by Nina Paley

Filed Under:

Mimi & Eunice: Ye Olde Technologie Killing Culture, Scribes

from the the-more-things-change,-the-more-they-stay-the-same dept

Ye Olde Technology

Last month a well meaning friend in San Francisco wrote to me:

Netflix hurts and an idiot student told me last spring,"Why pay too see Sita at the Red Vic when I can watch it on the Internet
for free."  I tried to be polite in my answer...  I fear theInternet, Netflix, and other forms of amusement are killing what is left of independent theatres which means it will make things harder for artists to break even on productions.  We will end up with a culture based on cell phone images "edited" on toy computers. 

To which I replied,

Actually, the "idiot student" is right - there is no reason to go to the cinema for the "content." The reason to go to the cinema is for the EXPERIENCE, which can't be replicated by isolated watching at home. Netflix and the Internet aren't "killing" cinemas; clinging to exclusivity as a business model is. Cinemas should be emphasizing the irreplaceable experience they offer.

And I drew the above cartoon. (Sita Sings the Blues ended up pulling in a great audience at the Red Vic, too.)

The second one is based on the Stop Piracy in NYC proaganda campaign. Maybe they'll sue me for stealing their idea!

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    Richard (profile), 10 Jan 2011 @ 1:49pm

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

    You asked me a question about morality as it pertains to religion. I answered. Shifting that answer in an attempt to further your copyright argument is unreasonable.

    Actually I gave an example of how your moral stance isn't self evident - but is in fact arbitrary - then I extended that example to the particular moral issue we are discussing. That is not unreasonable.

    That said: You don't get to decide whether the anguish generated in ANY instance is authentic. Setting yourself up as the arbiter of whether someone's emotions are authentic enough is absolutely unacceptable,

    And that is exactly what you are doing. In your moral framework you have to decide which anguish is authentic and which isn't. You have decided that the anguish caused by having a copyright violated must be respected but the anguish caused by being sued for hundreds of thousands over a few songs is OK. Now I appreciate that you don't defend everything that the copyright maximalists do - but that just underlines my point - ultimately youu are making those decisions that you just said it was immoral to make.

    I have an external reference so I don't have to take that responsibility.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.