Queen Charlotte, British vs. American, Copyright Law, and Second Guessing my art...

[shadowkat]

1. I finished Queen Charlotte - which I rather adored. I liked it better than the last two Bridgertons. In part, because, it focused so much on Queen Charlotte and Lady Danbury, who are wonderful characters. Both very strong in their own rights.

And Lady Danbury states something rather meaningful in response to a marriage proposal by Charlotte's brother:

"I cannot marry anyone. For so long now, I've breathed someone else's air, and I need to be able to breath my own."



2. It occurs to me that the difficulty of being around others, is ...I have to turn a part of myself off. I cannot be fully myself. I talked to mother about this - and she agreed, there's always compromises to be made, and landmines to be navigated.

Being alone is satisfying. I feel energized. There's none of the tension.
Or the worry. None of the need to be mindful of someone else's space or needs.

Mother wondered if by living alone for so long, it would be difficult for me to live with others. I don't believe so. I work in a cubicle five days a week, eight hours a day, surrounded by people. I take trains with them. I share sidewalks with them. Share a laundry room. Share elevators. Mail. Hallways. And live in an apartment building in which often I can hear them in the hallways, or outside or rummaging above me or next door with the low hum of the telly. (Telly sounds better in my head than television.)

So yes, I can live in close proximity with others - but I need my own space within that. Where I can be alone, and separate from them. Where I can be if only for a few hours - or a day, or two, fully and completely myself.

3. I do not know if this true? But according to my brother, American English is actually British English from over two or three centuries ago. The British changed their language to differentiate themselves from Americans. So Americans are speaking old English?

Is this true? It's coming from my Brother, and I've learned over the years to take a lot of what he states with a hefty grain of salt. But I do trust my international and well versed correspondence list on the matter.

Comments

[oursin]

I don't think the Brits deliberately changed how English She Was Spoke to differentiate themselves! - it was a question of different influences on languages - languages are constantly changing and developing, and the Brits were a) in much closer contact with Europe (lots of loan words/concepts from Le Continong) and b) having an Empire which also had significant linguistic impact.

And just, people who are speaking basically the same language in geographical isolation evolve it along diverse forks - every so often I see these things about how in different parts of the US common things are called by different names (possibly to do with patterns of immigration?). Particularly before easy long distance travel/mass communications.

It is, or has been, certainly alleged that in certain parts of US they are (or were) still talking the English of Shakespeare's day well into C20th, but those were very isolated communities.

[mefisto]

This is also my understanding. American English got lots of influences because colonists came from all over England and at different times. And then there were Dutch and German speakers too. The net result was lots of American language development.

That said, the Appalachian region was fairly uniform in its settlers (Scotch-Irish) and more isolated. Famously, folk songs in that area were very close to their English originals and got used in the collection of Childe's ballads.

[shadowkat]

This is most likely accurate. I'm not sure where my brother got his information from. Most likely some academic who didn't analyze the whole picture?

[yourlibrarian]

A quick stab at these:

*Does anyone even care to read it?

I would say yes, and that the response to them on AO3 proves as much.

*Will they even find it on Squidgeworld?

Not as many, simply because it's a smaller site. But I do think people will. I've gotten some interested readers since posting there.

*Why did I ever bother to do it on Ao3? (Yes, there are 611 kudos and 11 subscriptions, but a lot are for things they want to take down.)

It's unfortunate that it's proving to be so much work. But had the takedowns not started I think clearly it would have brought renewed interest to writings which probably wouldn't have been easily found otherwise.

*Does meta or essays or reviews even matter that much if they aren't done by professionals?

I don't know why they wouldn't be. A lot of people never read professional reviews but read the takes of other fans all the time. The biggest arbiter of films, for example, is Rotten Tomatoes which collates professional reviews but also that of bloggers and audience members.

[shadowkat]

Well, started up again. But IDK. I'm doing a lot of electronic jumping back and forth at work on a computer. And it's a lot. Plus I don't have a lot of time to do it. Dingbat Ao3 people.

I've switched 84 over. But I don't even know how I'm going to delete them all. Or what all to delete. Is it just reviews? Or also episode recaps?

[yourlibrarian]

Both reviews and recaps are what has been targeted before.

[shadowkat]

I'm trying to figure out the level of the recap/episode review that they'll target? Is it any, or is it ones that don't involve any in-depth analysis?

It would be nice if they were clear on this. Also, their misuse of the word transformative is annoying - it should be used in regards to fanfic, fanvids, and fanart only - because that falls under copyright infringement. Recaps only do if there's no criticism involved.

Ugh, the copyright lawyer in me wants to kick them.

[yourlibrarian]

Definitely the more in-depth it is the less likely it'll be targeted. But their official stance seems to be that all reviews are ephemeral and thus against their content policy.