FiyahCon’s Video Contract’s Problems: Video Release Contract 101 for Authors
Usually with these kinds of debacles, someone slams their hand on a desk and says, “This is the correct and only way.” You’ll learn quickly I’m not that type. I expect you to disbelieve me. I expect you to pick over every last word. But I also expect you to think for yourself and don’t follow what other people think. You can fact check me if you like. That’s reasonable.
BTW, any tweets I do post I ask you be respectful for the owners and don’t attack them. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and doxxing even if minor isn’t what I’m after. I do not support any such action and will work against it. My main focus of this is: Fair contracts for everyone! Not just me and the writers, but for the con owners too. If you are scanning to nitpick, and do selective reading, your arguments probably will fail. That said, I will understand if you want to skip to the contract part. And definitely cross reference me and check me and my sources for reliability. I believe it’s homo sapiens sapiens for a reason. Because you’re supposed to be a wise one, twice over.
How did I end up being a panelist?
I had been nursing a post on World Story Structures from my website and decided to port it over to this website because essentially, I’m lazy and blog format made it easier to edit.
From that I got a connection and they asked if I wanted to participate in the panel. Fine. I figure why not, maybe my message of asking agents and editors to be more aware of PoC story structures would help spread the message.
I admit there were huge stretches where I forgot I said yes. I forgot the contracts, etc. I also had no effing idea how the con was working what I’d actually signed up for, wasn’t given emails of leaders, etc to look to. I just knew it was a con I’d agreed to and I wanted to challenge an industry norm.
I’m also notorious on social media for keeping my followings small. I’m not that committed. So I only follow 142 out of 633-ish followers. My facebook is far worse, even though it’s older. (I get overwhelmed easily. So I don’t follow everyone who follows me back and avoid hashtags.)
So the video contract already?
I should mention that I’ve helped other writers read their contracts before. And also earmarked things that I thought were problematic in contracts and fought for more transparency in the industry. It’s not that I want grand credit or I’m this great person. It’s that I do put into practice what I preach. No one likes a hypocrite. And you’ll find track record where I did that sort of advocacy for writers who aren’t as savvy. I signed it in a haze at first, because I realized I’d missed it with the first email. Then I went back and read it again, and then I spotted the issues with it. You read all contracts you sign. I reneged on part of it.
So I’ve level-headed earmarked several of the paragraphs, and then rewrote it in the comments and hit send.
That said, I am not a lawyer, so I have linked actual lawyers and advice from literary agents and copyright law in order to make the case. You are free to believe these are cherry picking, in which case, definitely check my sources, their reliability, and cross reference. I am not a perfect human being. I get stuff wrong. I also take criticisms with grace when things are factually inaccurate. The original was sent August 24, 2021. I filled it out September 4, 2021. The panel is September 17. There isn’t enough time to negotiate the contract. (Last time I negotiated a contract, it took 3 months of going back and forth. But this one isn’t minor errors, so it would take a lot of work to fix it compared to the one I negotiated that took 3 months which was missing only 2 things, but was in better shape than this one.)
They have a section of the form where you can send what you don’t consent to.
See, I used it. But I suppose, line by line edits are needed with links and resources. So let’s break this contract down. I’m using copyright.gov, which does not make me a lawyer, but gives you reference. They are in Georgia, USA so this is fair. Here is the website.
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/
I think it’s important for laymen to understand what copyright actually covers:
“Audiovisual works” are works that consist of a series of related images which are intrinsically intended to be shown by the use of machines or devices such as projectors, viewers, or electronic equipment, together with accompanying sounds, if any, regardless of the nature of the material objects, such as films or tapes, in which the works are embodied
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html
https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/what-are-derivative-works-under-copyright-law
The scope covers reproduction, derivative works, distribution, public performance, and public display. https://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/scope.html There are contingencies for fair use, but Fair use, is a whole other can of worms. https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/index.html
https://www.pw.org/content/copyright
https://www.authorsguild.org/member-services/writers-resource-library/all-about-literary-agents/authors-guide-agency-agreements/
Example Writer’s contract: https://www.thebalancesmb.com/sample-contract-a-letter-of-agreement-1360549 And finally, problems to look for: https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/10686-contract-complications-avoid.html
https://writersrelief.com/2014/12/23/avoid-literary-agency-contract-dangers/
https://www.morse.law/news/book-publishing-contractsThe ones relevant here are
- Loopholes
- Term limits.
- Fuzzy language
- Definition of work probably should be included, though this is minor.
- Publication details.
- Payment is not delineated in the contract. Absence of payment must be also delineated in the contract.
- No terms for cancellation of the contract.
- No clear reversion clause.
- No clear contact information in the contract if there are concerns or dedicated email.
- Liability terms
- revoking consent on the final cut.
- What are the lines of distribution being used?
Let’s break this contract down: FIYAHCON 2021 Release Consent Form
Thank you for participating in FIYAHCON 2021!
This agreement is your authorization for FIYAHCON 2021 to record and make available recordings of you taking during the convention, with proper attribution. You will be provided an opportunity below to make any comments on any limitations you may want to put on this authorization.
>>That’s fine. OK. Who is implementing the contract beyond Fiyahcon. Whom do I contact if there are problems? Who is this agreement between? Contracts are between two parties. So name the parties up front. Make the person put their name in.
All information you provide in this Consent and Release will be treated in accordance with our Privacy Policy, available at https://theconvention.fiyahlitmag.com/privacy-policy/.
>>Fine.
There, you will also find the privacy policies of our 3rd party service providers, including Airmeet, Whereby, and Boxcast.
>>Should have been directly linked to make the case stronger. And say you are consenting to their rules as well. I’ve seen such lines in contracts before. And also limited liability if they should come after you for breaking their terms of service while on the platform.
By signing and returning this agreement, you authorize FIYAHCON 2021 and its agents on its behalf (together, “FIYAHCON”) to:
- make audio and video recordings by any means and in any media (“Recordings”) of my presentation, panel discussion(s) ("Panel"), lecture or program, and to use my likeness, approved name, approved photograph and approved biographical information in connection with the reproduction, distribution and promotion of the Panel and the Recordings; and
https://eforms.com/release/video/
This could be improve to be more specific. See link.
- credit me as the author or source of my contribution to the Panel. I retain any copyrights I may have in my contributions to the Panel. Nothing in this document shall limit my rights to publish or use my contributions to the Panel as I see fit.
>>”Nothing in this document shall limit my rights to publish” is not legalese. It should be something like, “FIYAHCON is not buying the license for any derivative works which include, but are not limited to... whatever” Please define what work is being subject to copyright holding in the video. This feels rushed. It needs a whole lot more delineation. OK. So is the video free for me to share or not? What defines a derivative work, and what derivative works can I share? It’s a mess. OK, so who owns the derivative work, the video, then? ‘cause that is derivative work. Performance is covered under copyright. If my performance is covered, and the materials I use are covered, then isn’t that a derivative work when you record it? Confusing on what is actually covered in the copyright and what license is being asked for.
I understand, agree and grant that:
- FIYAHCON will own the Recordings and all copyrights and other rights therein.
>>OK, so I don’t own any of my copyrights at all--you just backtracked and said you own all copyrights and other rights therein. That’s what you’re saying to me. And the derivative work, the recording, is the master of all of the copyrights. That makes no sense. This is what is called a loophole. Derivative works, like my performance and so on are not covered? This is also what the industry calls a weasel contract line. It looks innocent, but read that thing.
- FIYAHCON will have the irrevocable, worldwide right to make, copy, edit, publish, distribute, play, show, display and otherwise use and make available the Recordings and any works that may be derived from the Recordings, by any means and in any media now existing or hereafter invented for any lawful purpose, and to authorize others to do the same, provided always that FIYAHCON may only exercise these rights for educational or other purposes consistent with FIYAHCON’s mission and objectives.
>>Irrevocable? But you just said I own my copyright, which includes rights like distribution. Is this a license or a copyright at this point. It’s not clear. OK, so you own my likeness and can spread it as you like with no contract term limits in place? And the missions and objectives should be delineated in the contract.
- I also grant to the FIYAHCON the rights set out paragraph 5 above with respect to any slides, overheads, handouts or other materials that I have provided in connection with the Panel (“Materials”), provided always that such Materials will be properly attributed.
>>Grant? Is this a license or copyright? You just said I owned my own materials. So I’m granting my copyright for ALL of the materials, my likeness, etc to FIYAHCON forever?
- I will not be entitled to nor receive any royalties or other compensation in connection with the rights I have granted to FIYAHCON in this Consent and Release, including use and/or distribution of the Recordings. I waive any right that I might have to inspect or approve the finished Recordings or any descriptive copy that might be used in connection with them.
>>Wait, are you getting monetary enumeration off of this? It’s not clear in the contract. Let’s see what the con leader said.
I’m granting it to FIYAHCON, not BonFIYAHCON. So Fiyahcon can make profit off of it. So only Bonfiyahcon is free. FIYAHCON itself is a paid venture where people have to pay for tickets:
So when can they stop making profit or stop using my likeness...? No term limits to how my likeness might be used? I understand that this authorization shall continue indefinitely, unless I otherwise revoke this authorization in writing.
>>What indefinitely? No term limits? And I have to write you to get termination of contract? And again, do you own the copyright or license? What are the limitations you are imposing on yourself?
I warrant that:
- my contribution to any Panel and any Materials are original to me;
This honestly should be earlier in the contract and delineated further. What are materials. Define material. Define likeness. The contract has to define everything. But you just said you own my materials because I have to grant them to you.
- I have identified to FIYAHCON all copyrighted material of others that is included in the Panel or Materials; and neither my Panel, my Materials, nor the grant of rights I have made to FIYAHCON infringe or violate any copyright or other right of, or breach any obligation I have to, any third party. This Consent and Release is executed as a document under the laws of the State of Georgia, USA.
Define panel and Materials. Define others. (Third party--define it?) Shouldn’t you have a limited liability clause so you are not in trouble for what the person did and can say it was in the contract?
This may seem minor but remember, contract case are won or lost sometimes over a single comma.
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20180723-the-commas-that-cost-companies-millions
Other things that are missing are mentions of payment and profit made by the organization for the event. If they are getting zero dollars, then the contract will say so and delineate it. It will state if your appearance if nonprofit will result in a tax deduction or not. It states if the organization is a nonprofit and under which laws. And if it’s tied to another contract, like agreeing to be at the con, link that contract too, so the person can review it. If two contracts are linked and contradict each other it causes issues. And there should be a reversion clause on the license. Again, not a lawyer, so I may have missed a few things.
I signed it, because my goal is pretty clear: I want spread, and there is a section to revoke rights, so I did my best to revoke the unclear language of the contract and state I own the copyright to all of my likeness, performance and materials I made because granting what exactly?
I think you shouldn’t be serving 200 panelists with a contract that wasn’t written by a lawyer. There are boilerplate contracts everywhere. If you, as a laymen are serving a contract, then give people ample time to negotiate it and have a second set of eyes look over it.
Why then did you tweet?
In my previous experience, because yes, I’m that person who reads contracts, when you sign contracts, people check them and then get back to you. I’d reneged on a contract or changed it before or asked questions and then the people would come back to me after reading it. I’ve done video contracts before, too. I know what to expect.
But I wasn’t given email of who to contact if I had concerns (Not in the contract). General email is not a who. That’s a form email without guarantee it’s going to go to someone.
I got this one, but it’s about airmeet emails only. There is no listed email for general concerns. The email it is sent from is generic, and might not get a reply. There is no one to direct it to.
Got this one, but again no specific email is given to address concerns.
So do I use the generic form, if so, whom do I address it to and how do I address it so it gets seen? There is a subject line, but no departments. But that seems a little sloppy? There is no clear chain of command or clear who is handling what. They are sending all the emails from the same generic account, but it doesn’t seem to be a con account in the first place--it’s a literary account, so I’m not sure if I’d even get heard and why should I really be that invested into this late in the game? They only sent the consent form for the panel August 24, 2021. That’s not enough time to negotiate a contract. They only asked me to be on the panel on July 6, 2021 as shown. So even if I had gotten it then, it’s still very little time to negotiate a contract.
So I sent my critiques through the resource I was given: The consent form. Because where does the consent form say: If you have concerns, please address it to this person? So let’s say they sent it much earlier than August, and I had say over 3 months to negotiate the contract. Who do I send my concerns to to make sure it gets addressed in a quick manner?
No one got back to me, it was a few days out from the con and the video contract was sent too late to negotiate it. BTW, I didn’t know who the moderator for the panel would be until September 11th. The panel, again, is September 17. There is, therefore, no direct contact until September 11th. But that late to negotiate a contract? Agents know that it takes much, much longer than that.
Given that meh, let the one follower I know who cares and is actually following the con, know. (’cause I keep track of my followers and keep track of my knowledge of them. I occasionally post things specifically for some of my followers whom I don’t follow back. I’m also terrible with names, so occasionally post things that can be public for specific followers. I know the difference between them, but name retrieval... lol I can remember my character’s name well, but real humans... yeah, I know.) Maybe the reach is something like one or two read, edit the contract and re-sign it. I figure no traction. Dies. Maybe if I have the energy I’ll figure out later what I can’t figure out now (also trying to think about how to present to the con for the panel), and really, it’s minor, so they are busy and at this point it’s waaay too close to go time. It’s going to cause chaos and conflict and let’s avoid that.
What was the fall out?
Yeah, so after setting up the panel, and scratching my head at the tech they were using, my post got ONE WHOLE LIKE. And then one retweet. It sat there for several days and moved down my twitter account with nothing.
Should die there. But nope. Con leader came in and accused me of not using their email. Provided where exactly--and which one? The welcome letter was totally unclear. I didn’t know she existed until she posted under my tweet. I never got an email from the con leader about who the contact and who was running it, nor who was the staff and their emails--it had their names, but not direct contacts. And to be clear, as an attendant of cons in the past, I have gotten such an email before. Something like, “Welcome to (fill in)Con!” and usually has an introduction to the people running the con, the staff, the staff structure, etc. As a panelist I was pretty lost, but also focused on preparing for the panel and thinking how was I supposed to do this and how I would split up my knowledge in good chunks. Should I or should I not use diagrams given the contract was kinda iffy on it, even though I’d revoked that part of the contract. I worked weeks on those diagrams, sometimes having to think them through to improve what was out there. Art is more than what’s on the page. It’s also the time and thought that goes into it.
There was no contact in the contract or way to troubleshoot and there was no posted website link since the contract was done by email. I didn’t know they had a website until a few weeks ago. And I’m supposed to be a panelist. No one particularly informed me what the con was about either. (Their email nor contracts make that clear at all.) I’m also kinda busy with other life crap at the same time, so I don’t have the mental energy to try to figure this out. I did my best for what time and energy I had and someone should have been reading the contract by this time and come back to me. But nope. She was hyper focused on why I tweeted over what was exactly wrong with the contract and what could come off as weasel lines. There were a lot of superlatives in what she said. She said I hated the ENTIRE con because I criticized the lines above. And asked why didn’t I email? Because I didn’t know who to contact, and if she’s the con’s leader, she’s busy, she never introduced herself with how to contact her, but I don’t want to air out dirty laundry like that because it’s off topic and it’s likely to make her more mad, not less. I’m hoping maybe we could talk it out.
She said to email she didn’t say who. But then I didn’t know where to email, but I don’t want to air that part out either. So I replied and pointed that she was doing whataboutism and not taking a critique well, but I was hoping that she would focus on the subject. I also asked why she wasn’t doing it through the official account. She said something on the order of, “Let me get this straight, so you never emailed the staff?” Wait... so she doesn’t know which staff members to refer me to talk to them? She hasn’t read the contract I said I edited in the comments. Just pointing that out. Asked her to refocus again. So she blocked me on twitter. You can find the tweets, but no, I’m not screencapping them. It’s besides the point, and I don’t particularly want to link it.
She absolutely had my email. (I’ll show that later) I did not have hers. She never introduced herself with her email and, let me emphasize this: I’m a panelist. She never reached out to me, personally. The coordinators had me talk to the moderator of the panel to purely set up the panel, but it’s not clear if the coordinator is linked to Fiyahcon staff and what extent if they are. They are introducing themselves as kinda fellow panelist? There was no one that personally talked to me as a panel coordinator. It was a bunch of form emails. (I do have a sense this is not how cons usually work... but let’s cover that later.)
So she sent her followers, 7,000 after me and blocked me. ‘cause why not? Someone has a valid concern, blow it up by 7,000 people instead of addressing it. I DO know the temptation as someone who has had leadership roles before to do exactly this kind of thing, so I do have empathy. But I know going against your pride usually minimizes it.
So people rolled in, and so on and pretty much at this point, I ask people if they want to actually talk about the contract. And they don’t really. Because actually asking Fiyahcon about the contract would take work, and then they might be wrong. If they are wrong, then they can’t try to hunt me down, can they? Their foundation would crumble. They’d have to think and analyze instead of vent their frustrations out on me, me who is highly intersectional for marginalized identities.
And then I got this email, basically saying they are terminating me for unspecific reasons.
There is nowhere in the con rules that says that you cannot criticize the con’s contracts nor post about it on social media. The definition for harassment is left up to the victim involved.
https://theconvention.fiyahlitmag.com/community-policy/
I did not do defamation to the con. I’ve shown that the contract needed work. I was not given proper avenues to contact anyone with such concerns. But the head of the con did come onto my twitter account and then summarily canceled via email without citation of the contract or what parts of the contract I had breached and then refused to reply.
It’s just you, right?
Nope. Someone was curious about why both of the neurodiversity panels were late at night and at the same timeframe. Instead of addressing the question through official channels (fiyahlitmag account) they used their personal account, bringing a hostile environment and their personal following into an ND attendee's space. I asked permission to post it about it here.
And then went after another person for asking about safety protocols (again, protecting the person involved.).
They replied aggressively to comments where people expressed sadness or wished they had got a ticket in time. (https://twitter.com/fiyahlitmag/status/1437409433580150786)
Then you must be angry~~
If this is my “low” point where I’m known as a minor unagented author that fights for contract fairness--honestly, that’s a good look. I’m 100% delighted that authors who do not speak or know creative legalese are learning about it now. Writers, as Writer’s Digest taught me when I was first determined to be published, should know legal language to protect themselves, but I’ve run into a lot of writers who hope to be traditionally published who don’t know it. I extended my knowledge to them and discussed contracts--because you help those with less power than you. I’ve read in the past that agents like authors who know contracts fairly well.
Really, I know that cons can be stressful. To me, they feel like controlled chaos. I have sound sensitivities. I dislike being in physical cons a lot. The reverb with sounds is unpleasant for me. And then you’re usually sick for half the time. And then there is stuff everywhere, but no money to buy it. And I’m bad, super bad at crowds. I don’t mind being in front of them, but I hate being in them. I also have sensitivities to smells.
I also know that doing good leadership is really hard. You have to often swallow your pride and own things that weren’t exactly your fault. Remember to keep calm, while getting things done. I don’t boast. It’s not in my nature.
So I’m thinking that given the overall behavior, the con leaders are at the end of their ropes, but are being super sensitive to criticism. I’ve said it before--I don’t discipline my reviewers. I try to listen to constructive criticism and give it weight. The times (I admit) I’ve snapped I was usually stressed out. So I don’t exactly blame the con leaders at all. I think they are overstretched, not enough organized, and didn’t think it through.
Even the best organized cons are super chaotic. (Well, to my feeble mind, they are... but what do I know with my sound sensitivities) But I’ve also known con organizers who’ve talked to me before and complained about various aspects. (I don’t think their names are relevant and protect your sources). But the older cons that exist in their spheres run like clockwork, despite the politics. Everyone knows what to do, the organization is clear. Stretched out and understaffed and not quite sure what to do, having a new tech to deal with, I don’t really blame that the Fiyahcon staff is stressed out.
However, as my Aunt once told me, someone having a bad day is no excuse for them being rude to you. I do not wish the con ill nor its organizers--now that I know what the con is about, I think it’s a nifty idea. I’m hoping, though, they fix the contract, and get better organization next time.
Either way, asking for change is not the problem. Don’t shoot the messenger. Isn’t it better to ignore it or actually say, “Hey, I’m curious about your accusations, could we take it to email? I’ll email you since I know we didn’t provide contacts.” Or even better, “I’m kind of stressed out right now with organizing this con--I’ll send you X staff member to your email. Thanks. Please look for it.”
Let’s focus on remedies
Change. When someone is proposing change, usually people hate its guts, especially when you’re ten times more stressed out for whatever reason. Your vision tends to narrow.
https://www.inc.com/daniella-whyte/5-reasons-people-resist-change-and-what-we-can-do-about-it.html
https://www.emersonhc.com/change-management/people-hard-wired-resist-change
https://hbr.org/2012/09/ten-reasons-people-resist-chang
So let’s follow this: Harvard Business Review: Loss of control. No, changing the contract will protect Fiyahcon from lawsuits. It will protect the panelists and the attendees in the future from disruptions of service and provide more, not less, control for everyone.
Excess uncertainty.
Changing the contract takes lots and lots of time, but also, it eliminates uncertainty, that’s why contracts are made. It helps everyone to come to an agreement together.
Surprise, surprise!
Both of our timings were bad--I own that I was a little late. But even if I wasn’t, there wasn’t enough time to negotiate and ask them to fix the contract for everyone. With how they treated others, there is not an air of trust.
Everything seems different.
The differences, with a good contract in place are negligible. If anything, it protect that there will be no change, rather than lots of drama and tons of change.
Loss of face.
The short term loss of face will be less than the long term loss of face if the contract fails to protect people as intended or the con gets sued for whatever reason. Her doubling down about other topics, makes it look like it was intentional. But I’m giving leeway that it probably wasn’t? It’s just not combed through with an agent or lawyer.
Concerns about competence.
Agents, I believe, at least could help with refining the contract language. We are writers, editors, agents. There must be a few copyright lawyers out there who could offer their services--maybe even pro bono given the correct conditions. If we can’t do it as the core of the writing industry, then who can?
More work.
This one is the one that’s hardest to climb. I admit this one is the reason Fiyahcon might resist this. However, there are contracts that you can kind of copy-paste from. https://eforms.com/release/video/
https://signaturely.com/contracts/video-release-form-template/
for example, come up on search. I have a canned one I got from my own uni I changed a few words for.
It might take quite a while to write and it may take lots of back and forth, but I think the peace of mind that a reliable contract brings, so you know you, as the con are protected, and there is less, not more drama, is worth it.
Ripple effects.
If the change is implemented well, the ripples should be minimal. And in fact protect from ripples in the future.
Past resentments.
Actually, this might be a good time to bring those back and remember them so you can protect yourself from them in the future with the contract. Past resentments are really good for making rules and laws, but also protecting the organization.
Sometimes the threat is real.
The threat of not having a good contract is larger than one than not having a good contract.
Emerson
https://www.emersonhc.com/change-management/people-hard-wired-resist-change
Dissatisfaction with the way things are now
A positive vision of the future
Concrete steps to make the vision a reality
So... the dissatisfaction is pretty clear, since I did an analysis. It is too wide to open to lawsuits on both sides and wouldn’t make anyone happy in the long run if disputes should occur. Conflicting clauses doesn’t help.
I don’t think having a positive vision for a con, when I’m not a representative is my place. But I think having a smooth con with minimal drama and sound contracts to protect the panelists, attendants and participants is a good idea.
The clear, but difficult concrete step is to rewrite the contract and make sure the other contracts match up. Since writing contracts are boring, tedious, and going back and forth on them takes literal months, telegraphing a transparency about it would help the con greatly to see if there is anything missing. But you need a positive attitude towards feedback, good or bad to get there.
Conclusion:
When someone raises concerns about a contract having terrible language, weasel lines, usually those concerns are either neglect, done in a rush, or not thought about thoroughly. Most of the time, as with a missed or included comma, it’s not malicious. It protects BOTH the contractor and contractee to make sure that the language is sound. It actually protects from drama, and large bits of change. Because contracts are said to be at least 1895 BCE old--dating the the Babylonians
Contracts have included: https://www.livescience.com/60950-oldest-marriage-contract-infertility-surrogacy.html
As one of the oldest pieces of law, that predates much of anything else we know, contracts are that old as a piece of an agreement. So saying that this has no precedent would be strange.
It is actually a return to status quo and minimizes new possibilities and problems--if done correctly.
As for me, since I was canceled as a panelist, I’ll be spending my time making a youtube video on debunking the idea of the mighty 5-act European conflict model and working on some of the Worldwide Story structures mainly to get money to buy the books necessary to research the other ones. My smallest hope is that it helps other PoC (and non-English speakers) get published as more editors and agents become aware of story structures outside of the European and European Diaspora sphere. Otherwise, lusting after books I can’t read because they were never translated.
I always try to uplift others, regardless of if they have more privilege or less privilege than me--this is why I majored in Anthropology and concentrated my studies in Systems. I’m hoping for a small change in this industry to allow PoCs more freedom.
As for the rest, don’t witch hunt these people. I don’t condone it. I rarely think yelling people down really makes that much change. Being specific about your remedies and giving people time to think about it does.
If you feel stressed after reading this, then there’s always Mr. Rogers? I don’t mean that to be cheeky. (If you think about it, his way to tell stories has minimal conflict too) https://misterrogers.org/videos/what-to-you-do-with-the-mad-that-you-feel/
I’d also recommend reading some:
NK Jemisin, who plays with story structure, too, in pretty much all her works.
Iron Widow by Xiran Jay Zhao, who also has a youtube channel. They are awesome.
Weina Dai Randel, who subtlely mixes in some of the elements from Chinese story structure into her books. She has a new book coming out. Art of War by Lao Tzu. The structure isn’t apparent readily. Also useful as a book. It spends most of the time arguing for avoiding conflict, unlike how it’s exoticized on documentaries.
Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince--Doesn’t follow a 5-act structure. Podcasts
There is also the podcast Stories Mother Told, which are all stories from various parts of Africa with Attribution--that’s if you have disabilities with reading or can’t find audiobooks of the above.
If you don’t like that... Minari is fantastic. I love it a whole lot. Even more than Parasite. It asks so many important questions, but isn’t heavy-handed about it. (Class, race, immigrant status, age, unity, etc) It uses a Giseungjeongyeol story structure as it shows a strong return element.
The Farewell. I loved that over Crazy Rich Asians. (Also Always be my Maybe.)
Hunt down some Bollywood. If you know Bildungsroman, then seeing what Bollywood does with a similar coming of age structure and how elements are often borrowed from everywhere is super entertaining.
Two Weddings and a Funeral is one of the only films made by a gay native Korean director. Challenged me a lot watching this one. Giseungjeongyeol--there is a twist and a return element. The twist is one hell of a twist.
I also want to find more Nigerian dramas/movies. They are majority in English since the official language is English.
Either way, not that bothered. Now I’ve aired it out, it’s on them. And I no longer will engage or care. I figure, their loss, especially if they do nothing and won’t hear a critique of a contract.