Quote:
Originally Posted by acidzebra
Also interesting that he was his own man without a parasitic industry trying to lock up the fruits of his genius for their (not his) profits  |
No?
You think theatre owners did not get paid when his plays were presented? You thing costumers created his plays' clothing for free? You think he had no patrons?
Sure, there was a system that profited from his works... and by the definitions presented here, were just as parasitic then as now.
And Harry's point was, if W.S. was not compensated for his creative work... as he (thankfully) was... he might just as well have been a longshoreman, and we wouldn't be discussing him now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by acidzebra
I do not think writing books, making music, or making a painting is just like any job - in my work as a network administrator, nothing I will do will make a lasting impression on people like, say, the works of Shakespeare have. There is a fundamental difference.
|
However, you get paid for your work. So, it is your opinion that it makes sense to pay you for work that will have no lasting impression on Humanity, while it does not make sense to compensate someone whose work will have a lasting impression?