Does a writer have any artistic freedom left...?

Dear Kevin,

Looks a few posts up. I did not mention Heath or Brown, as they were not people to cut a historic furrow [mediocre in their own time even without the judgement of history to rely on], but Calaghan and Wislon were significant leaders in difficult times, yet not from the "establishment.".

ATB from George

Hi George, the right itself is without limits, but in practical terms, it does have limits, even if they are dictated by something as simple as good manners and courtesy toward others. It's a subtle distinction, and perhaps a philosophical (rather than a practical) one, but I think it's important.

On Freedom of Speech:

Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".[2][3]

So once again I say this. Not an absolute right to freedom of speech, but a granted privilege within the system of laws and customs of any given territory.

Therefore different in different territories. Different in France, the UK and Russia for three diverse examples ... So not an absolute right in any meaningful sense, though perhaps an aspiration, and perhaps we would be less well off without aspirations ... Is an aspiration a right? I think not ...

ATB from George

I think Heath was significant because he took us into Europe, although his tenure as PM was undistinguished except by industrial strife. Callaghan is also important because his time as PM marked the end of the old post-War consensus. Brown's time, I agree, was pretty dull - but maybe it's just too early to tell

To answer your title question, Yes !, as a writer, you can write whatever you wish.

Quite separately, you have no right whatsoever to either demand that someone other than yourself should publish what you write, and even less right, to demand that people should either read or like what you write.

My friend researched and wrote a book about Samual Owen (a Sea Captain & artist). He couldn't get any publisher interested in the book. He made arrangements with a printer for a run of 1,000 copies at a cost of £10k. After two years he has sold about 100 copies at c. £25 a copy.

Seems like as in any other free state activity, a bit of market research and commercial judgement is required as well as self-admired artistic prowess.

I think you're right in the "aspiration" bit George, but I think as a principle the right to freedom of expression and of speech (although the former is more important) is absolute and basic. Because if it is "granted" by a government it can easily be taken away, and we must be ever vigilant with regard to the aforementioned principle lest we sleepwalk into oppression.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/...iot-calls-men-jailed

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-sco...ey-shetland-26382115

Lest we sleep walk into oppression.

Dear Kevin,

I think we are. We are led by politicians who take every crisis as a reason to curtail more and more the freedoms we knew of old. Blair was one of the most adept at this.

ATB from George

Completely agree with you re Blair, George. For all his liberal pretensions and affectations he was a Stalinist meddler who wanted to control as many aspects of life as possible - witness his enthusiasm for compulsory ID cards.

Well in the case of the idiot Blackshaw and his "riot that never was", a crime was certainly committed, but the sentence was completely unjustified. It was a show of strength after the 2011 riots and the moral panic that ensued and was cynically designed to placate an angry public. It is a disgraceful case that shames our judicial system.

As for Derek Phin, he was a member of a trouble-making extreme right-wing fringe party that sought to make capital out of the horrific murder of Lee Rigby by Islamist extremists. As the Facebook post in question urged people to go out and burn down mosques, a crime had been clearly committed as it was an incitement to violence that endangered public safety in a very highly-charged atmosphere. The sentence was probably proportionate.

Both are a bit different from being bumped off for criticising the President, though, aren't they?

what president? what criticising? what story do you mean?

Good points Don.

Where I think Gajdzin, the OP had a very good (implied) point, and where I am in total agreement with him, is that publishers have become incredibly risk-averse. I've no idea what Gajdzin's books are like, but it sounds like they sell reasonably well; however, it's difficult to imagine a "difficult" author like, say, James Joyce getting published today as books like "Ulysses" and "Finnegan's Wake", for all their merits, would never sell in the quantities of a JK Rowling (or even a Hilary Mantel) blockbuster.

I mentioned one incident (that of Anna Politkovskaya) in a post above - do try to keep up! However, there is a depressing and lengthy list of journalists and other dissidents, who have been murdered by various despots for the crime of telling the truth or of not toeing the government line. It includes your buddy Vlad but could also take in Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Franco, Pinochet, Stroessner, Mugabe, Amin, Gadaffi, the Kims, Castro, Niyazov, Deng, Galtieri, and many, many others.

Not so much 50 different languages, but plenty of neologisms and portmanteau words maybe? I found "Ulysses" pretty easy but "Finnegans Wake" I found so opaque that I gave up on it after about 100 pages.

I can't remember who wrote it, but there is a rather amusing clerihew about "FW":

Finnegans Wake

Is one long spelling mistake

With not a lot

Of plot

Its central theme,
Revealed through Earwicker’s dream,
Is the cyclical pattern of fall and resurrection,
But except for a few good puns, it’s not worth close inspection

yes you did, she was killed by CIA agents.

those above mentioned have nothing in common with one another, and mostly never had to do with journalists or dissidents as such... but if you want to get hysterical in a way of "God save the Queen, a fascist regime" then its a typical routine with media hacks in the West, nothing new.

This Scot does because he's seen the democratic deficit inherent in sharing a parliament with a right of centre nation that has 10 times the population.  Especially a parliament that is so belligerent in this world and whose role model is the White House.

or.....he's trolling.

sharik's suggestion that Kevin-W is "hysterical" and a "media hack" does rather suggest this.

D.F.T.T.

i'm in earnest.

trolls dwell in Iceland.

is he not?

My origins are the North East of England, Northumberland/Durham. Regardless of my personal political views, the NE generally votes labour, as do several other parts of the UK. With a population not disimilar to Scotland, the NE is no more represented by Westminster than Scotland or Cornwall.

Are all the UK Regions meant to separate from the UK, or would it be better for them (including Scotland) to jointly campaign for better representation in Westminster and regional politics that better represent the local voting in General Elections.

Ok - you seem to be Putin's supporter. What do think about his idea to restore the borders of the former (pre revolution) Russian Empire then? 

I love your sense of humour, as well as your persistence.

Perhaps you and that nice freedom-loving Mr Putin, who is so unfairly blamed for all that CIA oppression of Russian journalists critical of his regime, could meet up, strip off your shirts to your manly torsos, jump on your horses, ride off into the forests with your hunting rifles and - in a purely manly, rather than homoerotic, way of course - bond round the campfire and discuss same-sex marriage? While you're put there perhaps you could go on a spree, and bag yourselves a brace of dissidents and a few gays for the old trophy wall?

nah not at all.

i've not a slightest idea, and why should i?