"Intertextuality", my arse

[donnaimmaculata]

Have any of you heard of the current plagiarism scandal in Germany? (trobadora has, I assume?) Seeing as a blogger is involved, I thought it is relevant to our interests:

So, there's this edgy bestseller by the latest literary fräuleinwunder, Helene Hegemann, who's 17 and has written a novel about sex, drugs and Berlin's techno clubs. The novel was celebrated by everyone and their mother, until it came to light that the author had copied entire passages as well as very distinctive neologisms ("Vaselintitten", "Technoplastizität") verbatim from a blogger, who's been publishing excerpts from his novel on his blog: http://airen.wordpress.com/

So far, so appalling. The girl is 17, was 16 when she wrote "her" novel, so perhaps - very perhaps - one might accept her apology and trust that she wasn't aware what she was doing. Assuming she were a very thick 17-year-old.

But: Now that all this came to light, not only doesn't she show any remorse but explains it all with "intertextuality" instead - others, too, justify this blatant act of plagiarism by handwaving it as "intertextuality". Because, you see, we should stop being so naive and we should abandon our old-fashioned ideas of authors creating "original" and "unique" material. Everyone, even the greatest in literature, have been using other people's ideas when writing their novels or poems. What is Thomas Mann's "Zauberberg" if not a copy of Goethe's "Faust"? And even before literature had become a widely spread form of art, back in the days when oral tradition was the established mode of distributing stories - everything was in the public domain anyway, and nobody got upset that their name wasn't attached to the story they had created. (Yes, this is an actual argument I've heard in this debate. The mind, it boggles.) So the author should suck it up already.

I feel I should read up more on the debate, because I misremember the definition of "intertextuality" that has been used to justify this plagiarism, but I just don't have the strength of mind necessary to wade though that crap.

Die Süddeutsche Zeitung has a short interview with a blogger who noticed the striking resemblance between the rip-off and the original. Excerpts:

"It's not only individual words, but also slightly re-phrased sentences and passages, as I realised when comparing the two."

"The novel ends with a letter written to the protagonist by his dead mother. Here, Helene Hegemann has obviously used the lyrics of Fuck You by the band Archive, has perhaps changed one or two words before using it, but without indicating the quote."

Comments

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

I know! I know! I wish I could immerse myself more deeply into the debate, because it is interesting (for a certain value of "interesting"), but I can't. I'm too young to die of apoplexy.

This whole debacle made me think of fandom, too, and of how enraged people get at the slightest breach of copyright - and as annoying as that is sometimes (-> wank), it is also an important means of self-governance and it serves as a learning process, too.

I can sort of understand the publisher if they defend their product. That's what they do. And if they didn't pick up on the plagiarism in time, they resort to damage control. But third parties? How can journalists and other "experts" seriously claim there's nothing wrong with what she did?

We should buy out all copies of Strobo and make it an even bigger bestseller than that other book (that shall not be named).

[trobadora]

Oh, yeah, the publisher and the author aren't very shocking in this. They're just resorting to ye olde "every stupid excuse is better than admitting a wrong" strategy. But everyone else? HOW CAN YOU BE SO DAFT OMG.

She did not participate in a shared tradition; she did not create intertextuality (which, after all, depends on establishing a reference between texts, not in deliberately hiding the fact that there are other texts involved). She appropriated someone else's work in order to benefit from it.

I want to know where these so-called experts bought their brains. They should return them; they're clearly defective.

I'm too young to die of apoplexy.

Yes, THIS. *tries not to explode*

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

TBH, I'm not entirely sure whether she realises how wrong it was. She doesn't seem very bright, to put it mildly. (I'm sure she knows it was wrong; the question is to what extent.) And instead of somebody explaining the secret of intertextual competence to her (in simple terms), she receives positive reinforcement. It's unbelievable.

We should watch our blood pressure. A slice of cake and a drink of wine would come in handy at this point.

[trobadora]

And instead of somebody explaining the secret of intertextual competence to her (in simple terms), she receives positive reinforcement. It's unbelievable.

And unbelievably damaging.

No cake, unfortunately, but I'll get some champagne myself. Cheers!

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

I've just had half a dozen Mini-Windis. It cheered me up considerably.

[trobadora]

ENVY.

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

Well, you've got champagne!