So, hey, there’s plagiarism. Lots of it this week, too.
First, Jenny Trout blogged extensively this week about the many, many similarities between books by m/m romance “author” Laura Harner, and novels by Opal Carew and Becky McGraw.
Harner’s statement to The Guardian contained this line, which is still baffling: “…it appears that I may have crossed the line and violated my own code of ethics.”
Every time this happens, I cue up Rhianna in my head.
Want to sing along? Start here at about :47.
As I said on Twitter, if you plagiarize and publish it, a reader will notice. Always. Because we read a LOT.
But the pattern repeats: a reader notices, sounds the alert, more passages are discovered that are too similar for coincidence, and the person who did the copying is somehow surprised by their own behavior.
This article from 1997, “Meaningless Apologies, Disowned Selves,” by Kathy Kellerman (PDF) highlights a similar pattern in Janet Dailey’s “apologies” to Nora Roberts when she was discovered copying Roberts’ words. I hadn’t seen this article before and it’s a pretty insightful examination of the language of apologies which don’t own responsibility and knowledge of one’s own actions:
Just recently, much published (93 books) romance novelist Janet Dailey, ‘apologized’ for plagiarizing passages from rival Nora Roberts’ novels, blaming her conduct on a psychological disorder. Janet Dailey — the intact, whole, and undivided, ‘I’ — did not plagiarize.
Instead the dirty deed was done by “my essentially random and non-pervasive acts of copying,” Dailey said.
“I don’t know what that means,” said Nora Roberts.
Harner’s statement is similar. “It appears” that Harner “may have” plagiarized other writers, and “violated her own code of ethics,” which, oddly enough, is similar to the code of ethics held by most people who create most things – to wit, don’t steal people’s writing and say that it’s yours.
And, she asks that we “not judge her too harshly.”
This gif is getting a workout, too, because today, there’s more!
How many plagiarism revelations can one week hold?
NPR and WQXR, a classic radio station that is a member of NPR’s network (and is the station I listen to when my alarm goes off in the morning) revealed that one of QXR’s online editors had been caught by an NPR copyeditor lifting passages without attribution. An examination of Brian Wise’s work revealed ten other articles in which he had plagiarized other writers.
NPR’s policy and their response are pretty frank:
NPR’s policy is clear: Plagiarism is unacceptable. Likewise, New York Public Radio’s policy is indisputable: “Plagiarism is an unforgivable offense. NYPR staff members do not take other people’s work and present it as our own.” There is nothing in journalism that is more important than the trust between a news organization and its audience. The hundreds of journalists at NPR and NYPR and across public radio devote their careers to upholding that trust every day. We apologize to our audiences and to those who had their work copied without credit.
Wise’s response: about as vague and distanced as Harner’s:
NPR and WQXR have identified some sentences and phrases in my work that were similar to those used in other media outlets. They are right. These unintentional lapses are entirely my fault. I did not live up to my high standards or those of NPR and WQXR. I sincerely apologize for this.
“Phrases in my work that were similar to those used in other media?” “Unintentional lapses?” How exactly does that work? Can you trip and fall into plagiarism?
But that pile of mush is nothing compared to the Washington Post’s “coverage” of Harner’s plagiarism from writer Justin Wm. Moyer (donotlink URL used, FYI):
Any writer knows that finishing any book isn’t easy. It takes craft. It takes persistence. It takes guts.
But a romance novel isn’t exactly “Infinite Jest.” Though some bodice-rippers are dirtier than others, there is a formula — at some point, the wealthy heiress or the lady-in-waiting hooks up with the horse wrangler or the errant knight, and jeans come off or, well, bodices get ripped.
But the fill-in-the-blanks quality of some romance novels seems to have been quite the hurdle for Laura Harner. The self-published author of romances featuring gay people has been accused of plagiarizing the work of a best-selling author of romances featuring straight people — and, in a statement, Harner has all but admitted it.
Wow. Romances aren’t Infinite Jest. The devil you say! And what’s this? There’s “a formula?” Well, I never. And they’re all the same?!
White courtesy phone for Mr. Moyer. 1997 is calling and they want their pseudo-journalism back.
Up until that monstrous pile of excrement was unleashed upon the internet, I was sighing at the familiarity of the sequence. It’s like a song at this point. Reader finds plagiarism. Author alerts people. Plagiarist responds with weirdness and an “apology” that has all the heft of a Wiffle ball. I start playing Rihanna on repeat.
But somehow, I didn’t expect the dispatch from the late 90’s press coverage of romance to show up in 2015.
It’s one thing when a person plagiarizes and steals words from others. I’ve said this before: plagiarism is treason among writers.
It’s another thing entirely when a writer can’t take the theft of words from another writer seriously enough to bypass the tired jokes.
It’s so difficult to, you know, set aside sexism, stigma, and misogyny, and consider the writing of another person as valuable as one’s own.
The coverage of NPR and WQXR’s revelation of plagiarism has been pretty factual. They admitted the problem, addressed it by assembling all the pieces of writing in question with corrected attributions, and apologized for how the actions of one of their writers affected their accountability in the eyes of their audience.
But hey, romance novels. We can’t take those seriously. Much like classical music, they’re all the same. Same notes, same letters, same formula, bunch of chapters or movements and really, they’re all fill-in-the-blanks, right? (Somewhere, J.S. Bach wants to rise up and smack me with his wig, I swear.)
What could possibly account for the difference in tone? One writer’s revelations of theft are treated with seriousness, and another’s are fodder for tired jokes and the dismissal of an entire literary genre, the people who write it, and the people who read it.
Gosh, golly, gee penis, I can’t imagine why that is.
I mean, the mainstream media should know better by now, right? There are legit journalists looking at the genre regularly without disdain, along with for-real academics studying the genre in depth and receiving grant money to do so. I’d like to think that the language and attitude surrounding the genre has begun to change, to become less misogynist and dismissive in the past few years.
That may be why this particular article is so distasteful: it’s out of place. That attitude of ignorance and bad jokes is from years ago, not now. For God’s sake, The Washington Post has a monthly column on romance written by Sarah MacLean. They should definitely know better.
Maybe it’ll stop if we name it! Heads up! When there’s shitass journalism about the romance genre that is steeped in flaccid sexism and tired cliches, we can call it “Moyering.”
So, back to that familiar, repeated pattern.
Discovery, then anger, then an “Oops, oh, was that me?” apology, followed by sexist condescension and ignorant blather from someone who couldn’t be bothered to take the work of another writer seriously.
I’m fine with the certainty that plagiarists will get caught, most often by readers.
And I’m pretty accepting of the inevitability that the plagiarist will pantomime a nonsensical apology best answered with Rihanna: “Don’t tell me you’re sorry, cause you’re not… you know you’re only sorry you got caught.”
But I’m ready for those who write, who are paid as writers, to stop dismissing the work of other writers when they are victims of plagiarism. Y’all can stop now.
Or you can say you’re sorry. That works, too.
@Lynnd: I also came here to mention the Bezos/Amazon/WaPo connection, but had a slightly different take. Bezos/Amazon make a lot of money off romance books, so it really wouldn’t be in their interest to gratuitously torque off a whole category of customers. I would imagine (but don’t actually know) that Bezos is pretty hands off in his management of WaPo, especially on the content side, but Moyer’s piece was cheap, shoddy journalism. His cheap shots weren’t even germane to the issue. If someone plagiarized Stephen King or James Patterson would he have slighted their genres as not even being worthy of being plagiarized in the first place? I doubt it. I’m actually surprised that the piece got past the editors. But, as a long-term subscriber of WaPo who has witnessed its sad decline, I probably shouldn’t be.
BTW, for my own gratuitous dig, what kind of a prat name is Justin Wm. Moyer?
Anyway, nice job, SB Sarah.
@Gloriamarie Amalfitano @Mara B: Lawdy, yes. There’s a form of self-plagiarism there. I had to quit reading the Harmony books. Or I should probably say book because they are all basically the same one. The heroines are all outcast types due to not fitting in with their families’ hypercompetitive business enterprises, or someone (usually a previous love interest) done her wrong in the hypercompetitive academic realm. The enigmatic heroes have unusual, mysterious powers. Bad guys lurk in magic/psychic caves. Alien artifacts. Dust bunnies. The end. And the point of all this is. . . I dunno. I guess we may one day unravel the mysteries of Harmony, but the pace has been so numbingly glacial that I’m too comatose to continue in order to find out.
I usually liked the dust bunnies, tho. JC could break out of her mold and write books about them. 🙂
(Sorry to drift off topic!)
@Susan, @Mara B Funnily enough, I am sick and tired of the dust bunnies. I liked them before they were anthropomorphized into characters that people on Harmony could not possibly know about. Elvis? And I am truly sick and tired of the endless repetition in each book of the same old same old history and info. The rest of it, though, I very much enjoy. I like Rainshadow Island very much. Although I have begun to think that it is time to solve the mystery of Harmony and wrap it up before it feels like she and/or the publisher is milking it.
@Mara B, yes, I thought we were thinking of the same author, the same books.
@Cordy: Plagiarism involves “work” the same way completing a word search puzzle does. If one enjoys playing with words, experiences the cheater’s thrill of getting away with wrongdoing, and profits from it, it’s the ideal full-time gig for someone with no ethics.
Plagiarists don’t say, “Okay, now I have a sequence where the prince fights a horde of angry cats,” and then go find a corresponding book to copy. You’re giving them too much credit for creative thinking. Plagiarists are not writers. They do not do any of the work of writing. First, they find the writing they want to copy. Then, they piece it together and play their little game of words. If there’s a sentence that doesn’t correspond to the identified plagiarized source, it’s an unidentified plagiarized source, not an original thought of the plagiarist.
This particular plagiarist cranked out 75 of her products in a couple of years, whereas most writers, for whom writing is their full-time job, take a year, if not more, to craft one book. That is a tremendous savings of time and effort for the plagiarist, plus the years of attention and money, plus the new national spotlight (nobody cares how they get famous, as long as they do), plus the fact that, let’s be honest here, there are unlikely to be any significant or lasting consequences for her actions. I guarantee there are people out there taking notes so they can follow in her footsteps.
Hell, there’s probably a workshop already. They have to be coming from somewhere, and they don’t collectively have the creativity to plot their own schemes.
@DonnaMarie, I disagree. I think even professional writers can plagiarize for the same reasons as students. Just because you wrote one thing doesn’t mean you can write another. Plagiarism happens everywhere, in all fields. It is NOT always faster to plagiarize because as someone else pointed out, you need to find the passages to plagiarize and tweak them to fit your work, so it’s not purely about saving time. Writing is intellectually (and emotionally) hard, whether you’re an amateur or a professional. She’s alluded to some sort of personal difficulties, which I think suggests that it was indeed fear driving her, at least at first. Maybe she wasn’t in the right head space to write but didn’t want to let anyone down so she started fudging things. Now in this case, it seems likely money also played a role. Who knows why she first plagiarized, but once she got away with it, it likely seemed easy to just do it one more time, and then another. Pretty soon it’s routine and she realized she could get more “written” with less work on her part, and she could churn out books at a faster rate and make more money. It’s a slippery slope and one that far too many people have fallen prey to.
I should add, I’m giving Harner a little benefit of doubt and assuming she didn’t literally start out plagiarizing. I’m assuming at some point in her early career she did write her own stuff but then got off track somewhere along the way. I’m not so naive to 100% assume that’s the way it happened, though. She may very well be a complete scam artist who’s been doing this since the very start purely as a way to make a quick buck. If that’s the case, that’s really more of a con artist than any sort of author.
@Karin: I HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. My clock radio is super old with a rotating dial, and if it gets bumped I get a different station. I love being woken up by classical music, or that very smooth voiced dude who is on at 6:30 am.
[…] Source: Plagiarism: The Pattern and the Response […]
[…] Plagiarism: The Pattern and the Response […]
Gloriamarie, why do genre writers have to include those silly placeholder explanations and recaps in the front of every sequel? Our publishers ask us to, and many of our readers get huffy if we don’t. Can’t expect a couple of generations of readers raised on PowerPoint and text messages to be able to read and recall ‘in context’ from one chapter to another, much less from one book to another.
What I found so crazy was in the first section the plagiarist replaced “buzzard” with “carrion eater”. As if she was “writing” with a thesaurus beside her and decided she shouldn’t copy directly and making it wordier at the same time.
“Crane Hana says:
October 31, 2015, at 3:40 pm
Gloriamarie, why do genre writers have to include those silly placeholder explanations and recaps in the front of every sequel? Our publishers ask us to, and many of our readers get huffy if we don’t. Can’t expect a couple of generations of readers raised on PowerPoint and text messages to be able to read and recall ‘in context’ from one chapter to another, much less from one book to another.”
Seriously? Publishers have that little respect for readers’ intelligence and retention of material they’ve read? That’s disturbing to find out.
Well, if they must hold the reader is such low esteem, surely there can be a compromise? I am really bored to tears to see the same the material repeated word for word in book after book after book in a series. If the publisher insists that readers are too stupid to remember such important details then why not use a glossary, a foreword, preface, or something of that nature instead of littering the body of the story with endless repetition that has the effect of authorial intrusion?
[…] Smart Bitches, Trashy Books: Plagiarism: The Pattern and the Response […]
Great article! My favorite line: “Plagiarism is treason among writers.” That is the best way I’ve heard it describe. Simple and oh so true.
What really chaps my nethers is the fact that Harner vaguely alluded to PTSD in her “apology.” Like, she didn’t come right out and say, “I have PTSD,” it was just, well, I write about a CERTAIN ISSUE and I write about that CERTAIN ISSUE for a reason and that CERTAIN ISSUE might be why I plagiarized. Like, okay, if you’re saying you have PTSD, just say it. It’s still not an excuse for plagiarism. But don’t dance around it and try to make us feel sympathetic toward you instead of angry with you. And for all we know, she didn’t write about PTSD, she probably ripped off someone else’s book that had that CERTAIN ISSUE in it.
According to Laura Harner’s account on Wattpad she’s still posting excerpts from other “works” as recently as 19 hours ago. This is clearly an “author” who feels no remorse for their out and out theft of other author’s work, and is planning to continue to publish, regardless of the harm she has done.
https://www.wattpad.com/user/LauraHarner/activity
Delphine Dryden started a tumblr tag (could use it over on Twitter, too) to account for all the news articles that can’t help but take a paragraph or two at the top to bash romance novels before getting to the actual newsworthy content (e.g. a case of plagiarism). Ironically, every romance-bashing news article is pretty formulaic, so if anyone has other examples, send them her way (@DelDryden or deldryden.tumblr.com).
Amen. Amen. Amen.
Also beware of plagiarists Claire Butler, Emma Lee, and Jessica Coulter Smith. Becky McGraw shares the fault of Justin Moyer by her public statements that the theft of copyright works by these three was less important than what happened to her because most of the novels they stole were was Internet published for free by the original authors. Copyright exists the moment the work is recorded, regardless of how it is published. Based on the current market for the genre, these three thieves are guaranteed at least $8k in the first year of publication for each stolen book. Just because the real author didn’t choose to make money on them does not justify stealing their creative works, or make the theft of lesser importance than those stolen from McGraw. In any case, be warned about their names, just as you’re warned about the more prolific thieves like Warner.
[…] – was discovered as having plagiarized a number of novels from other romance authors. Many posts and stories have been published on this so I won’t rehash it […]
[…] Smart Bitches Trashy Books […]