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

The US has enjoyed it sole global superpower status for near a quarter century now.  It has relentlessly taken advantage of less powerful nations citing "US exceptionalism" as its inflated sense of entitlement and self-justification. The US as the world’s bully can commit transgression after transgression anywhere on earth whenever it wants with complete impunity and with no accountability because its Empire dominance and strength permit getting away with it.  Basically, there is no one strong enough nor willing to deal with the consequences of calling out the USA.

That is why when Obama/Kerry accuse Russia of unjustified unilateral military aggression, defying and violating all international laws, disregarding other nations’ sovereignty, and maintaining horrendous human rights records, the entire world should laugh at America’s blatant hypocrisy and double standard.

Since 1991 when the Soviet Union broke up, NATO promised it would not move closer.  Instead, it has added 12 countries to its fold since 1999.  Look at this map, and tell me that if you were Russia you wouldn't be getting a bit nervous:

The US/West would NEVER tolerate this kind of expansion towards their border. 

But Putin is the expansionist?  I'm sure he wouldn't mind being one, but he hasn't the military or economic power to pull it off, and he knows it.  The bankrupt West is looking for fresh meat to pillage.  (And make no mistake about it Kevin, both our nations are insolvent; it's just a matter of time before they default, and in what manner.)

Putin is not a good guy at all.  He is only constrained my his own nation's inadequacy.  Would that the West were similarly hamstrung.  But the Western media have been totally irresponsible in their reporting on this, ignoring facts, rushing falsehoods to press (look at the NYT "picture scoop" that was run as front page news, then retracted quietly on the "back pages" only a few days later.)

Explain to me why the current Kiev regime is legitimate, beyond John Kerry saying it is.  They violently overthrew an elected government with elections scheduled for next year, only a week after signing an agreement with the then Ukrainian government agreeing to strip the president of much of his power and hold the elections earlier.

Everywhere the US has been (Egypt, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan) in the past 15 years is a disaster area.  Yet we chide others about human rights.  But any country going against the world’s most powerful nation is automatically deemed an enemy of the Empire and subject to such labels as "axis-of-evil" and a serious affront to human rights. On the other hand, when a country’s government encourages and willingly allows a strong US presence with active duty military installations accompanied by an army of private contractors and transnational corporations, corrupt dictators with the worst human rights records in the entire world are merely given a free pass, immune from any US criticism.

No Putin is not necessarily right, but I don't think he's the worst offender in this.  Had the US not fomented (if not financed) the overthrow of the Yanukovich government, Crimea would still be a semi-autonomous region of the Ukraine.

"The International Monetary Fund board on Wednesday approved a two-year, $17 billion loan package for cash-strapped Ukraine as it seeks to regain stability following Russia's annexation of Crimea."

Oh, brother! Is is just me?

And the loan will mean servitude for Ukraine and eventually austerity measures that will have the Ukrainians lamenting the day they made their bed with the banksters. 

It's the same MO every time...

There is one thing we can all know to be truth; that not one of the big players on any side of this thing gives a flying f-bomb about the Ukrainian people.

moreover, one might get an impression, according to '1984' that Totalitarism is a bad thing only whilst pass through a tough period like wars and so on when Room101 is used too often, but as such it may be acceptable in a benign form.

btw i've seen only the movie so far...

In terms of the original writer's question I think the idea of a serial is a good one.  At the end of the day the debate you have is one faced by creative artists since the dawn of time - whether to continue painting/writing/recording what you artistically desire or whether to 'sell out' and produce what your management think the market wants.  The very fortunate (Kate Bush is a good example) manage to produce artistically rewarding work that the market desires en masse.

This decision is one only you can make but your agent presumably feels that most of your worldwide fan base is currently located in Japan and as such want to read novels set in Japan ideally.  Your ability to push back against their position depends heavily on your sales and with sales of 5000 is thus fairly limited - if on the other hand you'd just sold 2 million you'd have a lot more clout.

Your decision needs to be balanced by where you want your career as a novelist to take you.  If the plan is to keep up the day-job and write on the side then feel free to write what you want.  If on the other hand you want to sell enough books to ditch the day job I would probably play ball with the agent and write the next one in Japan to try and build a following.  On the other hand I actually think having the novel set in Japan would be a barrier to it achieving volume sales in for example the USA or Europe.

One thing is clear though, unless you are financially independent all artists are to a degree constrained by the commercial requirements of their art.  Even Ian Fleming wanted to kill Bond off because he was bored of writing about him but the gravy train of 3 months in Jamaica writing a book a year was too good to turn down...

Jonathan

Don't disagree with any of this advice, but I have highlighted a couple of phrases which I personally would re-phrase along the lines of " listen to the advice of your agent - that's partly what he's there for". He might be wrong, but.............

This thread has gone to sleep, but here is an interview with John Le Carre [The Spy Who Came In From The Cold was his first book] - a major author who dared to tread his own path - and whose views on Freedom and Democracy, and the role of the West in the governance of "Countries we had no right to interfere in" - to quote Le Carre in the interview - which explores many of the issues probed in this thread.

I cannot agree that NATO has encroached on form Soviet Client States in Europe as DR Mark suggested. These former communist States have merely employed the Democratic process to elect governments that joined NATO as a defence against the continuing threat that they saw from from post soviet Russia. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IoSdtgTWPK8

Somewhere [at about the time of this thread either in this thread or elsewhere on the Naim forum] I was asked if the UK population was as free as we had been in the 1970s. Apparently Le Carre shares my view that we are living in a time where freedoms are being eroded on the alter of hysteria over the terrorist threat, whereas when we were faced with the IRA threat in times past "We held our nerve." Good point well made by Le Carre, I think.

ATB from George

George, you should remember that Le Carre's conduct (like that of many so called "writers" and "intellectuals") in the Rushdie affair was nothing short of disgraceful. Perhaps he only thinks people that he likes should have freedom of expression.

Le Carre has since regretted his behaviour and has apologised to Rushdie, but it ruined his credibility in a lot of people's eyes, including mine.

Dear Kevin,

I think most of us have made judgements and decisions that we later see as being wrong. To apologise is to make clear one's contrition and one's realisation ...

Refusing to accept an apology is, of course, another personal decision.

For myself, I can find a lot to agree with Le Carre on, even if I could never imagine that he would likely become someone I admired as a sort of hero!

ATB from George

er, what threat? 1990s Russia was struggling and pro-Western and anti-Communist and non-Emperialist one could ever imagine.

do you watch TV at all at least sometimes?

what are you talking about!?

the USSR was destroyed in 1991 and gone so peaceful as no other state in history of mankind. Gorbie had made it clear by withdrawing the troops from East Germany and Afganistan without a single shot fired, and you still would insist East Europe had reasons to fear Russia in the 1990s, huh?!
 

you think wrong. 1990-2005 is anything but a brief period; you tend to make up stories, but the facts are against you.

you have a very poor knowledge of history. Russia has been invaded by the Germans, Poles, French, British and so on.

don't you know Yeltsyn was a West puppet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_War

have you ever been to school?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...of_the_Light_Brigade

Char, I only said that Orwell was probably the best writer of prose in the English language in the 20th century, I never said that 1984 was the best book in English of the 20th century.

Best book of the 20th century? You could choose from, Ulysses, Vassily Grossman's Life & Fate, Boris Pasternak's underrated Doctor Zhivago, John Dos Passos' mighty trilogy USA, or probably the best of all, Proust's A la Recherche du Temps Perdu. I guess you could also throw stuff like Catch 22, Lolita, Waugh's Sword of Honour trilogy, Parade's End, Grapes of Wrath, Darkness at Noon, etc.

But not 1984. It's the most important, and in terms of its effect on the language and the wider culture, by far the most influential. but it's not even Orwell's best book.

Sorry, but Burroughs is a deeply overrated, and rather minor, writer. That's what happens when you give junkies typewriters and surround them with sycophants - they write pretentious, almost unreadable guff ripped off from Dadaists like Schwitters, Ball et al; later, pop stars too lazy to read proper books praise them to the skies and lo! Reputation sealed, at least among the hard of thinking (and lots of groups provided with band names, song titles and an image).

Interzone/(The) Naked Lunch ain't bad, but any fule kno that the most nightmarish of all dystopias is to be found either in Sir Thomas More's totalitarian theocracy in Utopia; or Yevgeny Zamyatin's We (which appears to have influence Orwell's book). Or 1984. [Which, if you think it's implicitly about the USSR, you can't have read it properly. Certainly it is a satirical critique of Stalinism, but it's just as much about Britain during wartime, and a warning that the conditions for totalitarianism can arise any time anywhere].

Burroughs isn't a terrible writer, just not half as good as his acolytes think he is. I (and I suspect thousands of others) am grateful for his role in inspiring the likes of Bowie, Joy Division, Throbbing Gristle and others, and I suspect that his legacy will be this, and perhaps, The Naked Lunch, rather than as a great writer.

Not this writer I'm afraid; nor any of the writers I know. Burroughs is someone you grow out of, best described as "iffy lit".

If there is such a thing as a "writer's writer" at the moment, it's probably Bellow, Joyce or Nabakov.

Who knows? Have you asked this guy?

+1; tied for the worst thing in/out of Yekaterinburg.

The main "threat" from Russia, and its only crime, is not wanting to do business with the West (or USA) in the exact manner the USA wants (i.e., being a total pushover), and standing in the way of the "Asia pivot".  Look for US companies to come in and frack the living s**t out of Ukraine, and I'll bet you a million tons of soybeans that Monsanto will be planting their GMO poison in short order as well.

Even though it will no doubt cause me considerable personal pain, it will be a great day for humanity when the USD loses its status as the reserve currency.  Any moves anyone makes in that direction will get them immediately vilified and invaded, because without that reserve underpinning, the whole charade falls apart. 

The USA is a bankrupt, insolvent, crumbling empire run by a bunch of megalomaniac neo-cons.  It exhibits all the classic behaviors of empires in serious decline.  And the UK and Germany need to be more proactive in telling us to take a hike, but it seems Angela came here to get her marching orders just a couple of weeks ago.

Char, do you actually believe that guff? Or is it vaguely remembered from some lecture in the 1980s?

Your powers of cut-and-paste are truly remarkable.