Plagiarism happens all the time. That doesn't make it excusable, though. (More than four million people bought the "High School Musical" soundtrack. Just because a lot of people do it doesn't mean it's acceptable.) After the Obama plagiarism story broke last week, I couldn't help but wonder if using someone else's idea as your own is ever OK. (I also apparently couldn't help but steal an oft-used line from "Sex and the City.")
In journalism and academia, plagiarism obviously is universally, undeniably, without fail unacceptable. Jayson Blair, Mike Barnicle, Stephen Glass, and many other journalists have ruined their careers and undermined both their respective publications and an already widely distrusted journalism institution when they were found to have plagiarized and fabricated stories. I do, however, think these are isolated incidents that are not representative of journalism as a whole. This does not happen often.
It does, however, happen all the time in music. Every aspect of Noel and Liam Gallagher's existence is copied from the Beatles; specifically, the melody to Oasis's "Don't Look Back in Anger" is copied directly from "Imagine" by John Lennon (as is a line in the chorus of the song). "You Were Meant for Me" by Jewel sounds a little too similar to Neil Young's "The Needle and the Damage Done." The guitar riff from dreadful band Papa Roach's even more dreadful song "Last Resort" is a rip off of Green Day's "Brain Stew," which is a rip off of Chicago's "25 or 6 to 4." Even George Harrison has done it; he was sued (successfully) for stealing the melody for "My Sweet Lord" from the Chiffons' "He's So Fine." And, of course, Vanilla Ice's (vehemently denied) theft from "Under Pressure." A lot of "borrowing" of riffs, melodies, and lyrics can easily be cast as an homage (especially in the case of Hootie and the Blowfish's lifting of a lyric from Bob Dylan's "Idiot Wind" -- they actually attribute it to him, thus avoiding the plagiarism label), but the line between theft and tribute has become extremely blurred.
It seems to be frowned upon to pilfer designs in the fashion industry. According to an article in Radar, Forever 21 has had more than two dozen lawsuits filed against it in the past year alone for stealing designs. Apparently, though, it's fine when high fashion rips off the pattern on my grandma's couch or the collective look of Herman Munster and Joey Ramone.
What about in Hollywood, that bastion of faux-creativity, where burgling someone else's hard work is lovingly referred to as a "reimagination" or a "remake"? The 1998 remake of "Psycho," for example, was a shot-by-shot reproduction of the original -- not an ounce of original thought went in to the movie. Even Daniel Day-Lewis's mustache in "Gangs of New York" is a rip off -- it looks strikingly similar to former Oakland A's pitcher Rollie Fingers's. Well, James Marder, a lawyer in L.A., is mad as hell, and he's not going to take it anymore*. He has devoted his entire career to representing writers who have had their ideas stolen by movie studios.
And in politics: Obama steals from Patrick, Clinton steals from Edwards, Edwards steals from Clinton, Clinton steals from Obama, McCain steals from Obama, Clinton steals from Clinton. I think in this most recent instance of rhetorical philandering, it's not the actual theft of the line that matters (although Obama definitely should have cited the source in his speech, despite having Patrick's permission to use it). What stands out is both Clinton's obvious desperation to find something on which to attack Obama (other than the extremely weak experience argument) and her hypocrisy. In last Thursday's debate, Clinton attacked Obama for the indiscretion with the obviously spontaneous big-time burn, "It’s not change you can believe in, it’s change you can Xerox" (which, by the way, makes no sense -- don't you typically Xerox an original copy of something, meaning Obama's original ideas will be copied by other politicians? Does she mean "It's not change you can believe in, it's change that has been Xeroxed"?). Then, a few minutes later in a transparent emotional appeal, she stole a line from a speech John Edwards gave in December (which, it should be noted, was stolen from a 1992 Bill Clinton speech).
So Obama gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar and then has the good fortune to find out that the person who caught him had just drunk all their parents' vodka and filled the bottle back up with water. How lucky is this guy? This is like if, after being persecuted for having "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton released a videotape of Kenneth Starr and the entire U.S. Congress having sex with RuPaul.
*Network. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 1977. (See, citing sources isn't that hard!)
No comments:
Post a Comment