The Cellist of Sarajevo - Inspiration for book is mad at author

Never heard of him or the book until now.

I don't know what Canadian law is on this, but in the US he'd have a good case about the photograph. As for the text itself, if it contains an accurate description of his actions in public, I doubt he'd have a case here.

Writing Jedi said:

Well, I'd never heard of them either, LOL. I just think the "cellist" is being a bit of a, well, suck about it.

Click to expand...

Not if they're using his likeness on the cover. A text inspired by his public activities is one thing; using his picture on the cover is quite another.

IceCreamEmpress said:

Not if they're using his likeness on the cover. A text inspired by his public activities is one thing; using his picture on the cover is quite another.

Click to expand...

I agree. And I'm not sure why you wouldn't ask for permission to use a real person's photograph on the front cover.

They crossed a line when they used his picture and his name on the book. Up to that point, no one necessarily "owns" one's actions in a meaningful way---especially in this case where the cellist is arguably a public figure.

It's still debatable. If he was wronged, I think he's being a bit of a drama queen about it. It might be proper to remove the photo and reference from the book, but no doubt the guy has sniffed money and wouldn't let that be the end of it.

ejket said:

no doubt the guy has sniffed money and wouldn't let that be the end of it.

Click to expand...

Come on -- it's fuckin' CanLit -- there's no money there!

(Sorry, cheap shot. Mostly true though. Except that Steve's done pretty well with international sales on this one, so there probably is a bit of scratch at play.)

It certainly was foolish to use his picture without obtaining permission. Beyond that, I don't see that the man has a case.

I hope it's a good book, because that's an interesting premise.

I don't see it as a grey area at all: the real-life information was used as a marketing tool to increase market interest and sales. The cellist should get his share.

The decision of the author and publisher to go ahead without permission was unethical.

But if you wrote about how three strangers were affected by, say, seeing David Blaine in his 'ice coffin' in Times Square, would Blaine be entitled to compensation? It's a fact. He did it. Both he-s, for all the world to see.

If the novel is about other people being affected by it, that's pure fiction.

I would certainly contact David Blaine and let him know he's about to be featured in my book. I may be old fashioned, but feel that's the right thing to do.

I probably would to, but I wouldn't be expecting to pay him in anything other than acknowledgement for having done something that inspired me to a story.

As far as using his likeness, I don't know what the rules are where that's concerned, but wouldn't be surprised to find that he's got a legitimate gripe there.

Perks said:

But if you wrote about how three strangers were affected by, say, seeing David Blaine in his 'ice coffin' in Times Square, would Blaine be entitled to compensation?

Click to expand...

Absolutely not, at least under US law.

Now, if you used David Blaine's photograph on the cover, you would be liable.

The thing is, a fiction writer gets paid to create and execute a story. If you had to pay down the line for your inspirations, it would never be anything more than a very expensive hobby.

I agree, however I also believe there should be self-imposed ethical boundaries to how we manipulate or use the elements of our inspiration. All the author had to do in this case, imo, if he didn't want to contact the cellist, was to change the name in the book and not use the man's picture.

I for one would not take it very well if I suddenly found my picture on the front cover of a book I had no idea was being published worldwide...and to top it off, my real name was used. I'd be really upset.

That wouldn't really work, though. If there was a globally documented event of a Vedran Smailovic playing the cello atop of heap of rubble for twenty-two days in Sarajevo, it would look pretty silly to name him Gordon Gunn and carry on with the tale from there.

I think it would be polite to inform him that his act of artistic defiance inspired a novel, but I think the author did that with the gift of the book. (Like I said, I hope it's a good book, because Mr. Smailovic's protest concert was an eloquent gesture.) I do not believe the author is under any obligation to obtain permission to use a news item as backdrop to his story.

Now if Mr. Smailovic was a central character, where the novelist assigned him traits and motivations in any significant way, then I think he might have something to say about it.

There are probably more graceful ways to have handled it, but it doesn't seem unethical to me, except for perhaps the cover art - which the author may or may not have had anything to do with.

Angelinity said:

I for one would not take it very well if I suddenly found my picture on the front cover of a book I had no idea was being published worldwide...and to top it off, my real name was used. I'd be really upset.

Click to expand...

His name and likeness had already been used worldwide in conjunction with the news coverage of the event. It sounds like that's all that was used in the book, pivotal as it was to the narrative.

Perks said:

His name and likeness had already been used worldwide in conjunction with the news coverage of the event. It sounds like that's all that was used in the book, pivotal as it was to the narrative.

Click to expand...

It's a fine line, imo--reporting the news is one thing, and if this were a journalist retelling the story, I wouldn't see a conflict of interest.

But we're talking about writing fiction here, and when an author uses a real person as a pivotal character to create and further the plot in his fiction, it does not seem right.

Had this been a political figure or leader of some other sort, I could overlook the faux pas. But it was an everyday guy who had the guts to take a stand risking his life, at a time of turmoil and mayhem. I imagine this 'moment' held a special meaning for him, I imagine he invested a great deal of emotion into it, and carried it with him for all these years.

Then out of the blue there is a book of fiction from a guy he's never met, a guy who never bothered to ask him why he'd done it, and what all of it had meant to him. I imagine this everyday man who maybe only did this one notable thing in his life, felt used and cheated.

Angelinity said:

Then out of the blue there is a book of fiction from a guy he's never met, a guy who never bothered to ask him why he'd done it, and what all of it had meant to him. I imagine this everyday man who maybe only did this one notable thing in his life, felt used and cheated.

Click to expand...

If that's what the book had been about, then I might agree with you. But the book is about three people who saw this man in his moment and what it meant to them and how it changed the course of their lives.

What Mr. Smailovic was thinking or feeling at the time of his performance is not pivotal. In fact, it's irrelevant. It's only the picture of him doing it - which was international news - that's important for the sake of the story. Interviewing Mr. Smailovic would not only have been useless, it could have damaged the story. That's why I think it's sort of a neat angle. We often never know why people do the things they do which inspire or inflame us in some way.

When I was a kid, I saw a little boy sobbing once. He was wracked with shudders and the tears on his face were coming in sheets, not just streams. The setting was ordinary, but something in his heartbreak just gutted me and tuned me to care more about strangers than I ever had before. I never forgot that boy. I can still see him clearly.

In all likelihood, he'd dropped his lollipop or had been scolded for a tantrum. Maybe he got stung by a bee. If I had known what was actually in his mind, the moment may very well have been diluted.

While Mr. Smailovic's internal dialogue was assuredly more profound during his vigil, still I find my point illustrative. It's the image of him that's iconic. What he was thinking at the time would only have weight if the story were about him. It's not.

Hmmm. I wonder if they've changed the cover, because there isn't anyone at all on it according to Amazon.com.http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1594489866/ref=sib_dp_pt#reader-link

The boy was and remains anonymous. Smailovic on the other hand is being pictured and talked about by, among other people he'll never know, the two of us.

And now I think I'm going to have to read the book. For one, it's sounds tremendous and also to see if I can retain my opinion of this conflict.

It really does sounds like a terrific story.

Angelinity said:

The boy was and remains anonymous. Smailovic on the other hand is being pictured and talked about by, among other people he'll never know, the two of us.

Click to expand...

But he always would have been. Many anonymous people have discussed this man over coffee or the dinner table or on the subway.

You make a protest, you want people to remember. That he inspired this novel sounds like a tribute. Not that it needed to be, in my opinion.

Perks said:

But he always would have been. Many anonymous people have discussed this man over coffee or the dinner table or on the subway.

Click to expand...

at the time he chose that for himself.

this time around his story was used unknowingly to him by someone who gained a monetary reward.