I’d like to start a discussion here about an increasingly frequent controversy I think has particular application for fantasy — the differences between:
- Inspiration
- Derivation
- What is sometimes called mixing, remixing, or sampling, those terms taken from the music biz (I think)
- Plagiarism, which not enough people seem to understand is both distinct from everything above and illegal.
I’m prompted by the latest “rip-off” scandal, this time by a very young German writer. A critical assessment here.
I’m going to be a bit harsher, and I’ll be the first to admit that I have a bias toward originality. Simply “a twist” is not enough for me. What I loved about Anne Rice’s INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE many years ago was that, sure, I’d read vampire stories, but never where the vampire was made out to be an all-right guy, maybe even something of a wimp. By contrast, while I enjoyed TWILIGHT, the “YA perspective full of teen longing” wasn’t enough twist for me to continue with the series.
I’m in the minority, though, as the comments on (and even the title of) this recent Spectacle post indicate. If it’s good, lots of people want more of the same. And if that gets more books read, especially by young readers, fine. Particularly in the realm of fantasy, it is admittedly hard to find a dramatically new twist. It may well be impossible to write about any quest, magical token, or elves and dwarves without readers (of a certain age, at least) thinking of Tolkien. I feel sad when the originals become eclipsed by lesser derivations, but I think the remake or updating of classics for new generations is natural and acceptable. I can hope that it’ll eventually lead younger readers to those better works, and at least Christopher Paolini had the grace to credit Bruce Colville for much of his inspiration. The difference between “inspired by” or “derivative of” is mostly in how highly you value the new work compared to the original.
It seems to me that inspiration is also at the heart of the not-so-new concept of mixing or sampling: You take something recognized, whether a classic myth or a guitar riff or a fantasy trope, and bring new meaning or relevance through its juxtaposition with other story (or musical) elements, by presenting drama or tragedy in comedic form (Mystery Science Theatre 3000, anyone?), rendering it in verse instead of narrative or song lyrics instead of television dialogue, telling it from a different POV or in another setting or context, etc. The new work builds on the foundation of the old. You could probably argue that virtually all art since ancient times has been remixes with varying degrees of originality.
But the value of such inspiration is that the new work gains depth when the audience is aware of the original archetypes or versions and can compare and contrast to appreciate the new light the latest creator has shed. INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE would have lost 90% of its charm if it were not built on a foundation of bad-guy vampires and other monsters. Any work with allusion or other sorts of homage is becomes poorer if nobody recognizes the source and therefore cannot reflect on the original style/context/presentation when they see or hear the new one. PRIDE AND PREJUDICE AND ZOMBIES only works because so many people are familiar with Austen, her work in general, and that specific book. Anybody who took one of my books and added zombies to the plot would not be mixing, because not enough readers would recognize the source, so the borrowing would be artistically, as well as legally, unjustified.
And that’s why young writers who plagiarize and then try to use the “it’s okay, because mixing is a modern art form” defense are not only wrong, they’re demonstrating ignorance about the purpose of a canon and the literary experience itself. (And musicians whose work is sampled without permission still win lawsuits, BTW, so I’m not sure why they even use this excuse; apparently they’re ignorant about that, too.) The Kaavyas and Helenes of the world are not borrowing for resonance; they’re borrowing because the original sounded good and they’re too lazy, rushed, or uninformed to make up their own. The fact that the work might be about mixing is even less of a justification if the audience doesn’t know. And words that are in the same order, format, and art form (fiction, prose, book), and that are not well enough known that a majority of readers might even vaguely recognize their source, are plagiarized. And if the author doesn’t tell anyone the source so that people have the opportunity to become familiar with it and compare/contrast, then it’s no longer inspiration or derivation or, least of all, mixing. It’s theft. Period.
So, now that I’ve ranted, a question: What should the book world, including readers, do about the changing attitudes toward such theft? Better educate students about plagiarism? Hope our own books or favorites are plagiarized because they need the press and it might increase our own sales? Give up, “decriminalize” it, and go to Open Source Everything? Or none of the above?
— Joni, who might like to read REALITY LEAK AND ZOMBIES — but only because she’d be able to see how it resonated against the original
Parker Peevyhouse
lindajoysingleton
Joni Sensel
Chris Eboch
Nick
Greg R. Fishbone
Great post Joni!
The lifting pages with very little alteration is a laugh. And obviously there’s some sketchiness with her idea that she meant to have a “dialogue” between the works, when she never made that clear from the beginning. But not having read either book I can’t make my own judgment as to how scandalous this is. I’ll be generous and say this is a talented girl who’s also young and naive, and perhaps didn’t think through her choices.
Blatant plaigarism does happen, and we do need to continue to inform and fight this kind of thing. Taking text unaltered, without giving credit to the original source, is stealing and we should never condone it.
But for every legitimate accusation of plagiarism there are a hundred more frivolous, unfounded lawsuits against talented authors for “stealing ideas.” Can you write a post on that? To me this is equally frustrating and in some ways more despicable because they’re trying to take credit, or at least ride on the heels, of someone else’s hard work and success. I don’t care if JK Rowling did get her idea from somewhere other than her imagination; to say that the idea, concept, or even series of events are what make the books great is ludicrous. (Read Editorial Anonymous’s blog post on the lawsuit against JK Rowling and you’ll see what I mean.)
http://editorialanonymous.blogspot.com/2010/02/lawsuits-and-looneytunes.html
In the information age when our currency is our intellectual property, concern about plagiarism is definitely warranted. We need to educate everyone why plagiarism is such a crime. They are stealing someone’s hard work. Just because digital information makes it easy to copy and paste doesn’t make it right.
I agree that lawsuits for “stealing my story idea” are frivolous. But lawsuits for plagiarism, stealing the written work, are valid. We need to protect what we’ve labored so hard to create. I think we need to make a class in copyright law mandatory as part of high school English and business classes.
Okay. You know what I’m going to say, because I taught school:
Plagiarism is a blight, dishonesty is the top of my list of Seven Deadlies, and I have NO patience for liars. None. I would buy NOTHING from this German chick, and her snidely argumentative little “it’s a new thing” defense just makes me want to snatch her bald. (Sorry. Did I say I have no tolerance? Yes, I did.) I know she was scared when she was found out – but it’s the “you’re too old and unhip to *get* me,” which is not just annoying but condescending, and makes her sound as if she is suffering from an overinflated sense of entitlement. As a representative of her hip generation, she’s not making them look good.
And yes, “lazy, rushed and uninformed” sounds just about like the people I had to deal with on this topic. Really, I’d like to see zero tolerance for cheating — as in, your little person is removed from our school, period, if you do. I know that probably won’t happen outside of private schools because academic dishonesty is just an echo of what a lot of adults do in their work environment, etc.
I’m an idealist, though. And I believe that those who can should hold the line and say, “No. Unacceptable.” Not to be punitive for no reason, but because you simply cannot live your best life with lying about who you are and of what you’re capable. And, if you’re teaching (or parenting) that’s what you want for your charges.