25 May 2013

My Weekly March 2003

I thought I'd finished with these but I was WRONG!!  I found another!!!

Now there's quite a story behind this article!!!!  Are you sitting comfortably?  Then I'll begin!!!

It all started with a phone call from the arts editor at the magazine (My Weekly).  We'd obviously become friends over the previous few years.  Elena asked if I could please do a seahorse pattern.  Well, of course I said 'yes' and asked what the deadline was.  'Tomorrow' she said.  Oh, she might've said next week but I know it was a very, very short time.  This must've been in 2001 that the call was made.  That's (duh, come on out BC3) 12 years ago when my life was megga busy.  So I made a seahorse.  This embarrasses me now as the tail is really the wrong way round!!!!  Neither I nor Elena noticed at the time!!!!  

So the pattern was completed against all the odds in just a few days, submitted and accepted.  I was as ever, dead chuffed.

Roll on a couple of YEARS and it was finally published!!!  

This seahorse  (although one of my favourites of all time) has caused me a lot of upset as a few years after publication somebody 'stole' it.  They changed it (NOT for the better) by putting in some picots and missing out a nose ring!!!  In fact I've put a picture of the 'damaged' seahorse below.  This was published in a tatting newsletter under another lady's name and the editor of the newsletter said it was 'fine to do that as it had been changed by more than 10% so the copyright now belonged to her'!!!  That's a myth as we all know!!!  I queried the amount of changes anyway!

I finally spoke to the 'designer' who was a very, very old lady who'd seen a picture of the seahorse and copied it from that.  She'd no concept of copyright issues.  I couldn't be cross with her but I was with the tatting newsletter people as, if they considered themselves 'experts in tatting', they should've checked and double checked the pattern.  By the time it was published it was already on my web site.  

Anyway it's all 'water under the bridge' now but it's worth a mention that by taking other people's work you can damage their health and temper!!!!!


9 comments:

  1. I hope the old lady learnt something, and the newsletter too. Funny how you had to design it in a hurry and then it took years to be published. Something wrong with that scenario!

    ReplyDelete
  2. hurry up and design it then it sits on the shelf for several years? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
    I like your's better even with the backwards tail.
    I do not like the fuzzy picot things unless it is meant to be like a thistle or fuzzy bear fur.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your tail was the right way round to match the graphic on the layout, so I say it was NOT an error -- it was an improvisation!

    ReplyDelete
  4. You tatted the tail the right way round to match the graphic on the layout. So I say it wasn't an error, it was an improvisation! Well done!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous3:54 pm

    Come on, dish! Who was the lady? What newsletter? Her version is nice too.
    Bernadette

    ReplyDelete
  6. Bernadette, the lady concerned must be well into her 90's by now and I wouldn't want to upset her IF she ever got to read about this online. She wrote to me and explained that she didn't know that what she did was so wrong. The newsletter is sadly still available but I wouldn't want to give it the publicity it doesn't deserve. It's the same publication that INSISTED one of my bookmarks is 3D!!!!! I designed it and I think I know when a thing is flat or 3D!!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I like her little fin on the back but not her nose. I understand playing with changes on someones original pattern. But not taking credit for being the designer. Tut tut.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What a saga! I can't believe they didn't publish for a couple of YEARS, especially after rushing you through it! What in the world was THATall about! I also can't believe how quickly you designed this excellent (and now iconic) pattern! Years ago I also thought seahorse tails DID go that way! It looks 'natural' to me! Then there's the 'copying' issue! As I said, quite a saga!!
    I'm also now wondering if my 1992 patterns WERE published and I never knew it? The magazine was published only once a year and was not easy to find. I gave up looking after 5 years! I should give them a call! Thanks so much for sharing this!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Oh, Kathy, I hope they were. I 'monitored' mine as I didn't want to be paid (for copyright reasons). The payments were so small for the amount of time they took and then limited me to not being able to share them that I refused to be paid. I also enjoyed the 'fame' for about five minutes. I've a very small attention span!!!!!

    ReplyDelete

Creative Commons Licence

Happy Beaks

Happy Beaks
I beg your pardon? I didn't quite catch what you said.