Taken from ‘My Name is Red’ – Orhan Pamuk, published 1998
Period 16th Century
EXCERPT:
“My great master, my dear sir, what separates the genuine miniaturist from the ordinary?” I assumed the Head Illuminator…
“There is no single measure that can distinguish the great miniaturist from the unskilled and faithless one,” he said in all seriousness, “This changes with time. Yet the skills and morality with which he should face the evils that threaten our art are of significance. Today, in order to determine just how genuine a young painter is, I’d ask him three questions.” (_1)
“And what would that be?”
“Has he come to believe, under the sway of recent custom as well as the influence of the Chinese and the European Franks, that he ought to have an individual painting technique, his own style? As an illustrator, does he want to have a manner, an aspect distinct from others, and does he attempt to prove this by signing his name somewhere in his work like the Frankish masters? To determine precisely these things, I’d first ask him a question about ‘style’ and ‘signature.’” (_2)
“And then?” I asked respectfully.
“Then, I’d want to learn how this illustrator felt about volumes changing hands, being unbound, and our pictures being used in other books and in other eras after the shahs and sultans who’d commissioned them have died. This is a subtle issue demanding a response beyond one’s being simply upset or pleased by it. Thus, I’d ask the illustrators a question about ‘time’-an illustrator’s time and Allah’s time. Do you follow me, my child?” (_3)
Nay, But that’s not what I asked. Instead, I asked, “And the third question?”
“The third would be ‘blindness’!” said the great master Head Illuminator Osman, who then fell silent as if this required no explication.
“What is it about ‘blindness’?” I said with embarrassment.
“Blindness is silence. If you combine what I‘ve just now said, the first and the second questions, ‘blindness’ will emerge. It’s the farthest one can go in illustrating; it is seeing what appears out of Allah’s own blackness.” (_4)
SIGNIFICANCE:
(_1) Profile of a genuine artist
(_2) A successful architect (materially successful and my Dad’s friend) made me sit infront of him when I was a kid and took the first lessons for being successful. He quoted, ‘To be successful, follow the path that has been tried and tested, don’t experiment.’ I still disagree with him. Perhaps his success amounted to cash stashed at his bank, but real success is about what new did you bring to people. Freud didn’t follow the beaten path and neither did Michael Angelo (list is endless). These people were futuristic, people now stake royalty to their works and will keep doing so in future. But how many of these people actually signed their own works to earn millions? Very few did. Some of the greatest works are quoted even more after the artists are dead, Van Goh, Beethoven and talk about Tolkein from contemporary times.Inspiration is important, but not to the tune of imitation.
(_3) OPEN SOURCE VS. COPYRIGHT (MICROSOFT). When Thomas Friedman was asked to react on pirated versions his books being sold at Connaught Place, New Delhi his response was a quirky smile. He praised the eagerness of the readers who perhaps couldn’t afford higher prices and expressed his gladness over the content spreading out further amidst people who wanted to read him. Signature is important but not to the tune of restricting access.
OPEN SOURCE EVENTUALLY WINS AGAINST MONOPOLISTIC TENDENCIES (dated in future when Microsoft finally sits with its knees crossed, paralyzed against altruist peers)
INACCESSIBLE PATENTS CAN ONLY ROT AND DIE
(_4) Personal vision renders everything else unimportant. If the illuminator has vision, he doesn’t need eyes.