Blog 4
Hello, everyone! For this week, I have decided to conjoin all of the articles under one discussion, rather than reflect upon them separately. This is due to all four of the articles being centered around the same ideas of plagiarism.
The topic of plagiarism can be frightening to some (as indicated by Sampsel mentioning one of his students coming into class with over one-hundred footnotes). Sometimes, it can be hard to discern whether the act of plagiarism was intentional or not. Regardless, as Sampsel highlights, students will be punished regardless of intention. I wonder what happens to people who did not plagiarize but were still accused of it (the girl who had her paper stolen). If the case is reported, does the girl still have the accusation attached to her name, or does it get rescinded? I would like to believe the former of the two options, but I am honestly not aware of the consequences. That prompts further research into the topic. Perhaps I should undergo said research.
When Sands discusses the gray-area of unintentional plagiarism, I begin to wonder where the line is drawn between influence and copying. She specifically mentioned the Harvard student who had her book pulled because it was too similar to books she read while growing up. She essentially has her reputation ruined, and, depending on her area of study, her career could be destroyed as well. She had been influenced/inspired/etc. by the authors of these books as well as their writing styles. In hindsight, it does not seem like a criminal trait to be inspired by someone else's work. On the other hand, it could potentially lead to disaster in academia.
As graduate students/researchers, we must be able to determine whether or not our work represents that of another person. The online plagiarism quiz provides multiple examples that seem like common sense. While the blatant examples of plagiarism are evident, there are also examples that are not as easy to figure out. Some of the parenthetical examples could be easily missed if a student did not read the question accurately. Being able to sound like ourselves and not closely resemble anyone else will prevent us from the consequences of plagiarism.
Gladstone's interview with Kenneth Goldsmith offers an interesting counter-view to all of this. If we view the idea of originality through Goldsmith's lens, we might see that there is actually no such thing as original material or ideas. He states in the interview, "There’s so much information out there already, that really one need not create any more." It sounds as if he believes that humans have created enough original material to fulfill their basic lifelong needs. I have seen and read multiple sources on utopian and dystopian societies where people do not need to create anything new in order to continue their "perfect" lives. Usually, the creator of these stories has a protagonist (or antagonist) go against the status quo, and by the end of the story, everything in the society falls into chaos. Obviously, these books and movies are merely examples that do not reflect on our society as a whole. it still leads me to question whether or not humanity is starting to fall into that hole of comfort and unwillingness to change. That is what I am hearing when I listen to this interview; Goldsmith does not seem open to the idea of searching and developing new ideas. I understand it is difficult to come up with something "original" (I always think to the South Park episode, "Simpsons Already Did It" [S06E07]). I am not sure whether or not this is because people are losing the desire to search for new ideas because of difficulty.
Sorry for rambling on there. It was a topic that had been in the back of my head for sometime. Regardless, have a great weekend, everyone! Three weeks to go!
The topic of plagiarism can be frightening to some (as indicated by Sampsel mentioning one of his students coming into class with over one-hundred footnotes). Sometimes, it can be hard to discern whether the act of plagiarism was intentional or not. Regardless, as Sampsel highlights, students will be punished regardless of intention. I wonder what happens to people who did not plagiarize but were still accused of it (the girl who had her paper stolen). If the case is reported, does the girl still have the accusation attached to her name, or does it get rescinded? I would like to believe the former of the two options, but I am honestly not aware of the consequences. That prompts further research into the topic. Perhaps I should undergo said research.
When Sands discusses the gray-area of unintentional plagiarism, I begin to wonder where the line is drawn between influence and copying. She specifically mentioned the Harvard student who had her book pulled because it was too similar to books she read while growing up. She essentially has her reputation ruined, and, depending on her area of study, her career could be destroyed as well. She had been influenced/inspired/etc. by the authors of these books as well as their writing styles. In hindsight, it does not seem like a criminal trait to be inspired by someone else's work. On the other hand, it could potentially lead to disaster in academia.
As graduate students/researchers, we must be able to determine whether or not our work represents that of another person. The online plagiarism quiz provides multiple examples that seem like common sense. While the blatant examples of plagiarism are evident, there are also examples that are not as easy to figure out. Some of the parenthetical examples could be easily missed if a student did not read the question accurately. Being able to sound like ourselves and not closely resemble anyone else will prevent us from the consequences of plagiarism.
Gladstone's interview with Kenneth Goldsmith offers an interesting counter-view to all of this. If we view the idea of originality through Goldsmith's lens, we might see that there is actually no such thing as original material or ideas. He states in the interview, "There’s so much information out there already, that really one need not create any more." It sounds as if he believes that humans have created enough original material to fulfill their basic lifelong needs. I have seen and read multiple sources on utopian and dystopian societies where people do not need to create anything new in order to continue their "perfect" lives. Usually, the creator of these stories has a protagonist (or antagonist) go against the status quo, and by the end of the story, everything in the society falls into chaos. Obviously, these books and movies are merely examples that do not reflect on our society as a whole. it still leads me to question whether or not humanity is starting to fall into that hole of comfort and unwillingness to change. That is what I am hearing when I listen to this interview; Goldsmith does not seem open to the idea of searching and developing new ideas. I understand it is difficult to come up with something "original" (I always think to the South Park episode, "Simpsons Already Did It" [S06E07]). I am not sure whether or not this is because people are losing the desire to search for new ideas because of difficulty.
Sorry for rambling on there. It was a topic that had been in the back of my head for sometime. Regardless, have a great weekend, everyone! Three weeks to go!
I remember reading the newspaper article about the girl accused or plagiarism, but can't remember the outcome. Perhaps it happened at Harvard? And I attempted to look it up and find out what happened, but (and I hate to admit this in this class), didn't have enough information to find it.
ReplyDeleteI appeciate your comments about Goldsmith's article. I felt as though I was reading a book from the 1960's: society did always seem to fall apart. But the connection you made to both South Park and The Simpsons was worth the read.