The communication "theory," which I first came across from someone I'll leave as FC for now, is a compelling and attractive one. An interpration of things, it applies an end to our evolution, or at least a major incremental goal of it, one that we can't see beyond. It does well to explain and lend meaning to our species -- thus the allure. But I was also drawn to it because it shows how disparate and surprising developments, including commercialism, are efficient means to that end. That's a significant characteristic shared with the spiritual and biological urge to get beyond biology.

As FC saw things, communication provided the one common ground for people. It was the one connective tissue. In music, film, photography, speech, and writing the urge comes from a need to know and to be known. He was careful to point out that almost never is it clear what dominates from the creator's perspective: That the audience come to know the subject matter or the director, writer, painter, singer, songwriter.

After digesting FC's comments, I soon leaned to believing it was predominantly the latter. When was the last time you saw a film or bestseller credited to "anonymous?" Certainly, financial considerations play a role in these decisions, a point highlighted by the fact that anonymous and pseudo-named authors have proliferated online, except and until income becomes an issue. Still, we can't give financial gain too much credit for authors and artists taking credit.