I'm sorry, but this is really bothering me.

We're writers. We agree that plagiarism is a terrible thing. It's reprehensible. But given what I have read, I do not believe that this girl is plagiarising.

Why? The words are nearly identical, you may say. Yes, they are — but the skeptical mind must ask, are they all that *original*?

>>In The Princess Diaries, the following passage appears on page 12: “There isn't a single inch of me that hasn't been pinched, cut, filed, painted, sloughed, blown dry, or moisturised. . . . Because I don't look a thing like Mia Thermopolis. Mia Thermopolis never had fingernails. Mia Thermopolis never had blond highlights.”

In Viswanathan's book, page 59 reads: “Every inch of me had been cut, filed, steamed, exfoliated, polished, painted, or moisturised. I didn't look a thing like Opal Mehta. Opal Mehta didn't own five pairs of shoes so expensive they could have been traded in for a small sailboat.”
<<

I've written passages very similar to this in years past, and I've never read Cabot, nor do I plan to. It is not an original rhythm or idea. It's a common experience, in fact -- ask any young woman going to a prom, coming-out party, wedding, theatrical performance... I'll bet any number of them would describe the experience similarly, and if they were feeling jaunty, they'd even state it the same way.

The example of the use of "a full-scale argument about animal rights" isn't a sign of plagiarism -- it's a sign of cliché.

The most damning examples that journalists can find are all absolutely pedestrian ideas presented in a standard, competently formed paragraph. All of the other examples were a sentence or two, which can be easily attributed to unconsciously imitating style. (I still, in my weaker moments, find myself imitating Neil Gaiman's and Douglas Adams's styles. Does that make me a plagiarist?)

Another example was a rhyme that Salman Rushdie used in a book, where he placed it on a wall as graffiti, and Ms. Viswanathan places one very similar on a poster. BFD, Mr. Rushdie. It's scenery.

I think it's unfortunate that such a young woman should have her reputation smeared this way. Who, at nineteen, has an original thought? Of *course* she's regurgitating style -- but I do not believe she is consciously stealing. Do I think she deserved to be making truckloads of money? I know too many good writers who haven't been published at all yet to think so. But I don't think she needs to be dragged through the mud and utterly ruined this way.

And this I find just plain stupid:

>>Both Jack, the love interest in Kinsella's novel, and Sean, the romantic hero in Opal Mehta, have a scar on one hand and “eyes so dark they're almost black”. << Again, the supposedly damning quoted fragment is a cliché.

Read Neil Gaiman's thoughts on the identical accusation that J.K. Rowling 'stole' Harry Potter from Gaiman's Timothy Hunter. And here's an interesting coincidence: the paper that broke *both* stories was The Scotsman, a publication I shall now avoid like the plague. (Wait, you've written “avoid like the plague” before, haven't you? I must have stolen it from you.)

This is probably more upsetting to me today than it normally would be because it smacks of scapegoatism, which this week I have a particular distaste for. But that's another post.

As writers we need to be careful about how we treat each other. I think there are two lessons in this: 1) Avoid cliché and 2) there is nothing new under the sun (which I should have avoided writing — like the plague — on the grounds that it's a cliché.)

My latest Amazon Book Binge arrived today:

• Self-Reliance and Other Essays (Dover Thrift Editions)
• Biology: A Self-Teaching Guide, 2nd edition
• The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin (Dover Thrift Editions)
• Get Weird! 101 Innovative Ways to Make Your Company a Great Place to Work
• Biology for Dummies
• Writing the Breakout Novel Workbook: Hands-On Help for Making Your Novel Stand Out and Succeed

I started on the workbook tonight, and just the first exercise has helped enormously. I have a new area of research to pursue and a new opening scene to write. Just thinking about who my heroes are and why was a mind-expanding process that I'm sure will go on for some time.

I really needed something like this to get me moving and thinking about the novel productively. I think only good things can come of going through the workbook. And I can't wait to sink my teeth into the Bio books. :)

This should be required reading for all humans. I've sent it to half a dozen people tonight, some who are struggling with what to do with their lives (like myself – most of us are in our mid-30s, still trying to figure that one out) and one or two who actually know and are doing something about it, but I thought they might get a boost out of it anyway.

With no further ado, I give you:

What You'll Wish You'd Known, by Paul Graham. Enjoy.

I've been working sporadically on an essay on the subject of Fandom for probably a year now. I still haven't quite cracked the nature of it to my satisfaction, but I got more fodder for it tonight.

I'm a “fan” of very few artists: two musicians (or groups of musicians) and two writers, (one of them dead.) I *admire* many more than that — in some cases admire them deeply — but only those four get inside me and make my heart swell and my vision go fuzzy. I only really lose myself in their work.

Tonight I had the opportunity to see a band called Lapdog play, in a relatively tiny venue, with a significantly limited crowd. Lapdog is the current project of Todd Nichols, formerly of Toad the Wet Sprocket. I've been a fan of TTWS, and specifically of Todd, since 1987, when I first saw them play in a little coffee house in Isla Vista, the student community outside the University of California at Santa Barbara.

What is it about a certain sound that just gets under your skin and transports you? Why this band, and not a million other bands? I don't know. But they got under my skin 19 years ago, and stayed there.

So tonight I sat about ten feet from the stage, dead center in front of Todd, and got to hear some of my favorite songs played live, and was introduced to a host of new material. It was intoxicating.

And I just can't figure out why that is.

What is the nature of fandom? It seems to me that one distinguishing feature is a sense of *importance.* The fan doesn't merely like or admire the artist (or their work – a distinction I'll have to explore) – the work is *important* in the fan's life. It adds a dimension. There's a relationship between the fan and the work.

I'll have to think about it some more. If I ever get that essay finished, I'll post it here. I certainly welcome your thoughts on the subject.

***

Edit: I completely forgot to mention that I got a new tattoo today. Hurt like a mf'r. Got it to cover the mess I made trying to give myself one in 11th grade art class. It's my third professional tattoo, and my first one to be done in color. I actually went in with a koi design (yes, a goldfish of sorts) but the artist didn't think it would cover the mess well enough. I figured he's the pro. I'll try to remember to post a pic.

BordersStores.Com Ccare to me
More options Apr 5 (17 hours ago)

Dear Christie:

Thank you for your expression of concern about our decision not to carry the issue of Free Inquiry magazine featuring cartoons depicting Muhammad. Borders is committed to our customers' right to choose what to read and what to buy and to the First Amendment right of Free Inquiry to publish the cartoons. In this particular case, we decided not to stock this issue in our stores because we place a priority on the safety and security of our customers and our employees. We believe that carrying this issue presented a challenge to that priority.

We value your thoughts and sincerely appreciate that you invested your time to tell us how you feel about the issue. I can assure you that our management team gave careful deliberation to this decision and considered all sides of the issue before reaching this conclusion. As always, we are interested in customer feedback about our choices and while we know you do not agree with our position, we hope you can understand the challenge of balancing the needs of our customers, employees and our communities.

I hope that this information is helpful. If you should have any other questions or comments, please don't hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,

Terra
Borders Customer Care

http://www.bordersstores.com

–

Well it's certainly thoughtful and respectful. I still think it's chickenshit.

Anyone know what's going on with FM? I keep getting an 'out of bandwidth' error – never seen that before, have you?

Tipped off by Ed Brayton at Dispatches From the Culture Wars, (a favorite daily read,) I just sent this via email to Borders Group, Inc.:

Dear Borders Group, Inc.,

According to the Associated Press, Borders Group has chosen not to carry an issue of Free Inquiry magazine, a periodical that is normally stocked (I know, because I buy it from you,) because it has reprinted four of the Danish cartoons that have caused such a senseless uproar around the world.

Not in the U.S., mind you. There have been no reports of violence related to the cartoons at all in the U.S.

But Borders has decided that it shouldn't carry the issue anyway.

“For us, the safety and security of our customers and employees is a top priority, and we believe that carrying this issue could challenge that priority,” Borders Group Inc. spokeswoman Beth Bingham said Wednesday. Where is the evidence of risk to your customers and employees? Do you really believe that fundamentalists are going to riot in the bookstore, or threaten those buying or selling the magazine? No one would have even known what was *in* the magazine unless they were looking to purchase it, if Borders hadn't brought attention to it by refusing to carry it!

“We absolutely respect our customers' right to choose what they wish to read and buy and we support the First Amendment,” Bingham said. “And we absolutely support the rights of Free Inquiry to publish the cartoons. We've just chosen not to carry this particular issue in our stores.”

And in so choosing you've limited Americans' access to the information that we want from the source that we normally get it from – you. That *is* censorship, and it is in direct conflict with the spirit of the First Amendment.

I have typically shopped at Borders weekly, and I have always loved the wide selection available. I have always been able to find material on the most off-beat, controversial topics without a problem. My confidence in Borders has been shaken by this very unfortunate and misguided decision. Free Inquiry will receive my subscription today — but I don't know when I'll be back to Borders.