

Word Theft - danso
http://www.poetryfoundation.org/article/247130

======
gabemart
The Paisley Rekdal poem referenced in the beginning of the article is "Bats"
[1].

Can anyone find a copy of the plagiarized version by Christian Ward? I'd be
very interested in seeing it.

[1]
[http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/19501](http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/19501)

------
danso
A few things stick out to me from the hacker's perspective:

1\. Poetry seems like a medium that is inherently difficult _not_ to
plagiarize. Unlike regular prose or journalism, you don't have the room to do
gracefully do attribution (e.g. "According to the Times, two roads diverged in
a yellow wood") and the shortness of the phrase necessarily reduces the space
you have to make something unique.

2\. It's great to be involved in an intellectual pursuit, like open source
software, where copying and remixing is not only encouraged, but is a best
practice.

3\. It says a lot about the ephemeral state and nature of poetry that someone
could plagiarize Emily Dickinson and Sylvia Plath, in this age of Google, and
almost get away with it.

edit: poor wording on my part. I meant more that it's difficult to avoid
_unintentionally_ plagiarizing, in that the form of the medium seems to make
it difficult to show that you were trying to "remix" (speaking from a
layperson's perspective). The examples given in the OP seem to obviously be
ripping off, though.

But yes, it also seems from a layperson's perspective that there would be
collisions in how things could be expressed...but I'm thinking as a layperson
who doesn't appreciate all the ways that poetry can break common rules of
language and expression.

~~~
1stop
... What constraints are on poetry that make it difficult to not plagerise?
Are you suggesting there is a finite amount of expression in language?

~~~
tbirdz
I think the commenter was referring to the literary device of allusion, where
one poem could make a reference to another poem or other literary work by
quoting it directly or paraphrasing, maybe even subverting the original
context to create a different kind of effect. However, citations could become
difficult, as the language associated with them could harm the poem's flow and
make it more awkward.

One solution I have seen to this though, is various annotated editions of
poems which add footnotes to explain various references, things specific to
that author's culture or time period etc. However, while these are certainly
informative, they can be a bit distracting from the poem itself.

~~~
robmclarty
Very well put.

I believe this sort of expression (of remixing and building upon and expanding
or contracting) is good and healthy and artistic and should be considered an
acceptable aspect of creative expression. How original is original? The fact
that we are using a common language already ties us to a past cultural history
upon which we build up the meanings in what we say and write (i.e., unoriginal
from the get go).

I think there are certainly varying degrees of similarity that can be seen in
different bodies of writing; some closer to the exact words of others. But at
the end of the day, how much does this really matter? I'm more interested in
human expression, however it needs to be done, than quibbling over who did
what first and by how much.

What little money can be had, yes, might want to be protected so that more art
can be produced, and maybe fame can bring a mild sort of immortality to reward
the struggling artist. But I don't think what compels us to write (or create)
is something we do for fame or fortune. I think it's more to do with adding to
the fabric of culture and playing a part in the drama of human history.

------
onion2k
Plagiarism checking software exists. Universities use it all the time. Surely,
with a relatively narrow corpus of work like poetry, this is a trivial problem
to solve.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _Plagiarism checking software exists. Universities use it all the time._

From what my university professor told me (and some student friends of mine,
who had their works checked by such software on regular basis), plagiarism
checking software is mostly a joke (or a scam, depending on how you look at
it), and is bought so that the university can tell that they are "employing
best available methods of plagiarism-protection" when applying for government
money. At least, this is how it works in Poland.

~~~
Tycho
Look at it like this: you could catch many instances of undergraduate
plagiarism if you a) google searched passages of submitted essays/disertations
and b) cross-checked all submitted papers against each other (including
previous years). Anyone can do this with no special tools, but systems like
Turnitin automate the process. So I don't see how it could be a joke/scam
(maybe if it's outrageously expensive). It also has other features like making
sure students have used citations/references correctly.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Method a) is a very weak check and also is either slow, or will likely make
Google ban you for trying to DDoS them.

Method b) is what, AFAIK, such software usually does, and from what I heard it
generates tons of false positives and is generally annoying.

A student friend of mine told me about how much trouble she and her year has
with the anti-plagiarism system her university uses; basically citing things
or using the same reference material (and thus having similar references
section) is enough to mark your thesis as plagiarism. They have a ruthlessly
enforced threshold of "plagiarism %" you need to stay below, and from what she
says, it's incredibly difficult to do so even when writing completely original
work.

~~~
Tycho
Method A is not really a weak check, it's bound to catch tons of cheating
students, it's just tedious for staff to perform.

Sounds like your friend's school is misusing the tool. Seeing that students
are all using the same references is pretty interesting information, as long
as you don't leap to conclusions. Likewise, seeing that someone is not citing
references properly may not be evidence of plagiarism but nevertheless it's
good for students to adhere to reference standards. When I used Turnitin I had
to keep below a certain percentge of 'quoted' text. I found this slightly
annoying but I could easily avoid it by replacing a quotation with my own
summary + a citation. It's just a stylistic choice that is being enforced
through the system.

Also, no % of plagiarism should be acceptable - beyond the residual/accidental
amount you get from coincidental phrasings.

------
userbinator
> Plagiarism isn’t a crime

Copyright...?

~~~
milliams
...is a civil offence I believe.

~~~
fennecfoxen
Depending on what you do with it, there can also be Fraud.

