Posts by Jolisa
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ruh-roh. (Sometimes, only the pidgin dog-English of Scooby-Doo can fully express my feelings.)
Oh, I've been whimpering like Scrappy all week. Tis not a pleasant task, and I'm still feeling a bit cautious and shellshocked by it all. But it was nice, as a recovering academic, to venture into dusty corners of the library I haven't visited in a while.
And I am more awestruck than ever by the terrifying power of the google.
There were more examples than were mentioned in the Listener article; I stopped finding correspondences when (because?) I stopped looking.
What got me looking further than the first example was the fact that that book (Karen Sinclair's Prophetic Histories) was not mentioned in the list of works consulted at the end of the book. The puzzling thing is, other sources are quoted appropriately throughout the novel - a character will say "As Wakefield said in his speech..." and off we go. That sort of citation and even pastiche is perfectly acceptable in a historical novel, especially one that is in part about the question of which histories are told and which aren't. Which made the unmarked borrowings stand out all the more.
One can certainly make arguments for a degree of strategic "quotation." Mark Williams has a very interesting chapter in his book Leaving the Highway: Six Contemporary New Zealand Novelists (AUP, 1990) on similar questions about the construction of The Matriarch.
I do wonder, like Jacqui, what the consequences would be for someone who had borrowed, accidentally or on purpose, 0.4% of their dissertation. And like Craig, I lament that an editor did not pick any of this up.
-
Nick, thank you so much! And Bart, and Emma, and everyone for words spoken and unspoken, and kind thoughts.
it's oddly apposite, because plagiarism does make me feel grief-y, as if it's a loss of some kind
And they call it a victimless crime. It has been a very queasy sort of a week, all round.
-
By the way, if anyone has the article and the scanner, I'd love to see a copy! Will pay in.. uh.. leftover Halloween candy or something.
More soon, just off to talk to Radio NZ.
-
I get the feeling it's not that simple?
It's definitely complex; the quotes were mostly tweaked and then spliced into the surrounding text. The Listener will have a sidebar featuring some of the more significant examples.
-
who need a way to be hateful and homophobic without cussin'.
Bang on the money, James. And inasmuch as homophobia and misogyny overlap in a tidy Venn diagram sort of way, see also big girl's blouse/pussy/etc.
-
pantywaist? who on earth uses 'pantywaist' in normal conversation (other than about underwear)
Heck, even about underwear. If your panties have a waist, you're wearing them wrong.
Or you're wearing Absolutely Enormous Panties, in which case, fair enough.
-
And fairy lights...
Definitely fairy lights!
-
Guys, it's not funny. Wasn't then (hence the years of avoiding dentists), isn't now.
-
Kyle, thanks for the swift apology. I feel like this was covered on one of Emma's threads although I can't track it down right now; I don't want to derail this discussion, but yeah, general PAS protocol, triggering, respect, etc.
(I know it's easy to joke wildly clear of the mark, having made flippant remarks in the early minutes of the tsunami thread last week that I now regret).
-
Trying to think which way round is worst.
Joking aside, the somatic effect was strangely indistinguishable; it was all simultaneously the worst, if that makes sense. He wasn't necessarily going out of his way to be deliberately pervy, as far as I could tell -- just cluelessly creepy in an old-school sort of way.
(The discussion above is kind of replicating the effect, frankly.)
Hilary, you've been through the wars. Nobody could fault you for trying anything and everything.