Jeffrey Tucker was wrong about Open Source...
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,208
    Who is Flowerday? Don't know that one.

    To add to this topic, I am glad leading lights exist in certain areas pointing the way to better sacred music. I am afraid, however, that they are too few and too far between at this time. If it grows and spreads, wonderful! There are many areas, such as my own, where one or two DMs and some singers are doing their best. In this area, there is no mad rush to imitate us.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,237
    Well, yeah, we know that we folks on the forum don't reflect the average point of view on Catholic church music. We're on a mission from God. That is, we're out to implement the Church's teaching on sacred music and make the liturgy beautiful, which is part of the New Evangelization.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    Are we doing it strategically, is my question.
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 748
    I think there are three problems with the discussion so far. One is the implicit comparison of cash-flow and profit in the two markets: the liturgical music market is never going to be the size of the software one. It might be thought this would make a commercial 'free' liturgical music operation less than feasible, but sales and marketing costs scale, too; and if the point of the exercise is to use professionalism to increase market share rather than to generate big fat dividends, the entry barriers might not be insuperable (if Jeff O and Adam B are reading this over breakfast, I hope they haven't choked on their cereal at the mention of those dividends).

    The second problem is that people seem to be forgetting that Adam's posts have been to some degree tentative and exploratory. As I read it, he's observed some analogy between an established 'open' product market and a nascent one, and wonders what lessons the newcomer might learn. All analogies break down sooner or later, but they're useful tools for thought and discussion.

    Finally, there are producers of goods here who seem to think that the free/not free options are mutually exclusive. Unless you're the compositional equivalent of Richard Stallman I don't think that's so. Some system producers, individual and corporate, distribute through both models; or rather, they distribute over a spectrum of models, from 'free' to not so, according to inclination, circumstance and demand. Perhaps note and word-smiths might do the same. After all, singers have been doing that in churches for years.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    The market share problem isn't about composers or wordsmiths. It's a pastoral problem. The fact is that 27 million percent more Catholics are going to be singing Gather Us In next Sunday instead of any form of the proper chant, and open sourcing isn't going to change that. At all.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 7,838
    Kathy is correct. Free and open will not change the status quo.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    I believe it already has.

    I also believe that, when predicting the future, "status quo" always seems like the most reasonable prediction, and is usually the most incorrect.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    Finally, there are producers of goods here who seem to think that the free/not free options are mutually exclusive. Unless you're the compositional equivalent of Richard Stallman I don't think that's so.


    I agree with this. A market thrives when there are many,many different business models operating simultaneously.

    And speaking of Richard Stallman...
    http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/copyright-and-globalization.html
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    Look at it this way. The single most effective thing the CMAA does is the Colloquium, and that is expensive.
    Thanked by 2Gavin CHGiffen
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,151
    And then again, the second most effective thing it does may be this very forum, which costs a fraction.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    Probably true. But, the reason the Colloquium is effective is because it builds the consumer market.
    Thanked by 2Gavin CHGiffen
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    The point to consider that free and valuable are not necessarily linked. Brand name and valuable are linked. CMAA is not (yet) the brand of choice for consumers. How do we get there?

    Thanked by 3Gavin francis CHGiffen
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    I think the CMAA is getting there, Kathy. It's just letting people know we're out there.

    A great many Catholic music directors don't care about chant, and would have no interest in the CMAA if they knew it existed. There's also many many more who are fed up with bad music, but have no idea where to start, or what the alternatives are. They think the answer is better hymns, or at least playing the bad ones on the organ. These are the people the CMAA needs to target, and I think we're getting through to them one at a time.
    Thanked by 2gregp CHGiffen
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 7,838
    I think we should do a TV commercial at the super bowl.
    Thanked by 2Chris Allen CHGiffen
  • Oh, I think it is a bit insular. If one reads posts here, one would think the Catholic world is clamoring for chant and sacred polyphony. It ain't so.


    If you had written this 10 years ago, you'd have been perfectly correct. Today, NPM members are highly insular, living on a big island that is shrinking day by day, quietly destroying itself as people tire of the sameness, the lack of meaning that they find there. They do not know what to do, since there is no foundation for what they are doing. When they look back at the past they cannot envision a future.

    When we look back at the past, we see the glory that it was and can strive to create it once again. It's all been documented, as they knew that this was going to happen over and over again, and it has and that there would be people looking for the books and music and thanking them in their absence for their work and foresight.

    Some Bishops are trying to keep this from happening, creating TLM ghetto Masses to corral the dissidents and keep them from asking their parish priests for Latin, for solemnity. Many priests were not exposed to any of this in seminaries and Bishops have to placate them to keep them in the corral and generating income for the diocesan coffers.

    Does your Bishop drive a big Cadillac and park the wrong way in No Parking - Fire Lane in front of your church and also the school? He does if you are in the Knoxville diocese. The custodian threatens to tow people every day, but....the Bishop gets a free ride.

    My brother's African-American Bishop shows up in a Toyota Corolla.


    Also, the Forum is first, the Colloq is only for those who can afford it...Forum's free!
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,208
    Noel, I think much of that depends on where you are located. Locally, I don't find any great demand from congregations to change anything. They are mostly happy with what they have had for 40 years. My own place has tried to hold to good music, but the pastor is getting older and his health could go either way. Who knows what will happen next.

    I believe the Knoxville bishop - someone can correct me if I am wrong - doesn't drive anymore since a stroke damaged his eyesight. While he probably hasn't gone out of his way to promote chant and polyphony, I haven't noticed him doing anything to prevent it, either. He seems somewhat uninterested in such things. I don't think they get much of his attention.
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,237
    Hey, no sensible ordinary does his own driving anyway, for reasons of liability.
  • Better running a car off the road than a diocese.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    This morning I attended a Mass in Italy where a Korean nun played a post-Communion meditation, a 35 year old classic hit of the 70s, 80s and today, One Bread, One Body.

    What we sing in English will take over the world. How do we do this?
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 9,208
    Good question, Kathy. I have wondered why musical rubbish in this country spreads everywhere. I know that the U.S. culture, or lack of it, is widely imitated elsewhere. Perhaps that is part of it.
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    That's also what makes it so important that we take this opportunity and run with it!
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,151
    A voice crying in the wilderness has claimed all along these sorts of encounters do not indicate dysfunction (and dystopia, I've heard that word all week about American culture!) whose origin is ecclesial, not liturgical.
    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,237
    An amusing idea: software licenses could be written much shorter for clarity, even in haiku:
    http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/000360
    Thanked by 3francis IanW Adam Wood
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 748
    Some might consider
    the idea of licence
    unacceptable,

    for who is to say
    the artist should be constrained
    or impose constraint?

    Practicalities,
    alas; our ev'ryday needs
    argue otherwise.




  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    IP Law is new and modern,
    An unnatural disgrace
    Granted by the Fed'ralistas
    Rights, like money, they debase.
    All our thoughts, our minds own produce,
    these are not our own to hold,
    but a part of his'try's progress,
    whether traded, bought, or sold.

    Shall we no remuneration?
    Have we nothing, then, to sell?
    Other industries have proved it,
    Free and Open pays quite well.
    I do not object to commerce,
    profit motive still excites,
    But to Government enforcement
    of removal of our rights.

    8787D
    I (always) suggest Nettleton
    Thanked by 1IanW
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 7,838
    Adam:

    I don't get your thinking. I have the right to make my creations free or not. Are you suggesting that I shouldn't have the right to commercialize my IP?
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    Anarchists may quayle to gather
    Money gained for mental work,
    But this cap'talist would rather
    Those not paid who work do shirk.
    Working men with nail and hammer
    They are paid their labor's wage.
    Payment likewise, without clamor,
    Justly pays the writing sage.
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,151
    I knew the former vice president was an anarchist when he spelled p o t a t o e.
    But he was no Sacco and Vanzetti!
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 7,237
    Poor Dan: he should have known not to trust the teacher's notes that day. He'll never live it down.
    Thanked by 1melofluent
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    Proposed new rule for forum:
    Any discussion involving debate or disagreement must be conducted via rhymed verse.
    (Advice or general conversation may remain in prose.)
    Thanked by 1francis
  • melofluentmelofluent
    Posts: 4,151
    ‘Twas in Janus month Wood grumped “harrumph”
    Through Febr’ry’s shortened span persisted Wood’s command.
    March Ides could prove no match, nor otherwise dispatch
    Wood’s dictums e’er so cruel, or pause to April’s fools.
    Once merry month of May, suspended now in sway
    Since now no moon in June, spelled lovers in mid-swoon.
    E’en Congress through July banned rockets’ glare in skies,
    None could spake words August lest uttered in disgust.
    September’s labors failed, consensus thus impaled!
    Day One ‘til Hallow’s Eve, concord to quick was cleaved.
    The month of thanks was spanked as if it authored pranks.
    December’s dark robbed will, as good was ever stilled.
    But the Day we call the Lord’s, we always can afford
    The peaceful great exchange, We’re One we thus acclaim!


    Thanked by 1IanW
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 748
    @Adam: Chonak mentioned the haiku; he didn't say anything about rhyme.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Free preview:

    "Adam is wrong because,
    If everything were free,"

    Sample of "Adam is Wrong Because" by Gavin, $23.99 SATB+Org, Instrumental parts rental $19.99 per instrument.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    Straw man, straw man, it's a straw man
    what dear Kathy said of "free"
    wages or just compensation
    aren't the point (well, not for me).
    As I've mentioned, o'er and over,
    getting paid is really fun,
    but I can't condone text patents
    Fed-enforced at point-of-gun.

    Anarchy is not 'gainst commerce,
    heav'n forbid! (and Tucker, too)
    Pirates, merchants, knock-off artists
    are more cap'talist than you.
    Break the bonds of mercantilism,
    soon then you will realize
    that IP, like all good Gummint,
    is a pack of stinking lies.

    Oh but, yet I'm still off topic
    one need not agree with this;
    though I fly the flag of freedom,
    my post was no tre-a-tise.
    I have no want to convert you
    to the libertarian side
    I just want the doors of music
    to be opened and flung wide.

    Free and freedom, price and license,
    these things have some cool effects,
    letting awesome build on awesome,
    no one knowing what is next.
    That's the hope I have for music:
    innovation uncontrolled.
    That's what software has to show us
    (plenty software still gets sold).
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    The state is not our enemy
    Policemen are our friend
    And copyright protects me
    And my rights to the end.
    Though JT is my leader
    In this great music biz
    Unlike you, gentle reader,
    My politics aren't his.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen Adam Wood
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 3,791
    O for a thousand tongues to sing
    My dear Redeemer's praise!
    Then might the verse of arguing
    No longer fill this place.
    Thanked by 2Kathy Adam Wood
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    But that's the point: our verses
    May not see light of day,
    Be songs no one rehearses
    Unless we change our way.
    I write with stain-ed fingers
    I write theology
    But in the bins it lingers,
    Not sung by you or me.

    Offense is the best defense.
    We need to print and sell
    To win against this pretence
    Of music fit for purgatory.
    Let heaven's music waken;
    Let publishing begin!
    Till market share is taken
    By those whose verse should win.
    Thanked by 3IanW Adam Wood CHGiffen
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    (Tune: ISTE CONFESSOR)

    Just incidentally, I don't mind free IP
    But it's not central, is it, to our mission?
    If it's not working, there's a working model:
    Our competition's!
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    (I've never had so much fun disagreeing with someone.)
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,280
    We have many arts, we need not one license.
    And the things we make, we can sell or share.
    May the music above, make us one indeed.
    One, the cause it's all for.
    One, the ongoing chore.
    One, the God we adore.

    1
    Open Source, a free-for-all,
    Some may choose to heed the call,
    Others, no less faithful, guard their stuff.

    2
    May I, though, make one request?
    When you're fin'ly put to rest:
    Will your IP, free to all the world.
  • francisfrancis
    Posts: 7,838
    if you pay twice the price
    usually it's twice as nice
    Thanked by 2Kathy Gavin
  • Kathy
    Posts: 4,922
    3. Copyright is much too long
    This is the agreement song
    15 years make sense, not 75.

    But with any art, how do we enforce it?
    If the Wesleys could/ not then how can we?
    Will my verse reflect just my heart's own corset?
    Just the thoughts of my mind,
    Just my words, nearly rhymed,
    Just the signified signed?

    A
    COLLECTION OF HYMNS,
    FOR
    THE USE OF THE PEOPLE CALLED
    METHODISTS.
    BY THE REV. JOHN WESLEY, M.A.,
    SOMETIME FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, OXFORD.
    With a New Supplement.
    LONDON:
    WESLEYAN-METHODIST BOOK-ROOM;
    2, CASTLE STREET, CITY ROAD, E.C.;
    SOLD AT 66, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.
    1889PREFACE.
    1. For many years I have been importuned to publish such a hymn-book as might be generally used in all our congregations throughout Great Britain and Ireland. I have hitherto withstood the importunity, as I believed such a publication was needless, considering the various hymn-books which my brother and I have published within these forty years last past; so that it may be doubted whether any religious community in the world has a greater variety of them.

    2. But it has been answered, "Such a publication is highly needful upon this very account: for the greater part of the people, being poor, are not able to purchase so many books; and those that have purchased them are, as it were, bewildered in the immense variety. A proper Collection of hymns for general use, carefully made out of all these books, is therefore still wanting; and one comprised in so moderate a compass, as to be neither cumbersome nor expensive."

    3. It has been replied, "You have such a Collection already, (entitled 'Hymns and Spiritual Songs') which I extracted several years ago from a variety of hymn-books." But it is objected, "This is in the other extreme: it is far too small. It does not, it cannot, in so narrow a compass, contain variety enough; not so much as we want, among whom singing makes so considerable a part of the public service. What we want is, a Collection not too large, that it may be cheap and portable; nor too small, that it may contain a sufficient variety for all ordinary occasions."

    4. Such a Hymn-Book you have now before you. It is not so large as to be either cumbersome or expensive; and it is large enough to contain such a variety of hymns as will not soon be worn threadbare. It is large enough to contain all the important truths of our most holy religion, whether speculative or practical; yea, to illustrate them all and to prove them both by Scripture and reason; and this is done in a regular order. The hymns are not carelessly jumbled together, but carefully ranged under proper heads, according to the experience of real Christians. So that this book is, in effect, a little body of experimental and practical divinity.

    5. As but a small part of these hymns is of my own composing, I do not think it inconsistent with modesty to declare, that I am persuaded no such hymn-book as this has yet been published in the English language. In what other publication of the kind have you so distinct and full an account of scriptural Christianity? Such a declaration of the heights and depths of religion, speculative and practical? so strong cautions against the most plausible errors; particularly those that are now most prevalent? and so clear directions for making your calling and election sure; for perfecting holiness in the fear of God?

    6. May I be permitted to add a few words with regard to the poetry? Then I will speak to those who are judges thereof, with all freedom and unreserve. To these I may say, without offence, 1. In these hymns there is no doggerel; no botches; nothing put in to patch up the rhyme; no feeble expletives. 2. Here is nothing turgid or bombast, on the one hand, or low and creeping, on the other. 3. Here are no cant expressions; no words without meaning. Those who impute this to us know not what they say. We talk common sense, both in prose and verse, and use no word but in a fixed and determinate sense. 4. Here are, allow me to say, both the purity, the strength, and the elegance of the English language; and, at the same time, the utmost simplicity and plainness, suited to every capacity. Lastly, I desire men of taste to judge, (these are the only competent judges) whether there be not in some of the following hymns the true spirit of poetry, such as cannot be acquired by art and labour, but must be the gift of nature. By labour a man may become a tolerable imitator of Spencer, Shakespeare, or Milton; and may heap together pretty compound epithets, as "pale-eyed," "meek-eyed," and the like; but unless he be born a poet, he will never attain the genuine spirit of poetry.

    7. And here I beg leave to mention a thought which has been long upon my mind, and which I should long ago have inserted in the public papers, had I not been unwilling to stir up a nest of hornets. Many gentlemen have done my brother and me (though without naming us) the honour to reprint many of our Hymns. Now they are perfectly welcome so to do, provided they print them just as they are. But I desire they would not attempt to mend them; for they really are not able. None of them is able to mend either the sense or the verse. Therefore, I must beg of them one of these two favours; either to let them stand just as they are, to take them for better for worse; or to add the true reading in the margin, or at the bottom of the page; that we may no longer be accountable either for the nonsense or for the doggerel of other men.

    8. But to return. That which is of infinitely more moment than the spirit of poetry, is the spirit of piety. And I trust, all persons of real judgment will find this breathing through the whole Collection. It is in this view chiefly, that I would recommend it to every truly pious reader, as a means of raising or quickening the spirit of devotion; of confirming his faith; of enlivening his hope; and of kindling and increasing his love to God and man. When Poetry thus keeps its place, as the handmaid of Piety, it shall attain, not a poor perishable wreath, but a crown that fadeth not away.

    Thanked by 1CHGiffen
  • IanWIanW
    Posts: 748
    The bit in bold goes to show that it isn't just about money, and how useful those clever Creative Commons chaps are (and how lawyers aren't all bad).
    Thanked by 1Gavin
  • CHGiffenCHGiffen
    Posts: 3,791
    Kathy, that 1899 Wesley preface is one of my all-time favorites. Thanks for posting it. It's a masterpiece of good advice for hymnists everywhere.
  • GavinGavin
    Posts: 2,799
    Were there really hymns with "feeble expletives"? (no. 6)