From: nextug@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: rec.juggling
Subject: Re: Moschen's Monopoly
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:48:09 GMT
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Just getting back home from Montreal (had a few diversions enroute)

and have been pleased to see the debate sparked by Michael 
Moschen's presentation in Montreal.

Not to speak for Michael Moschen (he did that very elequently 
himself in his presentation and in discussion with many people) but

as the person who set up Michael's visit to Montreal and as someone

who has spent a long time discussing with him, both before and 
during the convention, many of the issues which have been mentioned

in these postings, I thought I should try and clarify some points.

Michael is (as we can I think all agree) a very talented and 
creative person. He is someone who has taken some of the subject 
matter of juggling, as well as elements of music, contemporary 
dance, architecture and other disciplines, and has combined them 
in highly original and evocative ways, creating a number of novel 
techniques and effects along the way. More than this, he is someone

who understands his work as a creative discipline, with emphasis 
on both words. In this sense he has tried to take something from 
the techniques of juggling and forge them into an expressive, 
artistic medium. Not to replace or be on a "higher" plane than the 
circus tradition of juggling, or the busking tradition of juggling 
or anything else, but something *in addition* to these. As an 
artist and a performer he takes his work seriously. He is demanding

of himself and expects no less of others.

As Ben Schoenberg correctly points out, Michael is excited about 
the creative process -- the way we tap into our own creativity and 
discover things to say and do and ways of saying and doing them. 
We are all inspired by things that we see and by the 
accomplishments of others. These should be springboards to explore 
our own creative process. Imitation chiefly harms the imitator. 
Michael is clearly *not* concerned that people are inspired by what

he does and go out in their back yards to experiment. He was (if 
you'll pardon the pun) crystal clear on this point. Those who 
deliberately miss this point are muddying the waters. As Stuart 
Celarier sagacious observes"lets ... not dismiss Miachael's 
arguments based on hyperbolae and misinterpretation or 
misrepresentation of his statements and views." 

He *is*, however concerned about a couple of things. The first is 
that people not get lost in the blind alley of imitation -- not for

his sake but for their own. If they wish to explore some of the 
ideas he has created why do they incessantly do so with acrylic 
balls? Why not metal spheres, silicone balls, wooden balls? Why not

other objects? If people wish to explore bouncing balls why a 
triangle? Why not an octagon, a pentagon, a sqaure or the inside 
of a pyramid? Doing all these "contact" juggling maneuvers using 
acrylic balls makes the copying nothing if not explicit.

He is also concerned when this activity moves beyond the 
recreational into the commercial realm. He has a real reason to 
feel slighted when people take material which he has developed, 
appropriating it as their own, and then make money from it. For 
those whose knee-jerk response is to cry "Hey Michael, what about 
the discipline of juggling? Lighten up! Share with everyone else!" 
let us transpose this issue to another discipline, perhaps familiar

to everyone on the net.

A a really creative programmer writes some hot code to create a new

application that does things that no one has ever seen before. 
Sure, we're all inspired. Some fellow programmer approaches him and

says: "Hey, I really admire what you've done and moreover I want 
to rip you off. I want to take your code, for free, and use it in 
my own application to make a profit for me. Maybe, by the way, if 
I remember, I'll give you some credit." To the first programmers 
protests about the dubious ethics of doing this the second replies:

"Hey, lighten up! What about the discipline of computer programming

as a whole? Why don't you want to lose all control of how your work

is used and give away the results of your creative work, for free, 
so that others can profit by it. What kind of a jerk are you, 
anyway?"

Authors copyright their work. Plagarism is considered bad form as 
well as an offense. Musicians copyright their work. Try using a 
Michael Jackson tune to sell your own products without paying 
royalties and see how long it takes before the lawyers are at your
throat. Filmmakers copyright their work. Want to use some footage 
from a Steven Speilberg film on the TV program you're producing for

your local station. What's the chance you can do it for free, 
without permission and without credit? Dance choreographers 
copyright their creations. During Martha Graham's life no one would

have thought, or dared, to write a book on Graham technique without

consulting her and obtaining her permission. Why should juggling 
be an anomaly in this respect? Why can't jugglers expect the same 
respect and protection that so many others in disperate fields take

for granted?

As Jesse Schell very correctly put it: " Heck, I can see why MM is 
mad... Some people have outright stolen his routine. As grown-ups, 
we each need to drawn the line between inspiration and stealing."

Steve Ragatz, a professional, performing juggler also said it very 
well:

"Rather than deciding whether or not it is "right" or "wrong" to 
use another performers material, ask them.  If they don't want it 
to be used, they will tell you -- and usually do.  If the performer

doesn't feel strongly about it, then you are free and clear.

"Respect has everything to do with plagiarism.  I would never even 
consider using any "contact juggling" moves whatsoever out of 
respect for a truly great artist.  Even though I do not agree with 
many of his opinions, it is his and that's that.  If he had written

a play, I could not perform it without the rights -- if he had 
written a choral piece, I could not use it even in a non-profit 
situation without the rights. Legal or not -- the man has worked 
hard and has developed the material with such integrity to win my 
complete respect.  Michael Moschen has earned this respect and all 
of his routines, choreography and tricks are "hands off."

"Plagiarism is not a moral issue for the creator, it is a moral 
issue for the plagiarist."

Back in May of this year Suzie Williams (of Two Ply Press) wrote:

"A lot of jugglers don't see what's wrong with stealing material
and don't realize that you 
can't rise beyond mediocrity doing someone else's routines. We as 
fellow jugglers need to yell and scream when someone rips off 
another juggler's material.  Two Ply Press does this a lot . . . 
We the
juggling community, heap praise upon our creative idols (Moschen, 
Peter Davidson, Airjazz, ...) but don't learn from their creativity

-- we just imitate it. Both Moschen and Davidson are teaching 
workshops at the Montreal festival; let's hope they pass on their 
creative process and not just their tricks."

Those who expostulate about Michael Moschen's wanting "Godhood" are

way off the mark and do so in poor taste as well. Michael is a 
deeply moral and ethical person who, moreover, is very down to 
earth, approachable and without pretensions. As Stuart Celarier 
very correctly observes: "sparking  disxcussion is the ultimate 
reason why Michael agreed to attend the IJA festival, and to that 
end he has succeeded quite well."

Remember also what Bruce Manners wrote here back in May: "My bottom

line is that there is a very, very fine line between being  
influened by a performer and imitating a performer.  Influence is 
fine, but  imitating is NOT OK and should be discouraged.I hope 
this topic gets a bunch of discussion.  IHMO there is a lot of  
wholesale copying in our business (and in magic and clowning and 
..)"

With respect to Michael and the IJA, Michael took us to task 
(correctly, in my view) for publishing a review of James Ernest's 
book, Contact Juggling,  written by Ted Alspach, in Juggler's World 

which completely failed to deal the issues of copying and the 
creative ownership of the material covered in the book. A 
responsible review should have at least asked some questions or 
addressed the issue. In this light Michael, understandably, 
wondered about the IJA's motives in inviting him to Montreal.  
Moreover this was after an extensive article and interview (in the 
winter 1990 issue of Juggler's World) in which Michael had been 
quite explicit with respect to his views on the stealing of 
material. To quote from the piece :

"To take the simplest, least challenging route of taking somebody 
else's work instead of developing your own doesn't make any sense
 Life has to be about risks . . . In circumstances when people 
have stolen my material, either students or whaever, the deepest 
anger that I've had is that it's a violation of a kind of truth."

Speaking for the Board of Directors of the IJA, I offered our 
apolgies, emphasizing, however, that our blunder had been one of 
oversight and not a deliberate affront. I suggested that Montreal 
would be a good venue to bring some of these issues to the fore and

get jugglers thinking about them. We proceded from there.

Lets remember a couple of things. Michael doesn't need an award 
from the IJA to add to his  resume. His career is in full stellar 
flight. I imagine that some people might have better things to do 
with four days of their time then perform for free and catch 
endless flack about their ideas. He came because he cares about the

art of juggling and he cares about the organization. He has many 
friends in the IJA, has fond memories about his early experiences 
with the IJA in the mid 1970's and acknowledges a debt to the IJA 
for helping him in his early years of juggling. Despite Rick 
Wilson's claims, Michael Moschen is just the kind of person the IJA

needs -- somone who will talk to us about creativity, morality and 
ethics -- and not just teach us another juggling technique.

Juggling can be a expressive, artistic medium. Bobby May, Francis 
Brunn, Peter Davidson, Michael Menes and Michael Moschen -- to name

just a few -- have alread shown that. Juggling doesn't have to be 
only a fringe side-show on the stage of the arts. It's time that 
we as a community of jugglers matured as well, and developed 
responsible attitudes and positions with respect to plagarism and 
theft of material.

Christopher Majka
past IJA Publications Director