Reposting my art, Philosophy, and What's Next
11 years ago
In the past few months I've had more questions than usual (that is to say, I've actually had a few questions) about reusing my ideas or reposting my my work. Just so it's very clear, I'm very easy-peasy about it all. Here are some rules of thumb:
* When it comes to my characters/stories/artwork completely attributable to me, you are welcome to reproduce or use them in whatever way you see fit. That means you can repost them wherever you like without, you can sell them on posters or t-shirts, you can remove my signature, you can claim it as your own. I don't mind, and you don't need to ask my permission. I would love to see where it ends up to see how it gets used and/or what people say, but it's not a requirement. By doing so you agree that you also have no exclusive claim to the characters/stories/artwork, etc. etc. It's public domain/creative commons licensing.
* If you've commissioned something from me, you are free to repost it as you'd like and where you'd like, with or without attribution. You are free to modify or change it, and free to have other artists redraw characters I've created for you. I assume that if you've had other characters that don't belong to you included in your artwork, you've asked their permission as well; I can't grant that.
* If you want to reuse/repost/etc. a commission, request, or depiction of another person's character that I've made, you need their permission, but not mine. If you are unsure who that other person is, or unsure if a particular work of art is a commission, ask me. I'm happy to answer. I'm nice.
I think that covers 90% of the cases. Basically, I'm very copyleft, and happy to share!
* * *
Along those lines, I have some thoughts on the way art 'should' work that put me at odds with the majority of the artistic community, I think. I am against false scarcity. I'm against scarcity at all, really - I thing working toward a post-scarcity world is an unambiguously good thing (in the classical, philosophical, ethical mandate sense of good, not just something that would be nice, dear) - but at least for the time being, scarcity is undeniable real. There is hard limit to the available real estate on earth. There is only so much aluminum accessible within our crust. A person has a non-infinite number of seconds to work with in their life. Trading for scarcity, as long as it exists, is reasonable and sensible. I have no complaints there.
What I don't like is *creating* scarcity. Once I've drawn something or written something, it can be reproduced indefinitely without diluting the original. Someone else could repost it at a thousand other sites, and it would still be available wherever I posted it. In a real sense, the artistic community is one of the few places (along with education), where post-scarcity can currently exist. I can post a story digitally that can be reproduced indefinitely, and you can repay me with a non-scarce currency: favorites, or comments, or upvotes, or whatever medium the particular site uses.
But scarcity is inextricably tied to economy. It's not a direct relationship - some people may give me scarce economic currency (real money) as incentive or reward for my time. But it's really not reliable; record companies are shooting themselves in the foot for prosecuting downloaders, but they'd be out of business if the stopped trying sell things. Is that so bad? Do we owe the record companies a living? Do we owe artists a living? Indubitably the quality of art out there is significantly higher because it's been monetized, but I don't know that it's a sufficient argument. There are a lot of artists out there who I really admire, who make a living off creating and selling their work. I mean them no disrespect, and I'm glad they're able to do what they love for a living. But, ethically, creating false scarcity to support a business model is something I have a difficult time with.
I am not, and I would never argue taking a vigilante approach and just defying laws (or even artists' wishes) about reproduction of their artwork. I'm not trying to or expecting to change anyone's mind about creating scarcity to support themselves in an artistic field. I don't think less of anyone for having a different philosophical position on economics and art than I do.
But this is one of the most compelling reasons I decided not to pursue a career as an author or artist (not that I'm saying I have the skills to be a shoe-in in either field). I've written a couple of books now, and I started shopping one of them around before I really sat down and thought about how I feel about it. For-profit publishing is definitely the best distribution model we have currently. I'd love to have my stuff read by ten-thousand people instead of a hundred or so. But I feel like participating in that economical model would just be wrong... for me.
This is the same reason I haven't made an adoptables yet. I love the idea of adoptables. And I could just do them for free, really, just to make people happy, and open up for donations if I really wanted to. But I would feel wrong about handing something I'd made over to another person exclusively - it's creating scarcity.
Commissions ride the other side of the line. Those, in my opinion, are safe. I'm not trading art for money, I'm trading my time. That is always fair - so long as I really am trading time.
* * *
Before I get too long-winded (too late!), let me move on to the final point: What's next! Just like after I finished the Monster-girls project, I have a few things lined up I want to work on for myself and my friends, and I might take a commission here or there. But there's another project I've been thinking about that been lurking in the back of my mind: Sphinxes of the world. I love sphinxes - the way the look, the way they act, the role they play in mythology. That's especially true of the traditional Phix of Oedipus fame, but all kinds of sphinxes are great. I've reduced them to a concept and an algorithm to my satisfaction, and I want to apply those to other regions of the world, and other mythological domains.
And I'd love to do this as another project like monster girls, where I work for people and take a fair, minimal amount of money to keep me on track and keep people interested. (I turn around commissions much faster than personal work on average, stay on track with the projects for much longer, and get a lot more interest in the form of comments and favorites.) But how could I do this? They'd be perfect for adoptables, but... I don't feel like that's right (see the above). I could do them as commissions, but who would want to commission characters I've come up with and designed. I don't think I could successfully describe the necessary features of a sphinx successfully enough that anyone who wanted one would get it in the way I think is 'right'.
I'm really open to suggestions here. I don't really want to abandon the idea of 'Sphinxes of the World', but I'm positive if I just do it for myself I'll end up dropping the project - maybe even before it gets started.
* When it comes to my characters/stories/artwork completely attributable to me, you are welcome to reproduce or use them in whatever way you see fit. That means you can repost them wherever you like without, you can sell them on posters or t-shirts, you can remove my signature, you can claim it as your own. I don't mind, and you don't need to ask my permission. I would love to see where it ends up to see how it gets used and/or what people say, but it's not a requirement. By doing so you agree that you also have no exclusive claim to the characters/stories/artwork, etc. etc. It's public domain/creative commons licensing.
* If you've commissioned something from me, you are free to repost it as you'd like and where you'd like, with or without attribution. You are free to modify or change it, and free to have other artists redraw characters I've created for you. I assume that if you've had other characters that don't belong to you included in your artwork, you've asked their permission as well; I can't grant that.
* If you want to reuse/repost/etc. a commission, request, or depiction of another person's character that I've made, you need their permission, but not mine. If you are unsure who that other person is, or unsure if a particular work of art is a commission, ask me. I'm happy to answer. I'm nice.
I think that covers 90% of the cases. Basically, I'm very copyleft, and happy to share!
* * *
Along those lines, I have some thoughts on the way art 'should' work that put me at odds with the majority of the artistic community, I think. I am against false scarcity. I'm against scarcity at all, really - I thing working toward a post-scarcity world is an unambiguously good thing (in the classical, philosophical, ethical mandate sense of good, not just something that would be nice, dear) - but at least for the time being, scarcity is undeniable real. There is hard limit to the available real estate on earth. There is only so much aluminum accessible within our crust. A person has a non-infinite number of seconds to work with in their life. Trading for scarcity, as long as it exists, is reasonable and sensible. I have no complaints there.
What I don't like is *creating* scarcity. Once I've drawn something or written something, it can be reproduced indefinitely without diluting the original. Someone else could repost it at a thousand other sites, and it would still be available wherever I posted it. In a real sense, the artistic community is one of the few places (along with education), where post-scarcity can currently exist. I can post a story digitally that can be reproduced indefinitely, and you can repay me with a non-scarce currency: favorites, or comments, or upvotes, or whatever medium the particular site uses.
But scarcity is inextricably tied to economy. It's not a direct relationship - some people may give me scarce economic currency (real money) as incentive or reward for my time. But it's really not reliable; record companies are shooting themselves in the foot for prosecuting downloaders, but they'd be out of business if the stopped trying sell things. Is that so bad? Do we owe the record companies a living? Do we owe artists a living? Indubitably the quality of art out there is significantly higher because it's been monetized, but I don't know that it's a sufficient argument. There are a lot of artists out there who I really admire, who make a living off creating and selling their work. I mean them no disrespect, and I'm glad they're able to do what they love for a living. But, ethically, creating false scarcity to support a business model is something I have a difficult time with.
I am not, and I would never argue taking a vigilante approach and just defying laws (or even artists' wishes) about reproduction of their artwork. I'm not trying to or expecting to change anyone's mind about creating scarcity to support themselves in an artistic field. I don't think less of anyone for having a different philosophical position on economics and art than I do.
But this is one of the most compelling reasons I decided not to pursue a career as an author or artist (not that I'm saying I have the skills to be a shoe-in in either field). I've written a couple of books now, and I started shopping one of them around before I really sat down and thought about how I feel about it. For-profit publishing is definitely the best distribution model we have currently. I'd love to have my stuff read by ten-thousand people instead of a hundred or so. But I feel like participating in that economical model would just be wrong... for me.
This is the same reason I haven't made an adoptables yet. I love the idea of adoptables. And I could just do them for free, really, just to make people happy, and open up for donations if I really wanted to. But I would feel wrong about handing something I'd made over to another person exclusively - it's creating scarcity.
Commissions ride the other side of the line. Those, in my opinion, are safe. I'm not trading art for money, I'm trading my time. That is always fair - so long as I really am trading time.
* * *
Before I get too long-winded (too late!), let me move on to the final point: What's next! Just like after I finished the Monster-girls project, I have a few things lined up I want to work on for myself and my friends, and I might take a commission here or there. But there's another project I've been thinking about that been lurking in the back of my mind: Sphinxes of the world. I love sphinxes - the way the look, the way they act, the role they play in mythology. That's especially true of the traditional Phix of Oedipus fame, but all kinds of sphinxes are great. I've reduced them to a concept and an algorithm to my satisfaction, and I want to apply those to other regions of the world, and other mythological domains.
And I'd love to do this as another project like monster girls, where I work for people and take a fair, minimal amount of money to keep me on track and keep people interested. (I turn around commissions much faster than personal work on average, stay on track with the projects for much longer, and get a lot more interest in the form of comments and favorites.) But how could I do this? They'd be perfect for adoptables, but... I don't feel like that's right (see the above). I could do them as commissions, but who would want to commission characters I've come up with and designed. I don't think I could successfully describe the necessary features of a sphinx successfully enough that anyone who wanted one would get it in the way I think is 'right'.
I'm really open to suggestions here. I don't really want to abandon the idea of 'Sphinxes of the World', but I'm positive if I just do it for myself I'll end up dropping the project - maybe even before it gets started.
FA+

It it difficult for a person of my social standing to disagree with your advocacy of free sharing when it doesn't affect the originator in any tangible way, even though I understand the potential hazards of deregulating the spread of information, especially where professional creators are concerned.
The recording companies and copyright agencies are more to blame for pursuing the inflexible line of criminalizing the violators of the copyright law when the content producers and distributors themselves have been trying to adjust the monetization practices to adapt to the new technological environment. Projects like Kickstarter and Bandcamp have shown that quality doesn't need to suffer a lot in the name of emancipating the creator-customer venues from various middle-men, even though it's still a far cry in from the traditional marketing model's funding potential.
The "shooting themselves in a foot" aspect manifests the best in the fact that independently funded or even non-profit creators are capable of producing passable substitutes to what the mainstream market has to offer, and their low prices and defiance of standards and ratings are likely to cause a huge chunk of entertainment businesses go the way of the newspaper industry. But it is understandable that large companies are reluctant to cut their profits by sixty percent now, even if that would excuse them from losing ninety five percent later on.
That isn't to say that I would like to see the established artists currently being sustained by the very precarious balance of risk and freshness in their recording and publishing to do the sink-or-swim routine on my whim. Solving this issue amicably would call for some intensive social engineering, including popularization of personal payments, both as one-time donations or continuous support pledge policies a la Patreon, nudging the producing companies towards servicing those channels of remuneration and raising public awareness of the connection between the well-fed artists and the miraculous materialization of new entertaining works of art on the Web.
* * *
Regarding your laudable budding enterprise of great pitch and moment, I've only enthusiastic encouragement to offer, as well as accolades for your wisdom in bribing your artistic drive to be more tractable instead of whipping it into shape. Even the world's greatest minds demand their individual brands of sugary treats.
Although it would be an awful folly to doubt your own stockpiles of inspiration where sphinxes are concerned, as supposedly it is the straining floodgates on the reservoir of your educated cultural interest of this nature that give rise to such creative ambition, but I will help to the best of my inconsiderate, temporally-intensive ability.
First and foremost, although perhaps a little off the mark, is Ophryon's supremely educational and enchantingly written introduction of a certain painting pillar's favourite fictional actress. It is more of a chimera, but "Allegro's" hallmark generosity in the hind leg department gives her more roots in the bestial realm than in that of the more human-like nymphs and naiads and other Fair Folk. Here is an another homage rendition of the creature by the same artist.
Secondly, here are a few quality renditions sphinxes from the "Magic: The Gathering" legendarium: the Sphinx of the Chimes, Sharuum the Hegemon, Isperia the Inscrutable(a patron and chief advisor/oracle of the guild of lawyer-mages in a 'Medieval Coruscant' kind of setting), a lamassu(not really a sphinx, but close enough), sphinx of Uthuun, Serra sphinx, a giant Na'vi-looking sphinx who is apparently an ambassador, a sphinx who works part-time as a meteorologist, and has been known to share his prophetic dreams with Isperia, Jeleen sphinx, and that's as far as my conscience will carry me.
I do have some pretty specific ideas in mind when it comes to sphinxes, and have been gathering inspiration for a while. I plan on putting out a bit of personal art (2 items of which will also be sphinx-related, but not related to the project), and then maybe I'll finally write up what I have in mind to see how people receive it.
Naturally, a bit of recuperative hiatus would be expected before any new creative sprigs could sprout.
Below is an extended relevant extract from Terry Pratchett's largely standalone novel called "Pyramids":
(useful note: "You Bastard" is the name of a camel)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Legend had got it nearly right. The Sphinx did lurk on the borders of the kingdom. The
legend just hadn't been precise about what kind of borders it was talking about.
The Sphinx is an unreal creature. It exists solely because it has been imagined. It is well-known that in an infinite universe everything that can be imagined must exist somewhere, and since many of them are not things that ought to exist in a well-ordered space-time frame they get shoved into a side dimension. This may go some way to explaining the Sphinx's chronic bad temper, although any creature created with the body of a lion, bosom of a woman and wings of an eagle has a serious identity crisis and doesn't need much to make it angry.
So it had devised the Riddle. Across various dimensions it had provided the Sphinx with considerable entertainment and innumerable meals.
This was not known to Teppic as he led You Bastard through the swirling mists, but the
bones he crunched underfoot gave him enough essential detail.
A lot of people had died here. And it was reasonable to assume that the more recent ones had seen the remains of the earlier ones, and would therefore have proceeded stealthily. And that hadn't worked.
No sense in creeping along, then. Besides, some of the rocks that loomed out of the mists had a very distressing shape. This one here, for example, looked exactly like-
'Halt,' said the Sphinx.
There was no sound but the drip of the mist and the occasional sucking noise of You Bastard trying to extract moisture from the air.
'You're a sphinx,' said Teppic.
'The Sphinx,' corrected the Sphinx.
'Gosh. We've got any amount of statues to you at home.' Teppic looked up, and then further up. 'I thought you'd be smaller,' he added.
'Cower, mortal,' said the Sphinx. 'For thou art in the presence of the wise and the terrible.' It blinked. 'Any good, these statues?'
'They don't do you justice,' said Teppic, truthfully.
'Do you really think so? People often get the nose wrong,' said the Sphinx. 'My right profile is best, I'm told, and-' It dawned on the Sphinx that it was sidetracking itself. It coughed sternly.
'Before you can pass me, O mortal,' it said, 'you must answer my riddle.'
'Why?' said Teppic.
'What?' The Sphinx blinked at him. It hadn't been designed for this sort of thing.
'Why? Why? Because. Er. Because, hang on, yes, because I will bite your head off if you
don't. Yes, I think that's it.'
'Right,' said Teppic. 'Let's hear it, then.'
The Sphinx cleared its throat with a noise like an empty lorry reversing in a quarry.
'What goes on four legs in the morning, two legs at noon, and three legs in the evening?' said the Sphinx smugly.
Teppic considered this.
'That's a tough one,' he said, eventually.
'The toughest,' said the Sphinx.
'Um.'
'You'll never get it.'
'Ah,' said Teppic.
'Could you take your clothes off while you're thinking? The threads play merry hell with my teeth.'
'There isn't some kind of animal that regrows legs that have been-'
'Entirely the wrong track,' said the Sphinx, stretching its claws.
'Oh.'
'You haven't got the faintest idea, have you?'
'I'm still thinking,' said Teppic.
'You'll never get it.'
'You're right.' Teppic stared at the claws. This isn't really a fighting animal, he told himself
reassuringly, it's definitely over-endowed. Besides, its bosom will get in the way, even if its brain doesn't.
'The answer is: "A Man",' said the Sphinx. 'Now, don't put up a fight, please, it releases unpleasant chemicals into the bloodstream.'
Teppic backed away from a slashing paw. 'Hold on, hold on,' he said. 'What do you mean, a man?'
'It's easy,' said the Sphinx. 'A baby crawls in the morning, stands on both legs at noon, and at evening an old man walks with a stick. Good, isn't it?'
Teppic bit his lip. 'We're talking about one day here?' he said doubtfully.
There was a long, embarrassing silence.
'It's a wossname, a figure of speech,' said the Sphinx irritably, making another lunge.
'No, no, look, wait a minute,' said Teppic. 'I'd like us to be very clear about this, right? I mean, it's only fair, right?'
'Nothing wrong with the riddle,' said the Sphinx. 'Damn good riddle. Had that riddle for fifty years, sphinx and cub.' It thought about this. 'Chick,' it corrected.
'It's a good riddle,' Teppic said soothingly. 'Very deep. Very moving. The whole human
condition in a nutshell. But you've got to admit, this doesn't all happen to one individual in one day, does it?'
'Well. No,' the Sphinx admitted. 'But that is self-evident from the context. An element of dramatic analogy is present in all riddles,' it added, with the air of one who had heard the phrase a long time ago and rather liked it, although not to the extent of failing to eat the originator.
'Yes, but,' said Teppic crouching down and brushing a clear space on the damp sand, 'is there internal consistency within the metaphor? Let's say for example that the average life expectancy is seventy years, okay?'
'Okay,' said the Sphinx, in the uncertain tones of someone who has let the salesman in and is now regretfully contemplating a future in which they are undoubtedly going to buy life insurance.
'Right. Good. So noon would be age 35, am I right? Now considering that most children can toddle at a year or so, the four legs reference is really unsuitable, wouldn't you agree? I mean, most of the morning is spent on two legs. According to your analogy' he paused and did a few calculations with a convenient thighbone- 'only about twenty minutes immediately after 00.00 hours, half an hour tops, is spent on four legs. Am I right? Be fair.'
'Well-' said the Sphinx.
'By the same token you wouldn't be using a stick by six p.m. because you'd be only, er, 52,' said Teppic, scribbling furiously. 'In fact you wouldn't really be looking at any kind of walking aid until at least half past nine, I think. That's on the assumption that the entire lifespan takes place over one day which is, I believe I have already pointed out, ridiculous. I'm sorry, it's basically okay, but it doesn't work.'
'Well,' said the Sphinx, but irritably this time, 'I don't see what I can do about it. I haven't got any more. It's the only one I've ever needed.'
'You just need to alter it a bit, that's all.'
'How do you mean?'
'Just make it a bit more realistic.'
'Hmm.' The Sphinx scratched its mane with a claw.
'Okay,' it said doubtfully. 'I suppose I could ask: What is it that walks on four legs'
'Metaphorically speaking,' said Teppic.
'Four legs, metaphorically speaking,' the Sphinx agreed, 'for about-'
'Twenty minutes, I think we agreed.'
'Okay, fine, twenty minutes in the morning, on two legs'
'But I think calling it in "the morning" is stretching it a bit,' said Teppic. 'It's just after midnight. I mean, technically it's the morning, but in a very real sense it's still last night, what do you think?'
A look of glazed panic crossed the Sphinx's face.
'What do you think?' it managed.
'Let's just see where we've got to, shall we? What, metaphorically speaking, walks on four legs just after midnight, on two legs for most of the day-'
'Barring accidents,' said the Sphinx, pathetically eager to show that it was making a
contribution.
'Fine, on two legs barring accidents, until at least suppertime, when it walks with three legs-'
'I've known people use two walking sticks,' said the Sphinx helpfully.
'Okay. How about: when it continues to walk on two legs or with any prosthetic aids of its choice?'
The Sphinx gave this some consideration.
'Ye-ess,' it said gravely. 'That seems to fit all eventualities.'
'Well?' said Teppic.
'Well what?' said the Sphinx.
'Well, what's the answer?'
The Sphinx gave him a stony look, and then showed its fangs.
'Oh no,' it said. 'You don't catch me out like that. You think I'm stupid? You've got to tell me the answer.'
'Oh, blow,' said Teppic.
'Thought you had me there, didn't you?' said the Sphinx.
'Sorry.'
'You thought you could get me all confused, did you?'
The Sphinx grinned.
'It was worth a try,' said Teppic.
'Can't blame you. So what's the answer, then?'
Teppic scratched his nose.
'Haven't a clue,' he said. 'Unless, and this is a shot in the dark, you understand, it's: A Man.'
The Sphinx glared at him.
'You've been here before, haven't you?' it said accusingly.
'No.'
'Then someone's been talking, right?'
'Who could have talked? Has anyone ever guessed the riddle?' said Teppic.
'No!'
'Well, then. They couldn't have talked, could they?'
The Sphinx's claws scrabbled irritably on its rock.
'I suppose you'd better move along, then,' it grumbled.
'Thank you,' said Teppic.
'I'd be grateful if you didn't tell anyone, please,' added the Sphinx, coldly. 'I wouldn't like to spoil it for other people.'
Teppic scrambled up a rock and on to You Bastard.
'Don't you worry about that,' he said, spurring the camel onwards. He couldn't help noticing the way the Sphinx was moving its lips silently, as though trying to work something out.
You Bastard had gone only twenty yards or so before an enraged bellow erupted behind him. For once he forgot the etiquette that says a camel must be hit with a stick before it does anything. All four feet hit the sand and pushed.
This time he got it right.
However, if the main principle of the thing is to put the methodology you've invented to good use, and the commissioning party's creative input would be too much of a rogue element for the project to function, I must again endorse an another of Amethystine's suggestions - the sponsored series model.
Or, you could simply axe the audience's influence over the design of your darling sphinxes, and offer them to participate in the description field instead. Yours would be to type of riddling behavior and the appearance of the sphinx, and the clients would get to engage in a brief roleplay with your creation, with the end result becoming the proud official annotation to the drawing.
Alternatively-er still, you could make it a tried and true two-character interactive piece format, with the project's supporters paying for their character being variously tormented by the sphinxes of your authorship.
Finally, if I would still be permitted, I'd like to inquire if you conventionally receive your payments through Paypal, or by some other means ? Fairly indifferent towards commissions as I am, I would still love to help move such a noble enterprise along.
Thank you for your patience, and sorry for inundating you with uncalled-for hyperlinks.
A little bit more of obnoxiously plentiful sphinx-mongering. Apparently, there is an OS-affiliated pangram that goes like this: "Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow."
And I made a mistake: it wasn't the Prognostic Sphinx that prophesied doom for Isperia - it was the Sphinx of the Chimes.
That's it, I'm all out of sphinges.