Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

can a person be a work of art and can he or she be sold?

0 views
Skip to first unread message

doublespeakeasy

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 1:22:57 AM8/8/04
to
what if an exhibit showcases a person as an artwork?
can he bought and owned by a collector?

Braves Fan Deluxe

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 1:32:27 AM8/8/04
to
doublespeakeasy wrote:
> what if an exhibit showcases a person as an artwork?
> can he bought and owned by a collector?

of course ask Mr. Peabody


Michael

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 9:25:06 AM8/8/04
to
doublespeakeasy wrote:

> what if an exhibit showcases a person as an artwork?
> can he bought and owned by a collector?

This happened on Star Trek: The Next Generation. Data was captured by a
collector, who put him on display with other artifacts.

michael

Peter T. Daniels

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 11:01:16 AM8/8/04
to

All I know about that show is what I read in TV Guide, but isn't Data an
android, hence an artifact and not a person?
--
Peter T. Daniels gram...@att.net

La Donna Mobile

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 11:39:43 AM8/8/04
to

"Braves Fan Deluxe" <brave...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LViRc.5153$114....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...

> doublespeakeasy wrote:
> > what if an exhibit showcases a person as an artwork?
> > can he bought and owned by a collector?
>

I don't know about where you live in my city, the buying and selling of
one's body is the new respectable career move for any self-respecting female
new graduate Or so I've read. I'm not convinced...


Michael

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 12:30:26 PM8/8/04
to
doublespeakeasy wrote:

> what if an exhibit showcases a person as an artwork?
> can he bought and owned by a collector?

The closest thing is the blackmarket for stuffed and mounted Usenet trolls.

There was a guy who a living mannequin in malls and stuff. I think
someone didn't believe he was live, and ended up stabbing him. What
would the stabber be convicted of?

michael

George Peatty

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 4:32:37 PM8/8/04
to
On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 15:01:16 GMT, "Peter T. Daniels"
<gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>All I know about that show is what I read in TV Guide, but isn't Data an
>android, hence an artifact and not a person?

In our world, sure. In Trekverse, no. It is established in episodes like
Measure of a Man and Author, Author that non-organic beings are life forms
entitled to legal protection as life forms.

Peter T. Daniels

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 8:04:19 PM8/8/04
to

See what comes of that original Frank Gorshin black/white episode??

jayembee

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 9:56:49 PM8/8/04
to
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

That very point was the premise of the ST:TNG episode "The
Measure of a Man". After a hearing, it was decided by a JAG
officer that Data was a sentient being, and to be accorded
all the rights of one under Federation law.

-- jayembee

Jonsmind

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 10:24:42 PM8/8/04
to
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<411640...@worldnet.att.net>...

Data, was granted sedient status, on another episode, when a
cyberneticist, attempted to gain control of him, and dismantle him for
study.

Electric Nachos

unread,
Aug 8, 2004, 10:44:41 PM8/8/04
to

Jonsmind wrote in message ...

I remember that episode - but I think we're forgetting that Data was not a
human, which is defined as any living or extinct member of the family
Hominidae. And I do believe the act of "selling" humans is illegal. (Fuzzy
law)


Peter T. Daniels

unread,
Aug 9, 2004, 7:16:04 AM8/9/04
to

Why couldn't he get the specs from the manufacturer?

Frank R.A.J. Maloney

unread,
Aug 9, 2004, 11:55:41 AM8/9/04
to
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:41175C...@worldnet.att.net...
> Jonsmind wrote:

[deletions]

> > Data, was granted sedient status, on another episode, when a
> > cyberneticist, attempted to gain control of him, and dismantle him for
> > study.
>
> Why couldn't he get the specs from the manufacturer?

Data and Lore were created in isolation and secrecy. The research was
generally available, which is why the cyberneticist wanted to
reverse-engineer Data.

From Data's Personnel file at startrek.com:

"Place of birth: Omicron Theta science colony
Parents: Created by Dr. Noonien Soong and Dr. Juliana O'Donnell Soong
Tainer"

From Soong's file at the same site:

"He was thought killed in the Crystalline Entity's attack on the colony when
the massacre was uncovered in 2364, but three years later a personal summons
to Data revealed he'd escaped the massacre to a secret, solitary jungle lab
on Terlina III to continue his research and perfect an emotion chip. Not
knowing that Lore had been reassembled in 2364 by Data's U.S.S. Enterprise
crewmates, the elderly Soong unwittingly called him as well and mistakenly
gave him Data's chip, dying by Lore's hand during one of the dark android's
rages.

"Only after Soong's death was it known that he had married Julianna
O'Donnell on Mavala IV in 2328 and she had helped build all the androids,
then escaped with him to the second lab. There she died in an accident and
was herself rebuilt in an android body with transferred memories - a job so
perfect even she did not even realize it and later left her husband to
remarry, breaking his heart. Soong left a message for Data in his new
emotions chip, detailing the story of Julianna, as well as an advanced
'dream' program.

"Soong he had kept up with Data's career and legal debates but didn't know
he'd been found by a Starfleet crew - he'd wanted him to be a cyberneticist
or other scientist. Soong likened his creations to an artist's need for
expression and a natural desire to procreate as a way to immortality."

--
Frank in Seattle

___________

Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney

"I leave you now in radiant contentment"
-- "Whistling in the Dark"


Frank R.A.J. Maloney

unread,
Aug 9, 2004, 12:14:36 PM8/9/04
to
"Frank R.A.J. Maloney" <fr...@blarg.net> wrote in message
news:10hf7jk...@corp.supernews.com...

[deletions]

> Data and Lore were created in isolation and secrecy. The research was
> generally available, which is why the cyberneticist wanted to
> reverse-engineer Data.

[deletions]

Make that "NOT generally available". Sorry.

Peter T. Daniels

unread,
Aug 9, 2004, 12:39:58 PM8/9/04
to
Frank R.A.J. Maloney wrote:
>
> "Frank R.A.J. Maloney" <fr...@blarg.net> wrote in message
> news:10hf7jk...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> [deletions]
>
> > Data and Lore were created in isolation and secrecy.

Yeah, right. A machine (I don't know what Lore is) almost as complicated
as a human being was created without the collaboration of thousands of
specialists.

> The research was
> > generally available, which is why the cyberneticist wanted to
> > reverse-engineer Data.
>
> [deletions]
>
> Make that "NOT generally available". Sorry.

I kinda thought that was what you meant ...

Is it any wonder why those of us who grew up on the classic SF of the
40s and 50s (the era that terminated with the later novels of Heinlein
and the hegemony of Harlan Ellison, whose earlier work, in the Asimov
vein, was still in the tradition) have no interest in anything after the
original ST series? John Campbell's law was observed, and it was
successful: you make one imaginative leap and you work out its
consequences rigorously.

Frank R.A.J. Maloney

unread,
Aug 9, 2004, 12:57:49 PM8/9/04
to
"Peter T. Daniels" <gram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:4117A8...@worldnet.att.net...

Speak for yourself. I'm probably as old as you and my experience with SF is
just as hoary. I have always loved the Star Trek universe just as much as I
loved the Foundation universe, for example. Don't speak for anyone but
yourself, if you please.

Leonard Tillman

unread,
Aug 9, 2004, 1:30:30 PM8/9/04
to

From: no...@none.com (Michael)

doublespeakeasy wrote:

>what if an exhibit showcases a person as an
> artwork? can he bought and owned by a
> collector?

--------------


>The closest thing is the blackmarket for stuffed
> and mounted Usenet trolls.

Amen to that, though I'm more in favor of disposal after stuffing.

>There was a guy who a living mannequin in
> malls and stuff. I think someone didn't believe
> he was live, and ended up stabbing him.
> What would the stabber be convicted of?

Vandalism, if it's proven that he was unaware of the truth.

LT

0 new messages