Give It Away And Pray: Maybe Not A Business Model, But Still Important For Artists

from the If-you-don't-know-what-you're-doing,-you're-doing-it-right dept

Mike has written that "Give it away and pray is not a business model," however, that doesn't mean it's not a good way for Artists to live.

Business models can emerge from "give it away and pray." When I gave Sita Sings the Blues away, the audience created modes of sharing and revenue streams I hadn't thought of. Many fans, on their own initiative, set up  screenings and house parties, and sent me donations. Now that I know this is possible, I could call it a "business model" that could be replicated by offering screening kits and guidelines. But the audience may be coming up with new ideas and wanting to engage in new ways I can't predict or imagine. Last year's business model can't describe next year's zeitgeist; "give it away and pray" is eternal.

Because I surrendered any commercial monopoly on the film (truly gave it away with copyLeft rather than "sort of gave it away" with no-commercial-use and no-derivatives restrictions), it has been incorporated into some amazing creative projects I could never have imagined. Bill Cheswick's every-frame-of-a-movie poster and Star Simpson's MonkeyLectric bike wheel display are just two examples. If I hadn't given the film away, I wouldn't have even known about these amazing projects, let alone been part of them.

"Give it away" means expecting nothing in return, so whatever does return is also a gift. "Pray" means letting go of the results and trusting that giving is the right thing to do even if nothing comes back. This isn't a business model, because it's not about business; it is about Art, and Love. Economists may not be concerned with Art and Love, but Artists have to be, or else they stop being Artists. Of course Artists can be concerned with business as well. Art and commerce can be fully complementary. I pay a lot of attention to business models (that's why I read Techdirt). But I can forget that I am an Artist, especially when "give it away and pray" is so often dismissed. 

It's easy for me to exalt "give it away and pray", because so much came back to me so quickly in the case of Sita. We can analyze this material success and derive useful business models from it. That's quite valuable, but it's only part of the picture. If we forget the "give it away and pray" part, we regard audience gifts as commodities, which degrades the artist, the community, and the artist-audience relationship.

We never know what the world will bring us. Adhering to a business model may make us feel secure, but the most exciting possibilities and opportunities are in the space of not knowing. In Art, unlike Business, if you don't know what you're doing, you're doing it right.



Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:09pm

    It is safe to say, however, that giving it away was not your intention. Rather, it was the result of your mistake of starting out assuming you had rights to something that you did not have, correct? So perhaps you should thank the rights holder for setting you straight and getting you out of the groove of making movies for profit.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Michael Brutsch, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:11pm

    So cool

    I just have to tell you, you are so cool! I Googled my name the other day, and was surprised to find someone on IMDB shared my name (it's not that common). Imagine my surprise when I found that I was listed under the 'Contributors' for Sita Sings The Blues. A little thing, but it made me feel great, and you can bet I'll be back in the future.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    Nina Paley (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:18pm

    Re:

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:23pm

    In Business, unlike Art, if you don't know what you're doing, you're a professional.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:27pm

    Re:

    After paying the rights holder, she was free to release her film in any way she saw fit. However, I'm sure the unpleasantness of dealing with the rightsholders for long dead artists, helped open Nina's eyes.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:29pm

    Question for Nina

    Have you thought to use googles tools (blog, e-mail, wiki) for random people, and fans to make suggestions on how to monetize your music?

    Have you thought about using a contest to ask people and fans to submit ideas on how to monetize your music?

    Have you thought about setting up a wiki and crowdsourcing a business plan?

    My outside the box idea for you is to combine all the above ideas and let several business plans evolve over time via inout from your fans.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:30pm

    Re: Question for Nina

    inout = input

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:36pm

    Re: Question for Nina

    I really like this idea. I have an idea to use Sita as the basis of an open mobile game, and it would really help for people like me to know how to work with you on things like this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:36pm

    Re: Re:

    Starving artists shouldn't make art unless they consult with their high-priced lawyers first. Problem solved!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:46pm

    Re: Re:

    again you only got there because you made a mistake out of the gate in making the movie without the rights figured out up front. at least that is what masnick said. is he wrong too?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Jim (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:51pm

    Wow

    That was just freaking awesome!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 12:59pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Is there a reason why if that were true it would alter or effect any of the lessons learned?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Charles, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 1:20pm

    Make music
    Give it away for free
    ???
    profit


    Make music
    Sell out to record label
    ???
    Be abused by record label

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    icon
    Barry Solow (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 1:20pm

    Accident, Adversity and the Value of Ideas

    Nina originally expected to license and distribute her film through channels that were "normal" for independent filmmakers. It turned out that, while there were no copyright problems with Annette Hanshaw's recordings, there were (unexpectedly, to Nina) problems with "sync" rights for the songs. This led to a protracted, expensive period during which lawyers negotiated an expensive settlement (which, however, was less expensive than would have been the case without their efforts). Nina paid the numerous rights-holders. At that point she was free to go ahead as she had originally intended and release the film through "normal" channels. By then, however, she had learned a lot about the state of copyright law in this country (and others) and had come to some negative conclusions about the effects of the system on artistic creation. She did a lot of thinking and a lot of research and decided to take the bold step of copylefting her film. Since then, she has garnered more money from the film than anyone had predicted would be the case had she released it through regular channels.

    So, yes, Nina made the film without copyleft in mind. It can be said that she arrived at the decision to copyleft it by accident, after a great deal of adversity. How does that in any way count as an argument about what she says above? She has learned a lot through her experience and now believes she can help artists avoid the problems she encountered. What's wrong with that?

    Penicillin's discovery was an accident. Is it therefore any less valuable a discovery?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    Nina Paley (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 1:32pm

    Re: Re: Question for Nina

    Well, you can negotiate with me to use the Creator Endorsed Mark:
    http://questioncopyright.org/creator_endorsed

    And you can get the .fla source files here:
    http://www.archive.org/details/Sita_Sings_the_Blues_Files

    Basically you can do whatever you want with "Sita", without my permission, but Endorsed projects have a competitive advantage in the marketplace.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 1:43pm

    Re: Re: Question for Nina

    With me or Nina?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 1:56pm

    Re: Re: Re: Question for Nina

    Hmm...these all appear to be in some strange .fla format. Will have to find a way to work with these.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 2:52pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    with no alternative is a lesson learned or was the situations just forced?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 3:17pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Question for Nina

    "Hmm...these all appear to be in some strange .fla format."

    "And you can get the .fla source files here:"


    :|

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 5:15pm

    What I like about the give and pray is that it spawn an eco system that can evolve to give more to the artist.

    In this case people "ripping" her work knows where they will have to go to get more material or newer things so those with a little bit of sense know they have to treat her well by giving back in some way. I think it creates a symbiotic relation with users that can have very positive results. The key word is eco-system.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 6:29pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Is there any relevance to your questions, or are you just mindlessly nitpicking?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 6:41pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    That's what uncreative rights holders do!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Terry Hancock (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 6:54pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    NO, the situation was not "forced".

    Paley licensed the sync rights to the songs. With these payments, she was free to release Sita any way she wanted to.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 7:20pm

    Re: Accident, Adversity and the Value of Ideas

    no but the invention of penicillin wasnt accompanied by someone ways "i intended that all along", or that got more heart warming with each rewriting of history. this story has reach techdirt mythic proportions and the mountain climbed higher and the goal more noble on each round.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 8:39pm

    Re: Re: Accident, Adversity and the Value of Ideas

    What are you blathering on about now?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 8:40pm

    Re: Re: Accident, Adversity and the Value of Ideas

    "no but the invention of penicillin wasnt accompanied by someone ways "i intended that all along"

    Nor was it in this case. But feel free to keep continuing to make stuff up, TAM.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    icon
    Terry Hancock (profile), Apr 12th, 2010 @ 8:41pm

    FLA format problem

    Yes, FLA is a problem.

    I wrote about it in detail here:
    http://fsmsh.com/3271

    My conclusion since then is that the only way Sita is going to get converted to an open format is if somebody with Adobe Flash's animator installed renders the files to SWF format and publishes those.

    If/when that happens, I think I (as well as many other people) can probably get it converted to SVG (and after that, conversion to many different open formats becomes possible).

    But I am NOT willing to install a proprietary operating system or to buy Adobe's animation software just so I can make this initial conversion from FLA to SWF.

    Nor am I willing to reverse-engineer FLA format and write a conversion library. There doesn't seem to be much interest in doing that. In fact, AFAICT, the only reason SWF is supported is because you needed that to _play_ Flash animations (SWF was intended as an opaque distribution format -- like a binary, and because Flash is a product of proprietary culture for proprietary animators, FLA, which was intended to be a source format, is generally not distributed, so there was little demand for reading it).

    To clarify -- we are talking about access to the original vector graphics, for the purposes of making more sophisticated derivatives. The _video_ is of course already available in several free/open standard formats on Internet Archive, if you are satisfied with video snippets or frame-captures from the film.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 12th, 2010 @ 10:38pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    it is important to understand this isnt so much a brilliant winning strategy but rather something that just happened in spite of so much ignorance. without securing the rights up front before making the movie the way the movie was distributed was forced by the rights holder. it wasnt ms paleys original intention it was suppose to be a commercial movie. what success it has now is mostly because of a huge fail up front before the first frame of the movie was made. not its a cause celeb for the masnick.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 13th, 2010 @ 12:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    It's a good thing copyright protects long dead artists against those evil living ones.

    Where would art be without so much lawyering? I shudder to think of it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 13th, 2010 @ 5:41am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    it just protects them from the ignorant ones.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    icon
    jsf (profile), Apr 13th, 2010 @ 8:04am

    Not Just One Plan

    I think "give it away and pray" is really just part of a broader set of activities that you do to make a living. It has been this way for most artists for decades. New bands play for free or at their own cost, authors do readings, book signings, etc. for free, artists put their works into shows for free, all to get exposure and build a following.

    So in some ways "give it away and pray" has been around and successful for a long time.

    The real difference these days is you can get much more and broader exposure more quickly because of the internet. You also don't need a big company to help you get that mass exposure any more. And that is what has the big publishers, record companies, etc. scared.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Apr 13th, 2010 @ 8:13am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Long dead artists don't need protecting. Because they're dead. Troll harder.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This