book report

I recently finished reading "The Israel Test" by George Gilder.
I cannot help but see familiar themes and ideas, and a few new ideas to pursue. Part of this is due to my religious instruction.

I see themes about the scattering and regathering of the House of Israel as prophesied and partially chronicled in the Old Testament and history in general.
I see aspects of the New Testament expression/symbols drawn from Old Testament ones: the Bride being the covenant people of God/the church/the House of Israel as represented by any of its constituent tribes; the Whore Of All The Earth being those who fight against the Bride, who Israel 'went a whoring after' in the Old Testament.
I see how God worked through remnants of His covenant people, wherever in the world they had gone to, to push civilization forward.

Gilder starts the book addressing an idea that is very much a subtext of my religious training. "The real issue is between the rule of law and the rule of leveler egalitarianism, between creative excellence and covetous "fairness," between admiration of achievement versus envy and resentment of it." (The Israel Test, pg 3, pp2)

I do not believe God has a problem with men prospering. I do believe He and has problem with man giving in to the temptations of the flesh and forgetting his fellows. I do not count the 'Seven Deadly Sins' as doctrine, yet they are profitable for study, and as a good demarcation of which side of above the argument you are on.

Gilder asks a few questions in his thesis as he start the book, to wit:
"What is your attitude toward people who excel you in the creation of wealth or in other accomplishment?
"Do you aspire to their excellence, or do you seethe at it?
"Do you admire and celebrate exceptional achievement, or do you impugn it and seek to tear it down?"
 (The Israel Test, pg 3, pp4)

In his summary of his conclusions at the end of the book, Gilder ties the future of Israel and the United States together, saying in so many words, that as one goes, so goes the other.

As I look around, I see that there are many who have been instructed to seethe and demand 'fairness' from those who prosper. "From each according to his means to each according to their needs." They say that is fair.
I say two points in response, but since neither would make a good sound bite it is nearly impossible to say them. First: I believe God is more concerned with Justice and Mercy, than he is with 'fair.' I will do my best to stand with and echo God in my own concerns that way. But since I am only a single puny man, I will resort to the prayer summarized as 'strength to change what I can, serenity to accept what I can not, wisdom to know the difference' and then let God handle the rest.
Second: to those who do not want to accept God's involvement, don't worry. He has a heaven set aside for you, where he will not be involved. '...In my fathers house are many mansions...' and all that, from The Savior. And from Paul on that same subject, '...one glory of the sun, and one glory of the moon, and one glory of the stars...' Though I believe we are saved from death and hell by the grace of Christ and will be resurrected, we are assigned to our mansions of glory by our works, for just as one person is more faithful than another, so also does God in his justice have a more glorious mansion for the more faithful. Those worried about 'fair' will get their fair share; if they want more, they will seek for more. I would hope they would abandon their childishness and demands for fairness, and start to work to improve themselves, while at the same time encouraging others to the same. "...the greatest of all will be the servant of all..."

I have read an interesting article on deviantART, by $techgnotic posted Mon Apr 3, 2012, that asks the questions:

As a writer, have you ever experienced being pressured to change an important part of a story, either at a prospective publisher’s or editor’s insistence, or simply because of a reader’s impassioned entreaties?

No, I have not, save in cases where the thing being written was for a grade in a class.

As a reader or viewer (of movies, TV shows, videogames, art, etc.) do you feel a sense of entitlement giving you the right to not only criticize but actually demand changes be made to a disappointing work?

No, I do not. This is firmly grounded in two ideas that come to mind: first that I know what reality is and have a firm disconnect between reality and fantasy; the second is of intellectual property rights – it’s not my place to tell the author what to do or not do, unless hired as an editor/collaborator.

Do you feel this entitlement is based in your great investment of both money and time in the work?  Or do you feel this entitlement is based in your great investment of your head and heart in a particularly resonant storyline?

I feel that anyone who is so invested in an idea that the idea/subject of the idea becomes an idol of worship/religion had really better check their gauge and disconnect between reality and fantasy. Further that unless there is an intellectual property rights issue or monetary issue at stake, than criticism may be given but the sense of entitlement is based on a false notion.

As a writer or visual artist, is the connection between you and your audience important enough for you to want to make a change pleasing to them?

Yes, but to a point. There must be a balance between pleasing the audience and pleasing one’s self. Commission pieces are done for the primary audience of whoever is paying for it. Most other work is done for the artist who is producing it. Pieces put out for public consumption require some awareness of the audience, and what will please them. However it is a true principle of always keep them wanting more. A counter-point principle is to end the story without any room for continuation.

As an online reader of Knite, Romantically Apocalyptic, or Off-White, is there an increased value or special connection you experience in being able to connect with the authors of your favorite works-in-progress and contribute your feedback?

I am not an on-line reader at this time, so I cannot answer in that regard. As for other works, I simply have not ever tried to give such feedback, viewing it as not necessary – the work is fiction, or a depiction of the person’s faith, so my criticism might only be needed on the level of improving the artist’s craft/skills, and I have not been interested in contributing to in that regard.

Does the ability to offer comments, suggestions, criticisms, and encouragement bond you creatively to a property in a way eclipsing passive fandom?

To some it may, but to me this bond moves in the direction of religious idolatry, and I prefer not to give that sort of energy of soul or bond to an idea or work.

Does Fan art and Fan Fiction created around an online story with author/reader interactivity become more of an integral part of the property than traditional offline fan art tributes?

That depends on the creator of the original/source work. One of the long standing unofficial rules is ‘the original creator is the God of the universe of the story(s) set there.’ If the creator is going to interact with his fan base and adjust his work accordingly, let him. If this extends to ‘canonizing’ work from outside his own efforts, that is his choice.

Personally, I have thus far had little interaction with online-works.

Offline there are works that have been abandoned by the original creator; some modern where the creator has simply moved on and refuses to interact with that work; some now public domain where the creator has died and the estate has let the copyright lapse. Some of these have been picked up and taken in new directions by fans.

A good real world example for this may be the estate of E.R.Burroughs which I understand holds the copyrights to most all of the authors works, and apparently also intellectual rights to creation of new or derivative properties. The Tarzan-rights have passed around from various comic- and movie- and even TV- studios. This has met with various levels of approval from the estate. Others of the ERB properties have not been let out, for whatever reason.

There are works that have not been abandoned. Of these there are some right’s holders who have forbidden meddling with the property; on-going properties may simply want to maintain the control and direction of where the work is going, and are utterly resistant to outside meddling, for whatever reasons; others simply do not want a finished work to be continued.

An example of non-abandoned work might be the ‘Star Wars’ body of work. George Lucas and his companies have maintained the property rights, yet they have also responded to fans in one form or another. The 501 Legion started as a fan-community, but it got canonized in “Revenge of the Sith.”

If you played ME3, how did you feel about the ending? TMNT or TANT?

I have not played, and cannot give any kind of opinion of any worth about ME3.

As for the Ninja Turtles, I would like to see them in their original published form, without the differing colors of head bands or belts, and where Splinter started out as an unusual rat instead of a human. None of the video-productions have done this that I am aware of.

I am left to consider whether to start publishing my works on deviantART. I wonder what kind of critique I might get from it. I do not feel that my art is up to professional/finished snuff, but my writing may get some of the feedback I have needed.

My largest underlying question is about intellectual property rights.