The "Immorality" of a Concerto of Deliverance

[A Reply to the Critics at Objectivism Online
http://forum.objectivismonline.net/index.php?showtopic=1291&st=0 ]

I've reviewed the criticisms against me and, in particular, against my
producing the album Concerto of Deliverance for my pleasure and then
presenting it to other Rand admirers for their own enjoyment. I've
thought very carefully about this project from the beginning and, not
only did I conclude that it's a *moral* thing to do, but a *glorious*,
benevolent act as well. But, to be open-minded about this, I'm intrigued
by the possibility that the critics here may have discerned a principle
I'm not aware of.

So I examined their arguments as stated in their posts, with the view
that, even if I could not find a clear and consistent principle in their
presentation, perhaps I could deduce a principle from the concrete
examples they gave. The issue raised is important, not only to the
"moral" status of the album Concerto of Deliverance, but also, in
general, to how anyone should properly use and benefit from the work of
Ayn Rand.

In response to my first post introducing myself and presenting the new
album Concerto of Deliverance -- giving a summary of and links to who I
am, why and how the music was produced, and what it might sound like --
there were these following replies.

Stephen Speicher condemns me as being "irrational", a "liar", an
"intellectual and ethical fraud", who "immorally sought to reap benefit
from the good name of Ayn Rand" and "selling his immoral product", which
is "a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand".

Don Watkins III expressed "disgust... that he/the musician he hired had
the gall to call their project 'The Concerto of Deliverance'. Morally,
that is a violation of Rand's intellectual property rights. It is the
attempt to confer the benefits she made possible on someone who has no
right to them. For anyone who professes admiration for Rand to use her
in this way is sickening."

My reply to these criticisms included the following:

"Far from being 'a clear violation of the property rights of Ayn Rand',
the album Concerto of Deliverance is a tribute to her achievement and,
among other aims, a way to draw new readers to her works (which it is
already doing). And I put my severance pay and savings, and my love and
dedication to objectivism, to produce it. (Does anyone here expect me to
give it out for free, other than the samples and insightful articles on
the website?)

"The US copyright laws says this: "Copyright does not protect names,
titles, slogans, or short phrases. In some cases, these things may be
protected as trademarks." See US Copyright Office
<http://www.loc.gov/copyright/> And there is no registered trademark for
"Concerto of Deliverance".

"As to my using and benefiting from Rand's works: don't all
objectivists do? Is someone who makes a movie of Anthem (now in the
public domain) being immoral? Is someone who names their children after
characters in Rand's novels being immoral? Is calling a website or
organization "Objectivist" being immoral? Is applying objectivism in one
life and career, and making money from that being immoral? If it is,
then we should all refrain from deriving any benefit from her, put her
works in a vault, and make them taboo."

Following my rebuttal, Don Watkins III then wrote:

"You're dropping context. We all benefit from Rand's work. That is no
crime. The issue is trying to take from Rand benefits to which we are
not entitled. The music you commissioned [sic, even if it lived up to
Rand's description of Halley's work, is aquiring [sic] an audience
*simply* by using a title given value by Ayn Rand. It would have been
fine had you called it something else, and said, "Inspired by Rand's
description of Halley's Concerto of Deliverence [sic]." But to *call* it
"Concerto of Deliverence [sic]" is intellectual fraud."

And Brian wrote, "Monart may, and possibly should, have the legal right
to call his song what he wishes, but not the moral right. I don't think
anyone should call their peiece [sic] of music the Concerto of
Deliverance. In everyone's minds it is a great masterpiece that we
cannot hear but it selfcontained [sic] in Rand's novel. We each see it
as something beautiful in our own way. And I think it should remain that
way. It's something too precious to have someone try and bring it to
reality."

Collectively, the critics' statements make this claim: that I am
"immoral" and a "fraud" in producing and presenting an album called
"Concerto of Deliverance", because, in doing so, I am "violating
(morally)" Rand's "intellectual property rights", and "reaping benefit"
from what she created to which I wasn't "entitled".

What were the reasons given to justify this claim of "moral violation
and fraud"? I read and re-read the critics' posts, but I could not find
any. All that was stated was the repeated assertion of their claim, and
comparisons of this Concerto of Deliverance album with other cases of
people, in their projects, using words associated with Rand's work.
There were also appeals to Rand's (presumably posthumous) "disapproval"
of such things as this album.

Even though the reason and principle upon which I am being charged with
"immorality and fraud" is not given, I will analyze their claim,
nonetheless, and try to discern its meaning and validity.

First, the part of the claim pertaining to "violation of intellectual
property rights": As I have posted earlier, referring to the copyright
laws, I did not violate her property rights, intellectual or other
kinds. In response, then, the qualification, "moral" violation was
insisted, without explaining what that means. Now, it is the case, that
a violation of rights is an act committed in a socio-political context
which integrally involves the use of force or fraud. But no such an act
was committed by me or the composer.

I certainly did not use force. Nor, did I use fraud -- as in, e.g.,
taking credit for, and pretending that the name and meaning of,
"Concerto of Deliverance", was of my own making. No, I do not; I clearly
attribute the title to its source. Indeed, the title is a commemoration
and a tribute to her work, as is clearly stated in the album booklet and
the information on the website. So other than charges of forceful and
fraudulent, i.e., legal, violation, what is "moral" violation?

Now, I can understand cases where I can be immoral in producing the
album, but which has nothing to do with Rand's property rights, as in:
if my wife or my daughters need life-saving and expensive medical
treatment, but I take our remaining dollars and put it into this album
-- *then* I'd be immoral, in sacrificing their higher value. But that
wasn't the case. So in what way am I being immoral (and in alleged
"violation" of Rand's property, or even in disrespect of her eminence)?

The second part of the claim, that I'm benefiting from Rand's work to
which I have no right and am not entitled, is also difficult to make
sense of. That's why, in my previous post, I listed several kinds of
ways in which someone could use and benefit from Rand's work -- ways
which, if they were "immoral" and should not be done, then her work
should be made taboo. Then, the critics insisted on the qualification of
"no right and not entitled to", a qualification which doesn't make the
charge of immorality any clearer. I'm definitely not taking any of part
of Rand's work that I'm not "entitled to" or given "rights" to. I'm
obviously not taking or copying a piece of music that Rand composed and
calling it my property. So in what way am I using her work that I'm not
entitled to?

Don Watkins III gives a slight elaboration: The album "is aquiring
[sic] an audience *simply* by using a title given value by Ayn Rand". I
don't know what Watkins III means by "audience", but if he believes that
an audience is created that easily, he should produce an album called
"Anthem", or "Fountainhead", or another "Concerto of Deliverance (once
it becomes "moral" for him to do it). Without the genius required to
create the music, the title will no more "acquire" an audience, than
Clinton will acquire a following, wearing a T-shirt that says, "I am
John Galt".

"The Concerto of Deliverance", as a literary reference, is the title of
Chapter VI, Part III, in Atlas Shrugged, and, within the story, is the
name given by Richard Halley's friends to his Fifth Concerto. The
description by Ayn Rand of what the music sounded like to Dagny (when
she first heard it whistled on the train during the scene that
introduced her) is repeated when the music is described when played in
the Valley near the end of the story.

The title of the album I'm presenting is not "The Concerto of
Deliverance", indicating a supreme or ultimate or sui generic status. It
is also *not* a depiction of Richard Halley's Fifth Concerto. It is:
"Concerto of Deliverance" -- implying that it is *a*: "Concerto of
Deliverance", an original work inspired by a contemplation of Rand's
description of such music. The composer, John Mills-Cockell, with
literary guidance from the commissioner and executive producer, created
this, his longest, most expansive work as his musical offering of the
themes in Rand's passage. This was the original commission, as shown in
the numerous postings and updates on the web during the past two years,
and now on the album's website.

I will quote, below, from the last pages of the album booklet, as
indications of the relationship between the executive-producer, the
composer, and Ayn Rand, in regards to the emergence of this album
"Concerto of Deliverance".

Finally, a comment on Brian's insistence that Rand's description of the
Concerto of Deliverance "is too precious to have someone try and bring
it to reality". If this is true, does that mean that *any* ideal
depicted in Rand's art (or formulated in her philosophy) too "precious"
to bring into reality? If not, why then is only the Concerto of
Deliverance is too precious? There is something wrong with this
attitude, something which hold dreamers back from being real, something
which I referred to in the Zarlenga poem I posted previously: "Soar
aloft in the Night Sky...Afraid to face the dawn."



- Monart


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
-----------------------

[From the album booklet for Concerto of Deliverance
http://www.starshipaurora.com/albuminfo.html ]


Monart Pon -Executive Producer


Monart Pon immigrated to Canada from China when a boy. Here he found
three of his passions: astronautics, philosophy, and music. He enjoys a
diverse collection of music, including Dvorak, Debussy, Gershwin,
Stivell, Elvis, and many, many others. He has a Master's in the
philosophy of astronautics and advocates the rational, libertarian
advancement towards living in Space. <http://www.starshipaurora.com>
Monart first heard John Mills-Cockell's "Tillicum" & "December Angel"
and first read Rand's Atlas Shrugged, 30 years ago, and since then,
wanted to hear a "Concerto of Deliverance" as created by his favorite
composer. This album represents, for him, that desire achieved.
-------

The Music of John Mills-Cockell


John Mills-Cockell's music cuts across genres and breaks the bounds of
traditional styles and instrumentation, melding together both familiar
and newly synthesized sonorities. His musicality spans a wide range of
styles and themes, embracing the dramatic and deep, the light and
simple, the wistful and enchanted, the defiant and the triumphant, the
joyous and the sad -- all imbued with freshness, equanimity, and
integrity. A fountainhead of genius in our times, John Mills-Cockell's
sunlit music ennobles and sets fire to the soul.

John Mills-Cockell demonstrates his incomparable mastery of the New
Music, when he creates -- with superb clarity, intensity, sincerity,
confidence, and grace -- such profoundly moving and philosophical themes
as those of "deliverance". His music can challenge, comfort, and cheer
one's relentless movement towards the realization of life's beauty and
happiness. It's that powerful. An unusual musical adventure of
discovery, remembrance, and arrival -- this Concerto of Deliverance.


- Monart Pon, a fan

-------

About Ayn Rand (1905-1982)


Ayn Rand is a celebrated champion of free thought, free trade,
individual rights, and romantic heroism. She wrote:

"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic
being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with
productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only
absolute." ['About the Author', Atlas Shrugged]


"At the dawn of their lives, men seek a noble vision of man's nature
and of life's potential...the sense that one's life is important, that
great achievements are within one's capacity, and that great things lie
ahead." ['Introduction', The Fountainhead]


"She sat listening to the music. It was a symphony of triumph. The
notes flowed up, they spoke of rising and they were the rising itself,
they were the essence and the form of upward motion, they seemed to
embody every human act and thought that had ascent as its motive. It was
a sunburst of sound, breaking out of hiding and spreading open. It had
the freedom of release and the tension of purpose. It swept space clean,
and left nothing but the joy of an unobstructed effort. Only a faint
echo within the sounds spoke of that from which the music had escaped,
but spoke in laughing astonishment at the discovery that there was no
ugliness or pain, and there never had had to be. It was the song of an
immense deliverance."['Concerto of Deliverance', Ayn Rand, Atlas
Shrugged, 1957]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------\
------------------------