally just realised they weren’t going to be able to make a soldier out of me. So they put me out. Then I worked for a little while at a little at some little shipping clerk job. Then I went back to school again – to UC Santa Cruz. It was actually the second year that Santa Cruz was there. It was brand new then. I spent one year there, then I dropped out without finishing there. Then I got caught up in the summer of love 1967. I got caught up in it. I was living in this drug house and working odd jobs and smoking weed. Anyway by this time I was estranged from my family. At some point I ended up… after some bad acid trip… I was living in a hotel. In a little bare lightbulb hotel room and all this kind of stuff. I finally got myself back together and I met this girl who was living in the neighbourhood and I got together with her and then I was living in a little rear apartment in South Berkeley and… I was about ready to leave because I was running out of money – I kept trying to get these little jobs that I couldn’t get. And I couldn’t pay my rent, so I , said I’m going to go out on the road, you know, I was going to go out on the road… And some guy, one of my neighbors, says ‘hey,.. I need a janitor’.. [laughs] So next thing I knew I was working for the Berkeley Public Library… as a janitor.. [laughs] That was how I ended up there.

And you did that from then until…

That was in ’69. Eventually I moved up to doing building maintenance.

So it was 10 years you worked in building maintenance until January ’79 when the tool library opened?

That’s when the tool library opened.

And you worked from then until…

Well I retired in… I think it was in ’99. ’69, ’79 to ’99. And my daughter was born in ’89. I’ve got two sons that are older. One was born in ’71, the other was born in ’72. Then I divorced their mother – we broke up sometime around ’75 or something like that. I met another woman I worked with at the library. We had a daughter in ’89. She’s up at the University of Oregon. It,s been a long involved thing. I’ve been very lucky. Things came along for me.. so.. I don’t know. I don’t know what I would have done…

I heard you were working in the garden when I called you.

Yeah. I’m always working. All the years that I worked… We own our house. I’m always working to clean it up. So..

You’ve always had your own projects in the background?

I suppose its just.. my father did that sort of thing. My grandfathers were tradesmen.

So you’ve always been interested in making…

Well I.. yeah.. or at least that’s what I felt I should be doing. Actually most of my childhood I was being trained to be an academic or a musician or this sort of thing. Only when I got out on my own I decided to start doing things with my hands – learn how to work on cars, learn how to work on this and that…

Its so different now! Its a shame.

Yeah.. You can’t do it any more. Its all computerised. Its incredible.

I would have loved to work on one of those old bikes…

Yeah.. I had an old Volkswagen bus for many years. We ended up doing some stuff to it- rebuilt the engine three times! Of course I had a friend who was better at it than I was. Now you can’t do that any more.

A group of my friends did some work on an old ambulance which we converted into a mobile cinema. It has solar panels and runs on biodiesel. There’s a marquee that attaches to the back of it.

Wow.. There was a guy.. Have you heard of a guy called Malcolm Margolin? He’s a publisher of books – he has a publishing house called Heyday books. His son is an artist, and he came by the tool library one time and he had an idea- he thought people should get together and talk. You know, he had this conceptual thing. He has this old Volkswagen chassis. Somehow he attached this round wooden conference table to it. So that when he was driving around the country he was planning to get people to sit around this table and talk! [laughs] He’s doing another thing now.. with a chandelier… I can’t quite remember. [laughs] There’s people doing all sorts of stuff.

Yeah.. Its a shame though – Increasingly I get the feeling that a lot of people have to fight to find the time to work on these kinds of things.

Yeah. Just to survive and just keep your head above water is sometimes hard.

Part of me thinks that there’s something very comforting and in a way important about doing practical stuff. It can be sort of therapeutic if you’re very busy.

Oh yeah. I get a kick out of taking things apart and fixing them. There are some old bicycles in our back yard that have been sitting in the rain over the years. The chains are rusty and they won’t bend. The gears won’t work. Our older son was at Burning Man and he took the bike with him. I took the gears apart and figured out how they work and cleaned them and lubricated them. I got a kick out of that. To extend the life of something. I really hate to throw stuff away. But you have to sometimes. The trouble is there that there is no such thing as away. There is no away. It’s always somewhere. That’s what’s scary about it all. Have you ever read anything by William McDonough? There’s a book called Cradle to Cradle – as opposed to cradle to grave. He has ideas like if you wanted to have cars – why should you have to own a particular thing and then get rid of it, why not have it and then when it needs a redesign, bring it back in and they retune it. There’s no reason. Except that’s the way things are! [laughs] I guess there are always people with these kinds of ideas.

Someone told me that there were a lot of interesting ideas published in the Whole Earth Catalogue?

Well.. that was back in the late ’60s – ’69? It was a wonderful compendium of stuff. It was inspired by the picture of the whole earth that came back from the astronauts going to the moon – when they took a picture… For the first time people actually saw a picture of the earth – which was really, really a big moment. ‘There it is – its just like they said!’ [laughs] ‘Its just like the globe I used to have in my room!’.. Anyway that lasted a while then it morphed into something called the Co-Evolution Quarterly. There’s this guy named Stewart Brand, who sort of started it all He’s involved in something based out at Fort Mason called something like the Long Now. They have an exhibit space of these wierd clocks. Milennium clocks. Anyway he was the guy behind the Whole Earth Catalogue, and then it became Co-Evolution Quarterly which was really avante garde thinking, really far out thinking…

Was the Whole Earth Catalogue initially mostly practical?

Yeah… well, it had departments. It had tools, it had community, it had books… it had everything. All sorts of stuff. It really turned everyone on back in that day because it was a big bibliography that you normally wouldn’t see… Now of course, everything is online. That’s what blows me away. You can go online and find out anything you want just about. Wikipedia and all that stuff.

I’ve been thinking about a couple of web-based projects around some of the ideas we’ve been talking about. One is a big database of products and the components that they contain. So if you need a certain component – you can search for what kinds of products you might be able to salvage it from. Or you might want to look for what useful components are in a product you are getting rid of, or that you’ve found. The other thing is a big database of instructions or procedures – how you make different things – so that you can say I’ve got these materials or these tools, and see what kinds of things you can do using those things.

Yeah.. Those are great ideas… So much stuff just gets tossed. I guess that’s what wikis are for! What amazes me about what’s happening with the web, is that you used to have to go to a library and if the library didn’t have the book you were shit out of luck, you had to go to another library! [laughs] ..or find a bigger library in a bigger town, or university or whatever, that you might not have access to.

.. or try and track down someone to speak to…

Exactly!

This post was migrated to here from another (now defunct) blog on 19th December 2009

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment