There's been a few of these lately. It's amazing to read the two poems side by side.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/ente...#ixzz2f4FXZHA5
Printable View
There's been a few of these lately. It's amazing to read the two poems side by side.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/ente...#ixzz2f4FXZHA5
Indeed a lot of borrowing. In this case, I think he could be taken to court for plagiarism because in many lines he used the thingy word by word. Indeed amazing. He could have used synonyms and then he could not be taken to court because generic ideas cannot be copyrighted. But this is plagiarism in bursts of someone else's application of the ideas.
That's just sad. I read a quote recently, "Be yourself, everybody else is taken". Those two poems are 95% identical! He's a fool to think no one would notice that...and a sad fool to feel the need to be someone else..
McKay's is better. The translated version lacks his flow.
If I had read them on two different occasions, I would have experienced a sense of de ja vu!
The sad thing is McKay is generally one of those poets who has a long career of getting other poets published, and getting them on in their careers. It's like robbing from one of the most respected teachers of poetry in Canadian history, with the simple excuse that only Canadians will read McKay anyway - how would they know?Quote:
Originally Posted by cafolini
What sort of recourse does McKay have?
Ignoring it. Seriously, the guy is preoccupied with his own busy life, being one of the most prominent Canadian poets and publishers. I think to an extent poets are less likely to sue, since it generally is a non-earning field, poetry. I doubt anyone cashed in on his work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
I guess it would be different if Nunn won an award for the poem. I sometimes read poems and am inspired by the style but it doesn't occur to me plagiarize in that way. I'll use my own themes or the poem itself might spark a theme and then I'll create something in my own style.
When I read the title I was leery about the claim of plagiarism, because Nunn is right that so much of literature (and all the arts) are appropriating what's been done and putting them in a new/different context; but reading the poems side-by-side there's no doubt that this is out-and-out plagiarism. This isn't appropriating a line or two, or borrowing a form or a linguistic idea, or riffing on a theme, or parodying, this is just taking what someone else wrote, changing a few words, and claiming it for yourself. Quite disgusting, especially from an established poet. One wonders how many poetry reputations are made from these kinds of things. I'm hoping a very small number.
don't know about plagiarism but flattery is definitely due. I would be more then happy to oblige if someone wanted to copy my work. ;)
It's the publishers who have the 'best' recourse legally speaking. But on a different note: This is briliant publicity for McKay's work!-I doubt he has ever got this type of mainstream publicity. Ever. Happy endings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
There plagiarisms everywhere. Sometimes people do it unintentionally. You think it is your original because you have it in your mind, but it was something that you had read it somewhere and forgot it later.
A hopeless churl can only pilfer from semi-obscure literature or literature that is only semi-good, otherwise he may have to change it so much that he risks creativity. So the truly great stuff is out of reach due to the constraints of method. As his reputation increased so did the risk of exposure, serving as a reputation cap. Still, it is painful to see someone claiming even the minor glory from another poet's labors.
Thanks for posting this. Awarenss is always recommended, and to be part of the increased light of exposure on this plagarist is satisfying.
Do you have any links to some of these other cases?Quote:
Originally Posted by tonywalt