(no subject)
Interesting publishing articles have been cropping up over several of the ljs I read. shanna_s mentioned How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got (Real?), and Got a Life (although I'm sure I haven't remembered the title entirely correctly), as did jeff_duntemann. I thought Jeff's article was particularly poignant--what *are* publishers doing if they're not noticing that the books their publishing are a) plagiarised, b) not nonfiction (re: the Jonathan Frey fiasco)?
I think the New York Times started the whole trend, really. Funnily enough, plagiarisers in the mass media then get to write books or have documentaries made about how they were actually victims of the system, as though their fifth grade teachers didn't mark them down for copying out of their reference books on reports. I remember lectures upon lectures about not copying. How did other professional writers miss this?
Shanna's entry talks about how frustrating it is to watch the people who comment on the "Opal Mehta" scandal be derisive simply because of its genre, as though plagiarising chick lit is somehow less of a crime than copying from a classic. I think that people who make that kind of commentary on chick lit are simply not familiar enough with copyright law.
The last interesting publishing article is one I think I pulled from Jeff and haven't read in its entirety. You can find it at http://alg.livejournal.com/84032.html?thread=1578560&style=mine -- and I've currently forgotten enough html tagging that I have to recommend copying and pasting. For people interested in the publishing industry, I'd recommend it.
As a note, I'm loosely considering either starting a new live journal under my real name so that I can write about my books and do shameless self-promotion here, *or* deleting a bunch of old personal entries from this live journal and continuing the shameless self-promotion here, and probably not doing memes anymore. Anyone who actually reads this journal and has an opinion is encouraged to offer commentary. ;)
-A
I think the New York Times started the whole trend, really. Funnily enough, plagiarisers in the mass media then get to write books or have documentaries made about how they were actually victims of the system, as though their fifth grade teachers didn't mark them down for copying out of their reference books on reports. I remember lectures upon lectures about not copying. How did other professional writers miss this?
Shanna's entry talks about how frustrating it is to watch the people who comment on the "Opal Mehta" scandal be derisive simply because of its genre, as though plagiarising chick lit is somehow less of a crime than copying from a classic. I think that people who make that kind of commentary on chick lit are simply not familiar enough with copyright law.
The last interesting publishing article is one I think I pulled from Jeff and haven't read in its entirety. You can find it at http://alg.livejournal.com/84032.html?thread=1578560&style=mine -- and I've currently forgotten enough html tagging that I have to recommend copying and pasting. For people interested in the publishing industry, I'd recommend it.
As a note, I'm loosely considering either starting a new live journal under my real name so that I can write about my books and do shameless self-promotion here, *or* deleting a bunch of old personal entries from this live journal and continuing the shameless self-promotion here, and probably not doing memes anymore. Anyone who actually reads this journal and has an opinion is encouraged to offer commentary. ;)
-A