A charge of plagiarism shouldn't ruin our lives.
After reading Malcolm Gladwell's article covering a case of plagiarism involving a psychiatrist that studies serial killers, I found myself caught in the middle. Was what the playwright, Byrony Lavery, did wrong? Immoral/unethical, perhaps?
I think what Lavery did was wrong, but also "okay" in some sense. It was wrong because she "borrowed" Gladwell's writing almost word for word for the most part and never even mentioned his name. That's like the main point of plagiarism, not giving credit to whoever or whatever they took something from. You don't use someone else's work and then claim it as your own. Gladwell, in his letter to her, wrote, "I am happy to be the source of inspiration for other writers, and had you asked for my permission to quote—even liberally—from my piece, I would have been delighted to oblige. But to lift material, without my approval, is theft." This shows his discontent with the whole thing, but he also thought what she did was sort of like a compliment. If someone likes what you did so much that they wanted to do it too, you would be flattered. It's just WHAT and HOW they did it which causes people to get touchy. Other than taking Gladwell's words, Lavery "borrowed" the life of Dorothy Lewis, the psychiatrist, as well. By doing that, she hurt Lewis. She took someone's life and shared it with everyone else. But if you think about it, many people have done it and/or do it today with "inspired by a true story" movies and whatnot. Besides, people learn by examples.. like children with their parents
What Lavery did was also kind of acceptable because it was her inspiration for her play, "Frozen." It was for a work of art, not another article in a magazine. I liked what Gladwell said about understanding the difference between a transformative kind of borrowing and a derivative one, "that distinction, I realized, was what was missing from the discussion of Bryony Lavery’s borrowings. Yes, she had copied my work. But no one was asking why she had copied it, or what she had copied, or whether her copying served some larger purpose." At least he didn't take it too personal or made assumptions.
I agree with Sarah on how asking for forgiveness is much harder, probably worse than asking for permission. It can apply to a bunch of situations! Imagine a situation when you wanted to drive your parents' car and so you drove it without their permission, then accidently ran into the mailbox. Next comes the part where you must tell your parents and beg for their forgiveness when you could have simply asked first, which might have lessened their anger and your punishment. Lavery could have easily asked for permission and avoided the guilt for it, but she didn't.
9 years ago
I agree; you have to wonder why Lavery didn't ask Gladwell for permission. Her explanation that it was "news" seems kind of strange to me -- I think that's a reasonable explanation if she had only used the events he described as inspiration, but once she started using his actual language, it seems odd that it didn't occur to her to contact him. I think that says something about how we perceive different KINDS of authors. Writers of news are just "reporting," after all.
ReplyDelete