Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Billthedrill
Shakespeare never made a farthing from publishing his plays. He made his money by putting together performances of them for a paying audience.

If you read Boswell's Life of Johnson you'll see that Johnson himself barely scraped by. Johnson saw writing as a way of feeding himself, not of making a fortune.

And Johnson wrote many things, poems and sermons specifically, which he never made any money from but which were intended solely for the enjoyment of his circle.

I say again, no great work of literature was ever made in contemplation of profit - just in contemplation of generating enough income to write another day.

29 posted on 05/06/2003 1:39:04 PM PDT by wideawake (Support our troops and their Commander-in-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: wideawake
You're splitting hairs. If Shakespeare didn't write 'em for the money then what did he write 'em for? The practice of digital copying for free is similar to making old Will write the plays and put them on for free. And the upshot will be the same. No plays. And no Will.

I have, of course, read Boswell. And what I read in Boswell described a professional writer constantly struggling to get paid for his labors, often unsuccessfully. His contemporary Gibbon was stuck with producing one of the great works of the English language at the behest of a patron who, thank heaven, stayed with Gibbon despite his teasing "another damned thick, square, book - always scribble, scribble, scribble, eh, Mr. Gibbon?" Would you go back to that system? We don't have many patrons these days...

33 posted on 05/06/2003 1:56:58 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson