What do you think?
Rate this book
Digital Barbarism
World-renowned novelist Mark Helprin offers a ringing Jeffersonian defense of private property in the age of digital culture, with its degradation of thought and language, and collectivist bias against the rights of individual creators.
Mark Helprin anticipated that his 2007 New York Times op-ed piece about the extension of the term of copyright would be received quietly, if not altogether overlooked. Within a week, the article had accumulated 750,000 angry comments. He was shocked by the breathtaking sense of entitlement demonstrated by the commenters, and appalled by the breadth, speed, and illogic of their responses.
Helprin realized how drastically different this generation is from those before it. The Creative Commons movement and the copyright abolitionists, like the rest of their generation, were educated with a modern bias toward collaboration, which has led them to denigrate individual efforts and in turn fueled their sense of entitlement to the fruits of other people’s labors. More important, their selfish desire to “stick it” to the greedy corporate interests who control the production and distribution of intellectual property undermines not just the possibility of an independent literary culture but threatens the future of civilization itself.
Audio
First published April 1, 2009
24 people are currently reading
245 people want to read
About the author
Mark Helprin
39 books1,693 followersMark Helprin belongs to no literary school, movement, tendency, or trend. As many have observed and as Time Magazine has phrased it, “He lights his own way.” His three collections of short stories (A Dove of the East and Other Stories, Ellis Island and Other Stories, and The Pacific and Other Stories), six novels (Refiner's Fire, Winter's Tale, A Soldier of the Great War, Memoir From Antproof Case, Freddy and Fredericka and, In Sunlight and In Shadow), and three children's books (Swan Lake, A City in Winter, and The Veil of Snows, all illustrated by Chris Van Allsburg), speak eloquently for themselves and are remarkable throughout for the sustained beauty and power of their language.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews
October 15, 2009
This is that book that you love to hate! Mark Helprin is such a nasty, mean windbag in his book Digital Barbarism. As a tattooed woman (2 strikes against me), I'm apparently just one of the millions of riffraff he loathes! However, although it KILLS me to admit it, he does raise a couple of interesting questions about Intellectual Property. So, 2 stars.
But ultimately Helprin is still wrong. The evil that he imagines himself to be fighting when he attacks Creative Commons is a cartoonish villain: a radical, frothing-at-the-mouth, fanatical, nihilist communist. Kind of a foil to Helprin himself, who fancies himself a hero: a rational, noble, courageous, moralist capitalist. The problem is that Helprin gets the Creative Commons movement all wrong.
Although I'm sure a blogger or two has, indeed, argued for the abolition of copyright, I'm also sure that a blogger or two has argued for just about anything you can think of. That's the beauty of blogs -- everyone has a voice in the public forum (not just Mark Helprin). The copyright reform movement as a whole, however, is much more moderate. In fact, Creative Commons actually seeks to slow down and dial-back a radical movement that would see copyright abolished.
As the transfer of information and ideas has become more fluid in a digital environment connected by the internet, the policy mechanisms to control IP have also gotten much more restrictive and chilling. This is because the industries that profit from licensing IP panicked and lobbied for stricter controls to protect their investments. The reward for their lobbying was copyright extension and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It is now no longer safe, even in the context of fair use, to critique and respond to Intellectual Property without fears of unreasonable legal fees and prosecution.
So yes, people responded to these strict new controls by becoming pirates and thieves. But Creative Commons seeks to correct that, to be the moderate solution in-between that gives producers the option still to license their intellectual property, but more fluidly. I think this is probably in line with what the framers actually had in mind when they established a "limited term" for copyright, so that, as rugged individualists, innovators and capitalists, we could still profit from our ideas -- but that these ideas would then eventually be "freed" for public use and progress. The framers made this weird exception for ownership of Intellectual Property, as opposed to other sorts of property, because they recognized a special quality in ideas that allows us all to benefit when they are free.
I admit that Digital Barbarism did force me to critique my own views on Intellectual Property licensing, which had drifted pretty far to the left. For that I appreciate it. That's why it got 2 stars instead of 1.
But ultimately Helprin is still wrong. The evil that he imagines himself to be fighting when he attacks Creative Commons is a cartoonish villain: a radical, frothing-at-the-mouth, fanatical, nihilist communist. Kind of a foil to Helprin himself, who fancies himself a hero: a rational, noble, courageous, moralist capitalist. The problem is that Helprin gets the Creative Commons movement all wrong.
Although I'm sure a blogger or two has, indeed, argued for the abolition of copyright, I'm also sure that a blogger or two has argued for just about anything you can think of. That's the beauty of blogs -- everyone has a voice in the public forum (not just Mark Helprin). The copyright reform movement as a whole, however, is much more moderate. In fact, Creative Commons actually seeks to slow down and dial-back a radical movement that would see copyright abolished.
As the transfer of information and ideas has become more fluid in a digital environment connected by the internet, the policy mechanisms to control IP have also gotten much more restrictive and chilling. This is because the industries that profit from licensing IP panicked and lobbied for stricter controls to protect their investments. The reward for their lobbying was copyright extension and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It is now no longer safe, even in the context of fair use, to critique and respond to Intellectual Property without fears of unreasonable legal fees and prosecution.
So yes, people responded to these strict new controls by becoming pirates and thieves. But Creative Commons seeks to correct that, to be the moderate solution in-between that gives producers the option still to license their intellectual property, but more fluidly. I think this is probably in line with what the framers actually had in mind when they established a "limited term" for copyright, so that, as rugged individualists, innovators and capitalists, we could still profit from our ideas -- but that these ideas would then eventually be "freed" for public use and progress. The framers made this weird exception for ownership of Intellectual Property, as opposed to other sorts of property, because they recognized a special quality in ideas that allows us all to benefit when they are free.
I admit that Digital Barbarism did force me to critique my own views on Intellectual Property licensing, which had drifted pretty far to the left. For that I appreciate it. That's why it got 2 stars instead of 1.
September 18, 2012
I made a real effort to give this book the benefit of the doubt for as long as possible, but I found it really hard to read. I felt a desire to believe that it is propaganda created, however indirectly, by the copyright industry, but I know it probably isn't. Mark Halprin is most likely just expressing his own strong opinions.
The first chapter seemed at first to be mere whining about the effects of technology and nostalgia for a slower past, but Halprin does acknowledge that there's no turning back the clock and seems to have a notion of how people can live with the benefits of the modern world while retaining some of the richness of life that he believes many people in the modern world have lost. I was struck by how believable I found his prediction of life a decade or so in the future. I actually didn't find his depiction unappealing at all.
I skipped forward to the first mention of Lawrence Lessig, hoping that this would be a way of finding where Halprin makes his actual arguments about copyright. He did make some claims that I hadn't heard before such as that the Sony Bono copyright act had transferred some power from powerful corporations back to artists and writers by requiring copyright licenses to be returned to the original creator after some time period (like 35 years or something I think). I couldn't find any evidence that he actually addressed any of the arguments against copyright extremism by the likes of Lawrence Lessig, though, and from reading some reviews on Goodreads it seems he never did, which doesn't surprise me given the tone of the book. The part I read consisted almost entirely of sarcastic and self-righteous vitriol that I found really unpleasant to read, especially when he ridiculed arguments against copyright extremism without even providing a counterargument that I could discern. For example, he ridiculed a passage that made the distinction between physical goods (whose trade is a zero-sum game) and digital goods, which are non-rivalrous. He kept putting [sic] after zero-sum as though using this term was self-evidently preposterous.
I found it increasingly painful to read and soon gave up on it in disgust.
The first chapter seemed at first to be mere whining about the effects of technology and nostalgia for a slower past, but Halprin does acknowledge that there's no turning back the clock and seems to have a notion of how people can live with the benefits of the modern world while retaining some of the richness of life that he believes many people in the modern world have lost. I was struck by how believable I found his prediction of life a decade or so in the future. I actually didn't find his depiction unappealing at all.
I skipped forward to the first mention of Lawrence Lessig, hoping that this would be a way of finding where Halprin makes his actual arguments about copyright. He did make some claims that I hadn't heard before such as that the Sony Bono copyright act had transferred some power from powerful corporations back to artists and writers by requiring copyright licenses to be returned to the original creator after some time period (like 35 years or something I think). I couldn't find any evidence that he actually addressed any of the arguments against copyright extremism by the likes of Lawrence Lessig, though, and from reading some reviews on Goodreads it seems he never did, which doesn't surprise me given the tone of the book. The part I read consisted almost entirely of sarcastic and self-righteous vitriol that I found really unpleasant to read, especially when he ridiculed arguments against copyright extremism without even providing a counterargument that I could discern. For example, he ridiculed a passage that made the distinction between physical goods (whose trade is a zero-sum game) and digital goods, which are non-rivalrous. He kept putting [sic] after zero-sum as though using this term was self-evidently preposterous.
I found it increasingly painful to read and soon gave up on it in disgust.
November 8, 2009
Sadly underserved by his publisher in its name, it's not at all a long argument about copyright, but really a memoir intended to explain by example why one writes, and how only one's own individual experience in life can produce writing that is original and unique and one's own (and here he returns briefly to the copyright question and the nature of Internet writing vs. real writing.
Writers should read it.
Writers should read it.
June 4, 2009
Sarcastic book, fun to read. Unfortunately, his arguments are weak and he doesn't address many of the opposing argument's points. There is more to copyright debate than Mark Helprin speaks about and he addresses only what I consider to be "common sense" when it comes to copyright. The book is more of a ramble against the teenage and internet culture (two cultures that are completely separate, but Helprin combines throughout the entire book). Overall, this is the basic argument that all pro-copyrightists use, and Helprin doesn't exactly bring new ideas to the battle.
I was hoping to get some great insight to pro-copyright opinions. I was hoping it would really take books like "free culture" and really tackle their points. If you dislike (or ignorant of) the internet or teenage culture, then you will probably enjoy and agree with this book.
I am still left with the opinion that DRM and unregulated copyright (etc, etc) should be abolished for the sake of the consumer, artists, and corporations alike. I should probably mention that I am a musician and hoping to work in the field, not an illegal downloader.
I was hoping to get some great insight to pro-copyright opinions. I was hoping it would really take books like "free culture" and really tackle their points. If you dislike (or ignorant of) the internet or teenage culture, then you will probably enjoy and agree with this book.
I am still left with the opinion that DRM and unregulated copyright (etc, etc) should be abolished for the sake of the consumer, artists, and corporations alike. I should probably mention that I am a musician and hoping to work in the field, not an illegal downloader.
February 23, 2014
Excellent argument in favor of copyright; even for extending copyright into perpetuity of descendants. I believe if you own a house you should be able to pass it to your kids without burdening them with the taxes; perhaps a tax scale that takes into account the income of the recipient as well as the value of the inheritance.
The argument is not perfect - as others have noted, the author takes some time to throw in all kinds of opinions about other issues, usually with a conservative viewpoint. I found these digressions to be tolerable, in fact even enjoyable to see conservative viewpoints elucidated by someone who isn't a power hungry knuckle-dragger.
The gist of Helprin's argument is that if the ability to make money from one's artistic efforts is stymied by open use and digital replication then literature of quality will not be written. That he is correct is self-evident; the extinction of independent, full-time intellectuals has been well-documented by Jacobi and others. Any glance at the best seller list will reveal the lack of quality. An occasional quality work will slip in, but typically only by the anointed of academe such as Murakami or Pynchon.
Helprin takes the time to eviscerate the Creative Commons arguments; at this point he need merely sit back and point at the smoking wreckage of the music industry. A day hasn't passed without another artist pulling songs from the cloud services for non or negligible payment. Artists deserve to be paid for their work; they deserve to derive income from that work in their own lifetimes and I'm convinced they deserve to pass that legacy on to their children as well. Google should not be able to scan every page ever written and display it for free; nor should Bit Torrent users (or whatever the theft service of the day) be able to copy movies/games/books and make them available for free. No reward means no worthy product, and we are already reaping that harvest via the lowest SAT scores ever recorded, and a freedom of press rating lower than a Balkan dictatorship.
The argument is not perfect - as others have noted, the author takes some time to throw in all kinds of opinions about other issues, usually with a conservative viewpoint. I found these digressions to be tolerable, in fact even enjoyable to see conservative viewpoints elucidated by someone who isn't a power hungry knuckle-dragger.
The gist of Helprin's argument is that if the ability to make money from one's artistic efforts is stymied by open use and digital replication then literature of quality will not be written. That he is correct is self-evident; the extinction of independent, full-time intellectuals has been well-documented by Jacobi and others. Any glance at the best seller list will reveal the lack of quality. An occasional quality work will slip in, but typically only by the anointed of academe such as Murakami or Pynchon.
Helprin takes the time to eviscerate the Creative Commons arguments; at this point he need merely sit back and point at the smoking wreckage of the music industry. A day hasn't passed without another artist pulling songs from the cloud services for non or negligible payment. Artists deserve to be paid for their work; they deserve to derive income from that work in their own lifetimes and I'm convinced they deserve to pass that legacy on to their children as well. Google should not be able to scan every page ever written and display it for free; nor should Bit Torrent users (or whatever the theft service of the day) be able to copy movies/games/books and make them available for free. No reward means no worthy product, and we are already reaping that harvest via the lowest SAT scores ever recorded, and a freedom of press rating lower than a Balkan dictatorship.
October 23, 2010
This book is poorly argued. It displays a complete lack of understanding of the movement it claims to describe and oppose, not to mention Internet culture. In fact the whole argument is based on the largest straw man this side of the Burning Man festival. I want desperately to hate it, but the prose is beautiful. How could I hate any book that, in discussing a youthful pilfering of corn from an Iowa farmer uses the phrase: "he had thousands of acres of corn and, perhaps like Van Gogh, would not have missed a single ear"? I can't. I found this actually an enjoyable and engaging read, although perhaps when judging an essay large logical missteps should count for more.
January 29, 2020
The semiconscious hordes will quickly devour anything that doesn’t fit their mold, and denounce, in unison, anything that flashes past their collective eye, only to quickly move on to the next kill, or the next fad, never daring to seek their own original thought, or heaven forbid, put actual work into something and take pride in an individual outcome.
It was a difficult book to get into, but there were some beautiful reminders of the need to slow down and not try to progress in a frenzy with the crowded impatient people of the now. The comparison of the modern man, and the man in the past, at the beginning of the book, was both scary and inspiring.
It was a difficult book to get into, but there were some beautiful reminders of the need to slow down and not try to progress in a frenzy with the crowded impatient people of the now. The comparison of the modern man, and the man in the past, at the beginning of the book, was both scary and inspiring.
December 17, 2009
I might have actually agreed with his arguments but he spent so much time convincing the reader that he was an old man I forgot what his original thesis was.
Helprin is a great writer, who has become very cranky. I understand that when the web attacks it can be viscious, but you must learn to ignore the trolls.
At times I felt as if I had fallen into the middle of an Ayn Rand novel, though Helprin does seem to have more wit. Early on the put downs of the netizens were humorous, but they become old after a while.
Helprin is a great writer, who has become very cranky. I understand that when the web attacks it can be viscious, but you must learn to ignore the trolls.
At times I felt as if I had fallen into the middle of an Ayn Rand novel, though Helprin does seem to have more wit. Early on the put downs of the netizens were humorous, but they become old after a while.
February 1, 2012
I thoroughly enjoyed this book despite Helprin's controversial views and crotchety tone. Here's why: 1. It's extremely well-written. Helprin has an impressive vocabulary yet he doesn't write cumbersome, circular sentences. 2. His arguments contain insights so sharp that they leave you questioning ideas you've unconsciously taken for granted. Whether or not you agree with him, you will leave this book feeling more conscious of your own views. I highly recommend it.
August 5, 2019
The origin of Helprin's 'Digital Barbarism' is perhaps the most interesting part. Helprin had written an article in defense of, and potentially extending copyright for authors. At the time the author believed the article was most likely a brief job for a reasonable income and expected little otherwise, however to his surprise the article generated considerable online furor, and a form of online lynch mob against Helprin. Digital Barbarism is a response to that response, a manifesto defending Helprin's position and rebutting the behaviour of such online critics.
My problem with the piece is that everything was lined up for a good read, I was drawn into the issue of copyright, particularly for authors, and I was interested in Helprin's criticism of trial by internet. However ultimately I feel the book did not deliver. At some point the narrative devolves from a structured argument and rebuttal to a well educated rant. A rant which at times did include brilliant prose, and good points but also seemed to ramble unpredictably. There were at least two anecdotes about horses that provided incredibly powerful imagery but failed to make a clear point.
In the end Digital Barbarism feels a lot more like a collection of thoughts vaguely associated with the topic, I put the book down feeling I hadn't gleaned as much about the topic as one would expect. That's not to say that some would probably quite enjoy Helprin's piece as it felt like there was no limit to the topics he would dive into, and perhaps that is the crux of my issue is that the thesis is cast wide, discussing the very concepts of property, politics of state ownership and whatnot and while that sounds like a thorough piece of work, the actual book reads more like an author offloading their thoughts not a piece designed to benefit a reader.
My problem with the piece is that everything was lined up for a good read, I was drawn into the issue of copyright, particularly for authors, and I was interested in Helprin's criticism of trial by internet. However ultimately I feel the book did not deliver. At some point the narrative devolves from a structured argument and rebuttal to a well educated rant. A rant which at times did include brilliant prose, and good points but also seemed to ramble unpredictably. There were at least two anecdotes about horses that provided incredibly powerful imagery but failed to make a clear point.
In the end Digital Barbarism feels a lot more like a collection of thoughts vaguely associated with the topic, I put the book down feeling I hadn't gleaned as much about the topic as one would expect. That's not to say that some would probably quite enjoy Helprin's piece as it felt like there was no limit to the topics he would dive into, and perhaps that is the crux of my issue is that the thesis is cast wide, discussing the very concepts of property, politics of state ownership and whatnot and while that sounds like a thorough piece of work, the actual book reads more like an author offloading their thoughts not a piece designed to benefit a reader.
March 19, 2023
I'm uncertain as to whether I appreciated this piece more for its relatable sentiments or for its darkly poetic wit. The style and voice speak louder than the stories it tells. It's an autobiography in a truly artistic sense, far more entertaining and provocative than others for the satire and gracefulness of words than it is reasonably articulating any serious argument for the solitude it may be superficially interpreted as.
This is an exceptional read not for the merit of each one of the author's societal critiques but rather for the fun and creative way it lays out the ruminations of the writer archetype. There are still some perfectly valuable ideas outlined too, such as copyright and the value of boredom in an entertainment crazed few generations of insatiable consumerism of modern times. He implies the mental effects of our supercharged obsessive hedonistic culture are more serious than we tend to admit or address. That message being wrapped in artistic dark humour is beautiful in its subtly and stimulating in its beauteous satire.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book and I'm surprised by the 3-star rating. Here's hoping a proper review might encourage critical thinkers to not dismiss this work prematurely. There aren't many writers these days capable of writing more deeply than self-help instruction or imperative editorial styles. This type of literature is the sort that lasts, whether we appreciate contemporaries or not we're only kneecapping ourselves by not recognizing literary brilliance until others agree en masse. Dont wait for mod mentality to catch up, pick this one up and relax with it. It does what good books do - it makes you think and entertains by stimulating wit rather than adrenaline.
This is an exceptional read not for the merit of each one of the author's societal critiques but rather for the fun and creative way it lays out the ruminations of the writer archetype. There are still some perfectly valuable ideas outlined too, such as copyright and the value of boredom in an entertainment crazed few generations of insatiable consumerism of modern times. He implies the mental effects of our supercharged obsessive hedonistic culture are more serious than we tend to admit or address. That message being wrapped in artistic dark humour is beautiful in its subtly and stimulating in its beauteous satire.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book and I'm surprised by the 3-star rating. Here's hoping a proper review might encourage critical thinkers to not dismiss this work prematurely. There aren't many writers these days capable of writing more deeply than self-help instruction or imperative editorial styles. This type of literature is the sort that lasts, whether we appreciate contemporaries or not we're only kneecapping ourselves by not recognizing literary brilliance until others agree en masse. Dont wait for mod mentality to catch up, pick this one up and relax with it. It does what good books do - it makes you think and entertains by stimulating wit rather than adrenaline.
July 10, 2009
Mark Helprin is a novelist who wrote this screed in defense of copyright. His style is excessively erudite and pompous, with almost as many commas as nouns. Unfortunately, I agree with him. It would be so much easier to be turned off by his style and simply dismiss him as an ass.
In arguing for copyright, he branches into other more philosophic ideas like individualism versus collectivism. I found the book to be very interesting, but his voice was off-putting.
Apparently, this book originated from an Op-Ed article he wrote not long ago. It drew such a firestorm of criticism from people from all over the internet that he felt compelled to respond. Sadly, he comes across as a bit of a troll, except instead of responding to his detractors on the internet, he wrote a book about it (so that he can be verbose and get the last word in, I suppose). It amused and somewhat saddened me that an author would bother to quote and reply to some anonymous posters from the web.
In the end, I think the battle for copyright is an important one, and Helprin is literate, intelligent, and stubborn enough to keep up the good fight. I'm just glad I don't have to be in the same room with him while he's doing it.
In arguing for copyright, he branches into other more philosophic ideas like individualism versus collectivism. I found the book to be very interesting, but his voice was off-putting.
Apparently, this book originated from an Op-Ed article he wrote not long ago. It drew such a firestorm of criticism from people from all over the internet that he felt compelled to respond. Sadly, he comes across as a bit of a troll, except instead of responding to his detractors on the internet, he wrote a book about it (so that he can be verbose and get the last word in, I suppose). It amused and somewhat saddened me that an author would bother to quote and reply to some anonymous posters from the web.
In the end, I think the battle for copyright is an important one, and Helprin is literate, intelligent, and stubborn enough to keep up the good fight. I'm just glad I don't have to be in the same room with him while he's doing it.
September 26, 2009
I agree with first review of this book. This seems to be more of an old man's rant against teenage angst "You damned kids get off my lawn!" and not a treatise against the destruction of the laws that protect works of art.
Arguing against technology using the laws and notions of the past makes no sense because laws and notions of the past are irrelevant when it comes to protecting works of art. The Creative Commons movement is at least an inclusive group that seeks to make sense of how technology and art can fit together. This book contributes little because Helprin can't get past the notion that technology can contribute to art (he sees only one side of the argument through his perspective from the past).
Arguing against technology using the laws and notions of the past makes no sense because laws and notions of the past are irrelevant when it comes to protecting works of art. The Creative Commons movement is at least an inclusive group that seeks to make sense of how technology and art can fit together. This book contributes little because Helprin can't get past the notion that technology can contribute to art (he sees only one side of the argument through his perspective from the past).
August 6, 2009
This is not just a writer's manifesto but a personal talisman. I would say it's brave, but I don't believe it was an act of bravery for Helprin to write this book. Rather an act of frank and honest devotedness to his work and to the many ideas and ideals he holds most dear. I read this in conjunction with 'The Craftsman' by William Sennett and the two together have given me much pause and direction.
November 5, 2009
A fun read for those into intellectual property. Love the (c) breaks in the chapters. And I love the quote about lawyers. I didn't think anyone could defend copyright and the lack of intelligent deep discussion on the subject in such an entertaining way. I'd never want him to critique my writing...I have found a new author I like..
May 11, 2022
Man yells at cloud, in vain. Author keeps playing this role of old man who doesn't understand this new world but in the end he just comes off as ignorant. Assumes the moral high ground thinking it justifies being rude about everyone who disagrees with him.
June 3, 2009
Every writer, artist in the world needs to read and heed this wonderful book. Not only is Helprin one of the smartest writers around, he's funny, wise and prophetic too. So seriously, read this book.
October 22, 2018
I think anyone in the literary world--authors, agents, publishers, sellers--would find this book of interest, though Helprin's style is so acerbic it's challenging to accede even to the constructive points he makes. The inciting issue--copyright terms--is not one I'd had much insight into nor passion regarding, and it was certainly illuminating to learn about the issues at play: duration of rights, intellectual property terms, access to works, and much more. To my eyes, Helprin certainly makes a compelling case that existing copyright laws don't hamper creativity or the free-flow of ideas. Furthermore, and much to his credit (and the interest of this reader, who finds Helprin's style absorbing no matter the subject) he doesn't restrict himself to copyright matters, but, rather, uses these as a jumping off point to critique much in the broader culture, including taxation, cell phones, and techno dreams of immortality. Ultimately, though, Helprin is so scattershot and seems so cranky and sententious, he undermines his claims to reasoned argumentation. Invocations of truth and goodness and beauty in his more restrained moments seem at odds with his animus toward "Slurpee-sucking geeks...pretentious and earnest hipsters...women who have lizard tattoos...beer-drinking dufuses" and more as he decries the mob mentality and exaltation of technology he believes are undermining our nobler human capacities. I admire several of Helprin's novels, but I can't help believing his screed against the so-called digital barbarians might have found a more receptive audience if he'd exercised more discretion--and been more open to the possibility that his opponents could be acting out of considered belief rather than stupidity.
July 10, 2018
It's rare that when finishing one book I immediately turn back to that same author for more, but I'm doing it in this case: my next book is Helprin's A Soldier of the Great War. I want to get more of Helprin's prose in my head. But the reason I'm breaking my own rule and getting more of the same author is that I found Digital Barbarism to be unsatisfying on a few levels. Helprin's argument for copyright extension works beautifully for the type of work he does: literature to last the ages. He makes a compelling and fascinating argument on those grounds. However, he's so busy fulminating that he only occasionally sets his argument in the context that it comes from. This is no doubt by design, because he's writing literature to last the ages, right? But the context it comes from is a society that has lost the distinction between software and literature, and between background music and Wagnerian opera. Helprin's arguments about the rights of the sole creator fall apart when, as with software or a movie, there is no sole creator. Much of the friction between him and his online adversaries can be attributed to this category mistake. The problem is that the people he's arguing with would never read one of his books in the first place, so the argument is destined to fester. Argument aside, like everything Helprin writes, this is a jewel box of words, and so it's worth it just to hold them up to the light and admire them. Just make sure you pay for them. Unless you got this from a library, like, uh, I did.
November 4, 2019
This is a challenging read that addresses the serious issue of the copyright abolitionists "sense of entitlement to the fruits of other people's labor". Mark Helprin invites the reader to follow the history and arguments that have led to the undermining of the right benefit for the very works authors produce. Identifying key players, policies, legislation, and the role of the digital world, Helprin presents the jigsaw puzzle that has configured the present day illogic of the existing copyright violations. As someone who has found my own books pirated on the web, I agree, "It doesn't matter if you steal a lot or a little, or is you get away with it, or not: theft is ugly." My only wish is that the author would put out a slightly less, scholarly response to the issue that engages the average reader.
September 26, 2025
Mark Helprin makes a powerful yet nuanced case for copyright protection of creative and intellectual property which is under threat from those who think such protections should be removed. He's come under heavy criticism for his views and, in this book, he assails his critics with impeccable logic and reasoning, thoroughly exposing the poverty of their worldview and the folly of their motives. On the whole, in spite of the forcefulness and outright mercilessness of his argument, Helprin makes an irrefutable case for his position. The audiobook is very well read by David Colacci, and conveys Helprin's masterful prose wonderfully.
November 1, 2021
He makes a good defense of protecting copyright laws. Basically, why should a copyright be different from an asset like a stock or a piece of property? Although most people pay taxes on property while they hold it. After that he meanders through our current culture for a long time. He just comes off angry - book should have ended after second chapter.
February 4, 2020
Worthwhile, especially for the chapter that sprang from the original open asking for tweak of copyright terms.
July 14, 2020
Contemporary review of privacy and protection within the intellectual property space. Good arguments but poor cohesion overall.
February 17, 2021
This was a manifesto. Accurately named for opinion-based writing with some thought provoking comparisons. Can be rant-like, but evidently genuine sentiments on the value of a copyright.
May 15, 2021
[Imported automatically from my blog. Some formatting there may not have translated here.]
I'm a bit ashamed to admit this is the first book I've read by Mark Helprin; his name haunts most of the "Books All Good Conservatives Should Read" lists, including this recent one at National Review. But—hey!—I'd heard of him, and I'd noted some reviews of Digital Barbarism; so when I spied it in the New Book stacks at the library of the University Near Here, I grabbed it.
The tone is set immediately, in the book's preface, page xi, sentence one:
Even were this book to begin in medias res, which, as an essay-memoir, it does not, a reader might benefit from a brief guide to the terrain it covers.In medias res? Really? Helprin, to say the least, does not talk down to his readers. And it's not a book you can breeze through; Helprin's prose is dense, filled with literary allusions, historical references, and gratuitous snippets of non-English that (I'm pretty sure) smarter people than me will stumble over.
But (in a sense) the book really does begin in medias res. (Hey, look it up; I did.) It's at least round three in an ongoing debate between Helprin and (generally) the enemies of intellectual property and (specifically) Lawrence Lessig and the Creative Commons bunch. It was sparked back in 2007, when Helprin wrote an op-ed for the New York Times, where he argued for an extension of copyright terms beyond the current 70 years past the death of the author. This unleashed a firestorm against Helprin.
Part of the problem was the NYT's headline: "A Great Idea Lives Forever. Shouldn’t Its Copyright?". Helprin notes that, as a Constitutionalist, he agrees with the notion of a finite copyright period; he just was advocating its extension beyond 70 years. But that wasn't all:
It would perhaps have been comforting that the Times's inaccurate choice was the face that launched three-quarters of a million protests, but it wasn't. Certainly, a large number of people read just the title and then proceeded happily to vent their rage, but, in Lewis Carollian twilight, even those "analysts" who purported to have read the text, and those who actually did read it, read into it what was not there, and based their arguments, rebuttals, and abuse on something that did not exist, as if the didn't really need a text to set them off, which they didn't, although they said they did, because that, anyway, used to be the custom.This effect will not be unfamiliar to anyone who's written something controversial in a place where it can be read, and commented upon, by any idiot with a keyboard. And it was more than just plain misreading: one thread of commenters seized upon the fact that Helprin's novel Winter's Tale was based upon Shakespeare's play The Winter's Tale; if Helprin advocated perpetual copyright, how does he have the nerve, the sheer gall to leapfrog off another writer's work like that?
Only problem, as Helprin points out: despite the similarity in title, his novel didn't have anything to do with the play. But that didn't stop the bloggers…
So I'm inclined to side with Helprin, but the book is not really the defense of copyright, let alone intellectual property generally, that the topic deserves. You can see part of the problem from the quoted paragraph above. As accurate and well-written as it is, it's not much of an argument to point out that a lot of your opponents make stupid arguments.
Helprin bills this book as an "essay-memoir". The memoir parts are interesting, and (unsurprisingly) well-written. But they can distract from the fact that the essay bits are unfocused and incomplete. I can recommend the book as a good read (but not light reading).
Over at the Technology Liberation Front, Adam Thierer reprints his review of Digital Barbarism (which I find on-target), and also provides a feast of links for the interested.
July 8, 2014
No one told Mark Helprin to not feed the trolls, so he wrote a whole book, at least in part, to do just that.
This is a response to all the criticism he received to his infamous 2007 New York Times op/ed piece, which advocated lengthening copyrights. The criticism came from sources high and low, but he conflates them all to the lowest denominator, and addresses his critics as if they are all a) products of an educational system which promotes only collaboration, b) uncouthed barbarians of the internet, and c) anti-property statists.
I did not recognize the educational system which he decried, and his red - baiting was obnoxious and completely wrong. There was a decent book waiting to be written about the second group, an Internet culture which wants everything to be free, but this wasn't it. His factual errors were numerous, and he oddly chose to only use Internet citations, rather than actual books. Lawrence Lessig's critique was right on the mark there, but I give this one additional star because I enjoyed the diversions and the Helprin-ian heightened language, which others find insufferable. As he told his Harvard professsor, he can put together a decent sentence.
This is a response to all the criticism he received to his infamous 2007 New York Times op/ed piece, which advocated lengthening copyrights. The criticism came from sources high and low, but he conflates them all to the lowest denominator, and addresses his critics as if they are all a) products of an educational system which promotes only collaboration, b) uncouthed barbarians of the internet, and c) anti-property statists.
I did not recognize the educational system which he decried, and his red - baiting was obnoxious and completely wrong. There was a decent book waiting to be written about the second group, an Internet culture which wants everything to be free, but this wasn't it. His factual errors were numerous, and he oddly chose to only use Internet citations, rather than actual books. Lawrence Lessig's critique was right on the mark there, but I give this one additional star because I enjoyed the diversions and the Helprin-ian heightened language, which others find insufferable. As he told his Harvard professsor, he can put together a decent sentence.
November 14, 2013
Digital Barbarism is a shot of light against an uncivilized, darkened sky.
Brilliantly written, it is indeed a writer's manifesto. I would not try to interpret its content here, as that has been the most grievous error committed against Mark Helprin over the whole copyright issue; however, let it be known that nowhere in Digital Barbarism does Mr. Helprin write that technology is awful - as a matter of fact, he marvels at it! And he is not asking kids to get off his lawn - rather, he is poetically asking them to please refrain from stealing it! Read this book for yourself and it will focus, if not change, your understanding of the double-edged sword of media and technology.
This book is a reminder of the power of the (English) language. Mark Helprin is a living genius who uses words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs like a classical artist uses light, colour and strokes; he is creatively UNcommon. While the average person's vocabulary plummets, we risk losing great segments of our culture.
This warning is pre-emptive and the theme is genuine: but who will hear the fiddle before romanticism burns?
Brilliantly written, it is indeed a writer's manifesto. I would not try to interpret its content here, as that has been the most grievous error committed against Mark Helprin over the whole copyright issue; however, let it be known that nowhere in Digital Barbarism does Mr. Helprin write that technology is awful - as a matter of fact, he marvels at it! And he is not asking kids to get off his lawn - rather, he is poetically asking them to please refrain from stealing it! Read this book for yourself and it will focus, if not change, your understanding of the double-edged sword of media and technology.
This book is a reminder of the power of the (English) language. Mark Helprin is a living genius who uses words, phrases, sentences and paragraphs like a classical artist uses light, colour and strokes; he is creatively UNcommon. While the average person's vocabulary plummets, we risk losing great segments of our culture.
This warning is pre-emptive and the theme is genuine: but who will hear the fiddle before romanticism burns?
October 29, 2009
A year ago, Mark Helprin wrote an essay in the New York Times suggesting a minor extension to an author's right to copyright protection. The negative reaction from liberal bloggers was astounding. He received thousands of e-mails and was viciously attacked as an enemy of free expression, etc. This book is Helprin's response to all that.
April 6, 2011
A self-serving screed that grew out of an Op-Ed piece that Helprin contributed to the NY Times re the raid on rights of authors and their heirs to retain copyright on the work. It's a relentless harping on the neanderthals trying to push all intellectual property into the public domain - an interesting discussion if your a first year law student but painful reading.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 40 reviews