I’ve been thinking a lot lately about questions of derivation and plagiarism. There was an article in the New York Times recently about a 17-year-old author who’s been receiving great acclaim, but who also “borrowed” ideas and even whole pages from another author’s work. She referred to what she’d done as “mixing” rather than plagiarizing, which immediately brought up a comparison to musical sampling. For some reason, sampling in music doesn’t bother me as much as plagiarism in writing. I’m not totally sure why, but when I brought the question up to Ali, she agreed with me. For some reason, borrowing in music can work, while borrowing in literature is just not ok.
To be fair, I think there’s a difference between plagiarizing – the usage of whole phrases and passages from the work of another – and the borrowing of readily available ideas. There are, after all, only so many ideas that encapsulate the human experience, and we’re bound to reuse some of them as the years roll on. Hence another friend recently told me that she’d avoided reading the Harry Potter books for years because she’d heard that J.K. Rowling used concepts and inspiration from other science fiction and fantasy books. My friend figured that she’d read all those books, so Harry Potter wouldn’t offer her anything new, but when she finally did read them, she realized that the books might have pulled from other sources, but they ultimately created something brand new and amazing.
So, is the distinction that borrowing is ok if it makes something bigger and better and sufficiently different so as to be compelling? And where do we draw the line? It seems like the hardest thing about these questions is that the line between acceptable and unacceptable usage is always shifting. It depends on factors such as the amount of text used, the nature of the use, and whether or not the origin of the original words is made clear. It also depends, at least for me, on whether or not the final product is good and is creative enough to be considered original work and on how the culture where the borrowing is being done reacts to that kind of usage.
I’m reminded that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., arguably one of the greatest preachers we’ve ever known, borrowed liberally from the ideas and texts of other ministers in order to create his famous sermons. In the culture of Southern Christian ministers at the time, though, that sort of thing was more acceptable. I guess the theory was that it didn’t matter whose words you used to bring people to the Lord, so long as you got them there.
But still, for heaven’s sake, pay tribute to your sources! Respect the creativity that came up with the idea in the first place, by being creative enough to make an idea your own. And for those on the other side, who are being borrowed from, have enough pride in your own work to know when you’re being honored by someone’s borrowing and when you’re being ripped off. If it’s the former, say thank you and give your blessing. Don’t drag the poor sucker into court. And if it’s the latter? Well, court’s not a terrible idea, but public ridicule may be more effective!
Ultimately, I think it comes down to two things: attribution and success. If the references are named and their usage makes the new work something better, even what might technically amount to plagiarism isn’t so bad. Wow me with your words, and let me know where they first came from – as a reader, that’s all that I could want.
“but public ridicule may be more effective!”
AGREED! so much.
i don’t have much to add to this, cause you basically said everything that i could think of regarding this subject! lol
I think for me, where I’d draw the line is between borrowing the idea and borrowing the idea *plus* the words to explain it. If you can’t use your own words to frame a concept, you don’t get to use the idea – UNLESS you clearly state that it’s someone else’s work.
I’m not sure where this leaves me on my stance toward sampling in music. I like it. Where would “Ice, Ice Baby” be without the beat from “Under Pressure”? Jason DeRulo’s “Whatcha Say” without Imogen’s “Hide and Seek”? All of Girl Talk’s music? It’s a finer line, I think. There’s no way to stamp attribution on sounds, so where do you draw the line? I suppose wherever the original creator of the concept feels like legally pursuing its borrower.
As a teacher I am more opposed to plagairizing than I can adequately express. There is never a reason to take someone else’s work and claim it as your own. Ever.
It is another thing completely to use someone’s words in addition to your own. If one chooses to do that, I think it goes without saying that one must give credit where credit it due. It IS flattering.
I think it comes down to intent. What was intended by using someone’s words as your own? Did they inspire you? Did they touch you? Why was it necessary to do it? If you can answer those in a positive way, I think it’s okay. If one does use another words and then denies or tries to hide it the flattery and the excuse is then gone.
For me, it’s the same with music. Was it sampled because it was appreciated and added something that was missing? And was credit given where due? If so, by all means, use it. If not, stay away.
Thanks for a well thought out, thought-provoking blog!