After receiving an email concerning plagiarism from Peter, I thought about the article I read last mouth related to this topic. A few people have to leave their employment and even worse they are accused of a certain crime, theft since they copy other’s words. This is not different than stealing. This article, however, does not focus on how serious punishment of plagiarism is under the intellectual property law. It shows a different perspective of plagiarism that people may be too obsessed with it and therefore this limit creativity.
The main part of this article is that Gladwell and his friend’s writing was plagiarised by the play, named Frozen, but both of them have a totally different reaction towards such crime. His friend thinks that she would sue a person who did it, whereas Gladwell who feels upset at the very first place decided not to resort to legal action. Conversely, he feels pride that his writing has become a part of magnum opus. Moreover, he cites the Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig from the book, called Free Culture: the line drawn between private interests and public interests in intellectual property should be in the fine line that protects from copying but not too limits the mutual benefits. Regarding literature, people never accept copying at any case. Frozen uses Gladwell’s description of his friend’s work and “the outline of his friend’s work as main storyline to create the play and that should be the way creativity works as Gladwell claims that “old words in the service of a new idea aren’t the problem” and “What inhibits creativity is new word in the service of an old idea”. Although his career as a journalist makes e him to focus on plagiarism, he thinks that every phrase and word has been used more than once were he to search back to the body of English literature. People have just lost track from which the idea originated. He concludes that “the final dishonesty of the plagiarism fundamentalists is to encourage us to pretend that these chains of influence and evolution do not exist and that a writer’s words have a virgin birth and an eternal life”
First of all, I am, as always, impressed by Gladwell’s nature of storytelling skills. This makes me as a reader understand some difficult ideas clearly, which allows me to keep reading his articles.
Secondly, although plagiarism is considered as a crime, people can be trapped by this idea and discourage the creativity or innovation. Considering the fact that there are many songs that use the same order of notes but may be different rhythm or pitch and this certainly would not call copying since there are eighth notes in one octave. Composers seem to be limited by the choices if they are too concerned about bleaching the intellectual property. Sometimes they combine a good sound from many pieces of other composers, which listeners will hardly notice if they are not told.
Last but not least, I do not mean that we as students should ignore the importance of plagiarism while conducting research. It would be no harm in fact is a MUST to give someone the credit if we use other ideas.
References
Gladwell, M. (2009). should a charge of plagiarism ruin your life? What the Dog saw. New York: Penguin
The EAP Class Blog at https://
academicaua.blogspot.com for students in Peter's classes.
Anyone can read this Blog; only members can post or comment.
AEP Class Blog - information pages
Thursday, 22 July 2010
12 comments:
Before you click the blue "Publish" button for your first comment on a post, check ✔ the "Notify me" box. You want to know when your classmates contribute to a discussion you have joined.
A thoughtful response should normally mean writing for five to ten minutes. After you state your main idea, some details, explanation, examples or other follow up will help your readers.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGoshhhhhh!!!!!! Does your article come from What the Dog saw?????? you're spoiling meeeeeeee. I've just bought his work and about to read it. I shouldn't have read your article at all.
ReplyDeleteT_________________T
I am sorry P'Tum.
ReplyDeleteI think it is an interesting piece of work, so I would like to share with others.
Anyway, after you read the book, I am more than welcome to discuss it with you.
I think using other people's ideas is fine.
ReplyDeleteIn literature, which we study in level 6, other people's ideas are always reused. Almost all of Shakespeare's plays, for exmaple, are based on other people's stories. He tool older, often well known stories, and turned them into masterpieces of English. And then later writers use Shakespeare - sometimes directly, sometimes allusively. And as we saw, Golding's novel explicitly refers to other stories of a people lost on an uninhabited island.
Using other people's ideas is generally good thing, but in academic writing, there are more strict standards about how we may use other people's work. But such use is always there in every field of study.
What the Dog Saw? I don't know that. Is it something we might usefully read in AEP?
It reminded me of The Curious Incident of the Dog in teh Night-Time, a novel that I'm thinking of adding to the AEP list of reading materials. And Haddon, the author, not surprisingly alludes to other writers; his title is taken from one of Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories.
Oops, I've even made a typo in the name of the title. I wish blogger had the same spell check facility that MS Word has. It would save me from at least some errors.
ReplyDeletesuch book is really great one, and it seems to be very useful for many student because the way that Gladwell wrote is easy to read, and his points are very easy to catch up also. Only one problem with being AEP book is that this work is not as short as Lord of the flies. It's 410 pages book.
ReplyDeleteThis book is about the fact that we often overlook about it, and this is the same way of Gladwell previos works such as Blink: The power of thinking without thinking (2005) or Outliers: The srory of success (2008). All of them is worth to read, but if you want to use for AEP class, I would suggest Blink for you because it's the thinest of Gladwell's works.
You can find more information in Google. It's very easy because all of his work got the No.1 best selling at that time, so many people always discuss about his points in the cyber.
Petchy, when I finish this book, you'll not have much time to discuss with me anymore because you will be studing in U.K. at that time. Moreover, you don't use MSN, Twitter, Facebook, Hi5, or anything else, so how can I discuss with you?
ReplyDeleteThanks Tum, I'll check them out.
ReplyDeleteIn this blog.
ReplyDeleteCan I and may I, Peter ?
Actually, I do have my email address.
ReplyDeleteDoes it count ?
Will you count? -*-
ReplyDeleteOh! you are my true friends, Mr. petch.
ReplyDeleteTum can register Twitter for you.He told me it cost only 10$.How generous he is, right?
"old words in the service of a new idea" and "new word in the service of an old idea"; I like these two fragments. Gladwell clearly explained the significant between them. For me, the first one give me the sense of respect though you repeat other people's work. The second one, in contrast, look like that person attempts to soundly copy the work (but it is obvious that he/she fails to do so). Now, there is a situation raised in my mind. I'm not sure that whether it is relavant to the post(if not, please clarify for me)
-One day: a person named "X" found that 1+1 = 2
-A year later : another person named "Y" proclaimed that 1+1+1=3.
Do you think what "Y" did can call committing plagarism? Without the idea that is borrowed from "X", the later equation would probably not exist. In the case, number 3 is a productive result of the creativity that Gladwell mentioned, don't you think so?