Posts by Jolisa
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Tania, thank you so much for chiming in here - it is always good to hear from practitioners of the art, especially one who is currently tackling precisely the question we're talking about (how, and how much, to weave one's research and primary and secondary sources into a novel).
Apologies for misspelling your name upthread (am sensitive to such things) and let me say that I am eager to get my hands on Banquo's Son -- to read and enjoy, I hasten to add, not to run through my Naughty Writer Filter (pat. pend.).
Your thoughts and this fine blog post at Reading the Maps have me cooking up a follow-up post of my own. A sort of contemplative how to/how not to, based not (or not only) on what's permissible, but on what works.
In the meantime, I'm eager to hear examples -- mostly novels, because it seems to me that poetry makes different rules for itself, and that they work just fine -- of contemporary literature that cites or incorporates other material, and does it well and productively.
I'll start: Theresa Hak Kyung Cha's Dictée, UC Press, 1982.
And Peter Carey's My Life as a Fake (!) as well as his Ned Kelly book.
-
Waiter! There are dark purple spheres in my soup!
Shh! Everyone will want some!
So, I just illuminated the issues for listeners to the ZB network, and will be discussing the story on Checkpoint this evening, on Radio NZ (not sure what time exactly).
And it's official, at least according to TVNZ: I'm sad. But we knew that.
Oh, and: if anyone reading this could figure out how to convene it, I would absolutely love to hear a round-table of novelists talking about their process, especially when it comes to integrating research into a historical novel. I'm thinking Paula Morris, Rachael King, Tania Roxburgh, CK Stead... it would be fascinating, eh?
-
An e-mail from the Vice-Chancellor of Auckland University to staff and students, which has arrived in my inbox from several sources.
I am communicating directly with staff and students on the matter concerning Professor Witi Ihimaera which has received considerable media publicity. Much of the public comment has been ill-informed and made in ignorance of the facts. This is notwithstanding our explanations to the media of how this matter was handled and the procedures involved.
On 3 November, Professor Ihimaera alerted the University to claims of plagiarism against him which were being investigated by the Listener. In accordance with the University's "Guidelines for the Conduct of Research (Part 2, Procedures for Dealing with Concerns of Misconduct in Research)" his Head of Department, Professor Tom Bishop, then conducted a preliminary assessment of the allegations. This found that a small amount of material in Professor Ihimaera's novel, The Trowenna Sea, had been published without attribution or acknowledgement. On the basis of his review of the material of concern and Professor Ihimaera's response, Professor Bishop concluded that the material had been inadvertently included in the novel without proper acknowledgement and that the instances were not sufficient to constitute misconduct as defined in these Procedures.
Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable and Professor Ihimaera has publicly acknowledged that he erred in using unattributed passages as he did. He has repeatedly apologised in public and is taking appropriate steps to remedy his error. The book has been withdrawn from sale at considerable financial cost to Professor Ihimaera. This will enable him to undertake a review of the text and to check it against the sources upon which he drew. The review will determine the acknowledgements and referencing to be included in a future edition of the book.
There have been claims in the media that Professor Ihimaera has been treated leniently and that a severe sanction, including dismissal, should have been imposed. It is also being said that different standards would have applied to a student in the same position. These claims are patently untrue. Students and staff are subject to essentially the same policies and procedures in cases of alleged plagiarism. The University does not condone plagiarism, but recognises the need to take into account a range of factors such as intention, seriousness and extent. Were a small amount of unattributed material to be discovered in a doctoral thesis, for example, the student would be required to rewrite the thesis with appropriate attribution - precisely the action Professor Ihimaera will be taking of his own volition.
The University deplores plagiarism in any form and has robust processes for dealing with allegations of academic misconduct by either staff or students. The University's approved process for addressing allegations of staff misconduct in research was followed scrupulously in this case. To do otherwise would be to breach Professor Ihimaera's rights as an employee of the University.
Stuart N. McCutcheonVice-Chancellor
-
The only problem with the sports doping analogy is that it presumes that the practice enhances the performance. In fact, as both Nicholas Reid and I pointed out, the borrowings were part of what bogged the novel down.
I think it's more like going to a flash restaurant with a big name chef, and then discovering that the hors d'oeuvres came out of a tin, and the sauces came from the supermarket. And, in this case, the dessert came from the much less famous joint down the road, where they take great pride in their family recipe.
-
Also nice to hear give short shift to the idea that Auckland Uni had an out because The Trowenna Sea was not published "under the university's auspices".
I wonder if the university counts novels written by creative faculty towards its research output. Can anyone confirm this?
Because if so, then the university very much does have something at stake here. -
Beats the usual "Last chance to save your waistline" surely.
Even those incredibly helpful stories are always sabotaged by the infallibly persuasive wine and cooking pages. Yum.
The Listener: truly something for everyone.
(Although: no children's department.)
-
Yes, I for one am glad you chose that course of action Jolisa.
Very much a case of "don't go there."
It looks like there is going to be a Your Views on whether "Ihimaera should keep his job" on the Herald as soon as they fill their customary quota of braindead racists.
Gaaah. So not wanting to go there, either.
-
Ear-worming strangers.
Am trying to think of a way of working Joe Orton into the conversation. On second thoughts, best not.
-
Thanks, guys. Hard to concentrate all the thinking and nuance of the last few weeks into nice soundbites, especially with the Wombles playing in the next room by way of video-babysitter. On the other hand, it kind of was the perfect soundtrack.
-
Jolisa might be interested in the observation that plagiarism hunters historically have been a very poorly regarded group.
Interested? Hmm, try mortified. I really didn't go looking for this; it found me. And it would have found somebody, sooner or later.
Although, when it became clear that the initial 16 examples I found without looking very hard were not considered sufficient, I certainly did put on my hunting cap and went looking for bear. And found several more large furry specimens, some from sources unmentioned in the bibliography.
The CBC program is indeed interesting, although it doesn't change my mind on this case, and reiterates most of the points that we've already collectively made. (Also, most of the musical examples, e.g. Brahms variations on Haydn's St Anthony's Chorale, are completely bogus as analogies to literature). Even the presenter, in teasing out a new and more forgiving notion of "borrowed" influences, states that "stealing another person's writing word for word, say, and then plunking it into a newspaper column or a term paper, is outright plagiarism, and it's bad."
Also of use: Jonathan Lethem's argument that "there are standards of transparency, transformation, and reciprocity. ... How well did it do on those marks? That's how you're going to figure out if it's a good or a bad [appropriation]."
I note too that Lethem says "let me engulf my influences," and, while talking about the variety of the influences on anything he writes, "I don't worry about originality when I talk about voice, I worry about pungency, versatility, excitement... I want the voice of anything I'm writing to have a quality of necessity, of energy, of expansiveness."
I want that in a writer's voice, too, and it's really annoying when you can spot the seams as easily as I did. Like Lethem, I'd emphasise the "make" in "make it new."
Look, I have no problem whatsoever making a nuanced argument for influence, homage, allusion, referentiality, intertextuality, hybridity, whatever you want to call it. I am all over that stuff, professionally and personally; I love it, I prize it, I seek it out.
In my opinion, that's not what's going on here.
(Love the Promiscuous Materials Project, though. That's different again.)