"Intertextuality", my arse
Feb. 10th, 2010 06:23 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
donnaimmaculataHave any of you heard of the current plagiarism scandal in Germany? (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
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."
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."
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-02-10 06:27 pm (UTC)Fangirls of 17 are stupid and dishonest everywhere. Even when threatened with legal action.
Perhaps the interweebz is NOT the place to put one's original drafts of unpublished work, n'est-ce pas?
no subject
Date: 2010-02-10 06:39 pm (UTC)Sadly, you're right. Though I'm not quite sure about the timeline in this case: his book was published last summer, it's possible that he's been publishing excerpts when the process was already underway. He was published by a small independent publishing house, she by a large publishing corporation.
I think the situation proves a third thing: it's not the quality of the text that makes a bestseller, but the PR budget of the publishing house.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-11 06:30 pm (UTC)Too many trees die to put crap on airport newstand shelves. And that 'crap' is, more often than not, derivative to the point of plaigarism. The problem has become more and more acute as technology has grown. Remember all the sampling copyright issues in the 90's?
There is only ONE way to protect one's work that I know of and that is to print it out, send it to oneself certified, registered mail and DO NOT OPEN IT. While that will hold a copyright in the US, it would be wise, at that point to go ahead and APPLY for it legally. Right out of the gate. Don't wait for a publisher. Too many writers don't realise that they are perfectly capable of copyrighting their work and it doesn't have to cost a lot or require lawyers. But that's the US. I don't know how it works in other countries.
Personally, I think the only way the little beyotch is gonna comprehend it, is if the courts say, "Oh, well, you copied this and it was ok....so author Y over here, she's copied 4 chapters but that's ok with you, right? She's getting a million in advance btw. " Snerk. I'll bet the brat gets wise pretty quick then. LOL!
no subject
Date: 2010-02-11 06:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-11 07:03 pm (UTC)