Margaret Atwood's new work will not be published until 2114

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

They're just personal documents until they are actually published so the copyright clock doesn't start running until 2114 and won't run out till 2184. That is assuming it gets published at all.

If it does, it'll be like this novelty:
http://www.amazon.com/Paris-Twentiet.../dp/034542039X

Umm... not quite so. The Jules Verne book (in the original French) gained a 25 year publication copyright in 1994, which lasts until (I think) 1st January 2020. The translation into English, of course, has its own copyright which is the life of the translator+70 years.

For works published after the copyright would normally have expired, the situation varies from country to country.

In Canada they immediately enter the public domain (although I believe plans are being made to change this).

In the EU there's a limited publication copyright lasting 25 years from date of publication. (If first publish in the EU by an EU person.) This is what the Verne book has.

In the US they also immediately enter the public domain.


Of course, what the copyright laws will look like in 2114 is anyone's guess.

[CharredScribe]

Originally Posted by Billi

What will these future generations discover that they can't discover from all the other texts that are written ourdays?

No idea. But not all texts written 100 years ago are available now, and I am not sure that the increasing digitisation of literature will significantly change that. I also imagine that the authors will be writing with the future in mind, which is very different from how most work is written now, which is for current readers. If I sat down and wrote a story that I expected to be read tomorrow, I think it would look different to something that I am writing which would not be read for 100 years. Even that could change the nature of how future works would be interpreted, as intergenerational learning can be very different depending on how intentional or deliberate a writer would be in terms of what messages or ideas they want to share.

[fjtorres]

A good portion of the value of classic literature comes the fact that it was written for their times and their audiences. (The rest is storytelling and entertainment.) Actively trying to write for a future audience is as silly as trying to write for aliens. It is pretentious and self-defeating.
Just look to how silly the futurists of the past look today with the retro futures they conceived, trying to guess what life would be like mere decades ahead; most of the things they thought would be important are, at most, of secondary importance. Conversely, the forces that are truly molding the present day--both technologically and sociopolitically--were blithely ignored.
Writing for a future that will never come to pass is like packing a time capsule with survivalist food supplies. At best it tells the future what you were thinking, at worst it delivers a moldy mess.

The best way to address the future is by dealing with the issues of today and trying to leave the world incrementally better than we found it. The future will deal with its own concerns in due time.

[Rizla]

What are her books like? Someone I know who met Atwood described her as haughty and arrogant. As such, I applaud Atwood's decision to bury her book for a hundred years.

My friend met Stephen King at the same time, and she said he was funny and humble.

[CharredScribe]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

A good portion of the value of classic literature comes the fact that it was written for their times and their audiences. (The rest is storytelling and entertainment.) Actively trying to write for a future audience is as silly as trying to write for aliens. It is pretentious and self-defeating.
Just look to how silly the futurists of the past look today with the retro futures they conceived, trying to guess what life would be like mere decades ahead; most of the things they thought would be important are, at most, of secondary importance. Conversely, the forces that are truly molding the present day--both technologically and sociopolitically--were blithely ignored.
Writing for a future that will never come to pass is like packing a time capsule with survivalist food supplies. At best it tells the future what you were thinking, at worst it delivers a moldy mess.

The best way to address the future is by dealing with the issues of today and trying to leave the world incrementally better than we found it. The future will deal with its own concerns in due time.

That's all very interesting (though not all true), but I fail to see how it is relevant. If the intention of the project was to somehow solve future problems and share some world-changing, important information, then it is not a suitable method at all. But that doesn't seem to be their intention at all. It is more of an experiment into how literature written now with the future generations in mind would be received by them, presumably to be assessed by future sociologists, anthropologists and/or historians who document and analyse the history of literature.

It is different to seeing how texts written now are received by future generations for the very reason that the classics we read now have been read, written about, talked about, analysed and over-analysed, and assessed - so when I started Moby Dick, I knew the impact it had had on the development of literature, which immediately changed how I read it. If I read a book now written a 100 years ago that has never been seen, and I go in with no preconceptions or ideas about the interpretations of others, that would be a very different experience. I think that the idea behind the Future Library is to have this experience, rather than having some narrow utilitarian function or goal such as bringing about world peace. I think they even refer to the project as "artwork".

Not to everyone's interest of course, but personally, I like the different ideas and concepts that this project raises for me.

[CharredScribe]

Originally Posted by Rizla

What are her books like? Someone I know who met Atwood described her as haughty and arrogant. As such, I applaud Atwood's decision to bury her book for a hundred years.

My friend met Stephen King at the same time, and she said he was funny and humble.

I've met her once, very briefly, and she seemed nice but that's all I can say about her personally.

I like most of her books (although I struggle to enjoy Surfacing, which was a very odd text). I find that her books can be quite different from each other, so hard to pin them down. For example, Alias Grace is historical fiction, and you are left to draw some of your own conclusions - it is sort of a murder mystery. I like her MaddAddam trilogy, which is a mix of sci-fi and dystopian / speculative fiction. My favourite may be The Handmaid's Tale, which is also dystopian, and a little frightening when you see how attempts to control women's fertility is still such a big deal 30 years after the book was written.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by LucyOne

First thing that came to my mind when I heard about this project: "Please, don't let Margaret Atwood contribute!" And then...

As a project, it sure makes you reflect about time, transcience and mortality, but as a reader and a fan I just want to cry

I know, right. And then I got mad.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

30 years... 100 years...
Makes no difference.

well, at least there's a chance I'll still be alive in 30 years...not so much 100.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by CharredScribe

I've met her once, very briefly, and she seemed nice but that's all I can say about her personally.

I like most of her books (although I struggle to enjoy Surfacing, which was a very odd text). I find that her books can be quite different from each other, so hard to pin them down. For example, Alias Grace is historical fiction, and you are left to draw some of your own conclusions - it is sort of a murder mystery. I like her MaddAddam trilogy, which is a mix of sci-fi and dystopian / speculative fiction. My favourite may be The Handmaid's Tale, which is also dystopian, and a little frightening when you see how attempts to control women's fertility is still such a big deal 30 years after the book was written.

I'll have to try something some time. It sounds a bit "heavy" (not sure of the word) but maybe I'll try a preview sometime.

[rkomar]

I haven't read any of Atwood's novels since "Bluebeard's Egg", but I've read and enjoyed a lot of her non-fiction writing. I've seen her interviewed on TV a few times recently, and she came across as reasonably pleasant. Perhaps that reputation of coldness lingers from her youth. In those days, Al Purdy wrote an amusing poem "Concerning Ms. Atwood": http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categorie...ms-atwood.html

[CharredScribe]

Originally Posted by rkomar

I haven't read any of Atwood's novels since "Bluebeard's Egg", but I've read and enjoyed a lot of her non-fiction writing...

There is an anthology of her essays, non-fiction work and articles, mostly about writing, what it means to be a writer, some autobiographical articles, her political opinions etc. Really great essays in there: Writing with Intent: Essays, Reviews, Personal Prose--1983-2005

I've haven't read much of her work prior to the mid-90s - I should check it out.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by CharredScribe

There is an anthology of her essays, non-fiction work and articles, mostly about writing, what it means to be a writer, some autobiographical articles, her political opinions etc. Really great essays in there: Writing with Intent: Essays, Reviews, Personal Prose--1983-2005

I've haven't read much of her work prior to the mid-90s - I should check it out.

Have you read "Negotiating with the Dead: A Writer on Writing"? It's probably my favourite book of essays by her. It came out in 2002, so maybe some of it was included in the anthology; I don't know.

[corroonb]

I don't care about this. I'll be dead (I hope so) before it's ever published and there is not exactly a shortage of material to read.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Joykins

I know, right. And then I got mad.

If this makes you feel any better, my guess is that her work for 2114 consumption is a short story.

[CharredScribe]

Originally Posted by rkomar

Have you read "Negotiating with the Dead: A Writer on Writing"? It's probably my favourite book of essays by her. It came out in 2002, so maybe some of it was included in the anthology; I don't know.

Never read it, but have added it to my list. Thanks I'll check to see if there is an overlap in essays.