I love blogs. I'm relatively new to being a blogger myself, but I've been following blogs on interior design, good books to read, and do-it-yourself projects for over a year now. I may be getting into a controversial subject here, but I do feel the need to get my personal opinion out there.
I hate it when a post comes up in my feed in which a blogger complains about being plagiarized. I think plagiarism is completely wrong and out of line, so my heart always goes out to a writers whose work has been stolen. That would be a nightmare! I always try very hard to make sure I give credit where credit is due and such... but if it ever appears that I have "stolen" or "borrowed" from another blogger, I do hope that someone confronts me about it in a respectful manner. I'm not saying that plagiarizers should only be given slaps on the wrist and sent on their way. But sometimes it could be an accident or a misunderstanding. I would hope that I would be approached respectfully before being attacked. I would certainly remove the content and profusely apologize. (All that being said, I don't believe I've ever plagiarized and I never plan to.)
What brings this all up? Well, two of my favorite blogs: Scandalous Women (SW) and Historically Obsessed (HO). Recently, Historically Obsessed published a post about a certain painting by Pre-Raphaelite Sir John Everett Millais. Apparently, the blogger of SW read HO's post and was inspired by it. A few days later, SW published a post focusing on the scandalous affair of Millais and Effie Gray, who was John Ruskin's wife. Then today, HO published a post accusing SW of plagiarizing and attacking the blogger of SW.
This really troubles me. I read both of the posts before the accusation was made. I was so excited to see that two bloggers had blogged about Pre-Raphaelite subject matter because I just finished studying the Pre-Raphaelites in my British Literature course. I read both, noticed that both were from separate blogs, but didn't think they were at all the same. Even though the two posts shared the same painting and people, the actual post topics were completely different.
The HO post discusses the meaning behind, symbolism of, and the blogger's connection to one of Millais' paintings. The post includes two quotes, one from from Essential Pre-Raphaelites and one from Illustrated London News. The only instance in which Effie Gray or John Ruskin are mentioned is in those quotes.
The SW post delves into the personal lives of John Ruskin, Effie Gray, and Sir John Everett Millais. The post explains the marriage of Ruskin and Effie, how unhappy Effie was, the financial circumstances of Effie's family and the eventual annulment. It also goes onto to talk about the love between Effie and Millais. Besides including the same painting as a picture in the post, the post doesn't actually refer to the painting, its symbolism, its meaning or any of the other stuff HO covered.
I don't believe that SW is in the wrong here. Is it so wrong to be inspired by a blog, research deeper on the topic, and then publish your own post on the subject? I understand the need to come up with creative ideas and to want those ideas attributed to yourself. But to believe that you will be the only to cover that topic, especially when it is such a well-known and interesting subject, is really rather silly in my opinion.
Plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarizers should have some sort of punishment. But SW did not plagiarize. The author was inspired by HO's post and took the topic in her own direction, focusing on the "scandalous woman" Effie Gray.
I will continue to read both blogs because I enjoy them equally, but seriously---the way HO accused SW of "stealing" was out of line and really put a damper on my blog reading of the day. Another thing that sort of torqued me in HO's accusative post was this line,
But go read the two posts for yourself and see what you think. Click here to read the "original" Historically Obsessed post about the painting. Click here to read the Scandalous Women post that focuses on Effie Gray's life.
"Take the whole range of imaginative literature, and we are all wholesale borrowers. In every matter that relates to invention, to use, or beauty or form, we are borrowers." (Wendell Phillips)
Amore.
I hate it when a post comes up in my feed in which a blogger complains about being plagiarized. I think plagiarism is completely wrong and out of line, so my heart always goes out to a writers whose work has been stolen. That would be a nightmare! I always try very hard to make sure I give credit where credit is due and such... but if it ever appears that I have "stolen" or "borrowed" from another blogger, I do hope that someone confronts me about it in a respectful manner. I'm not saying that plagiarizers should only be given slaps on the wrist and sent on their way. But sometimes it could be an accident or a misunderstanding. I would hope that I would be approached respectfully before being attacked. I would certainly remove the content and profusely apologize. (All that being said, I don't believe I've ever plagiarized and I never plan to.)
What brings this all up? Well, two of my favorite blogs: Scandalous Women (SW) and Historically Obsessed (HO). Recently, Historically Obsessed published a post about a certain painting by Pre-Raphaelite Sir John Everett Millais. Apparently, the blogger of SW read HO's post and was inspired by it. A few days later, SW published a post focusing on the scandalous affair of Millais and Effie Gray, who was John Ruskin's wife. Then today, HO published a post accusing SW of plagiarizing and attacking the blogger of SW.
This really troubles me. I read both of the posts before the accusation was made. I was so excited to see that two bloggers had blogged about Pre-Raphaelite subject matter because I just finished studying the Pre-Raphaelites in my British Literature course. I read both, noticed that both were from separate blogs, but didn't think they were at all the same. Even though the two posts shared the same painting and people, the actual post topics were completely different.
The HO post discusses the meaning behind, symbolism of, and the blogger's connection to one of Millais' paintings. The post includes two quotes, one from from Essential Pre-Raphaelites and one from Illustrated London News. The only instance in which Effie Gray or John Ruskin are mentioned is in those quotes.
The SW post delves into the personal lives of John Ruskin, Effie Gray, and Sir John Everett Millais. The post explains the marriage of Ruskin and Effie, how unhappy Effie was, the financial circumstances of Effie's family and the eventual annulment. It also goes onto to talk about the love between Effie and Millais. Besides including the same painting as a picture in the post, the post doesn't actually refer to the painting, its symbolism, its meaning or any of the other stuff HO covered.
I don't believe that SW is in the wrong here. Is it so wrong to be inspired by a blog, research deeper on the topic, and then publish your own post on the subject? I understand the need to come up with creative ideas and to want those ideas attributed to yourself. But to believe that you will be the only to cover that topic, especially when it is such a well-known and interesting subject, is really rather silly in my opinion.
Plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarizers should have some sort of punishment. But SW did not plagiarize. The author was inspired by HO's post and took the topic in her own direction, focusing on the "scandalous woman" Effie Gray.
I will continue to read both blogs because I enjoy them equally, but seriously---the way HO accused SW of "stealing" was out of line and really put a damper on my blog reading of the day. Another thing that sort of torqued me in HO's accusative post was this line,
"Hum, I wonder where she got that idea could it be that she spends her day trolling other Historical Fiction blogs looking for ideas on what to post herself?" (from Historically Obsessed: Plagiarism in the HF Community BEWARE)I think that a lot of HF bloggers read other Historical Fiction blogs just as avid Historical Fiction readers do. Bloggers and readers alike are always looking for another wonderful pageturner to stick their nose in. Is it wrong if a blogger reads another blog's review, reads the book themselves, and then posts their own review about it? I think not. I've discovered soooo many favorite novels by reading reviews on blogs. Am I plagiarizing that blogger by talking about the book on my own blog? Am I "stealing" their idea? No. And to accuse me (and other bloggers) of that would be absurd. I know there are people out there who deal steal a review and post it as their own. Those people are plagiarizers.
But go read the two posts for yourself and see what you think. Click here to read the "original" Historically Obsessed post about the painting. Click here to read the Scandalous Women post that focuses on Effie Gray's life.
"Take the whole range of imaginative literature, and we are all wholesale borrowers. In every matter that relates to invention, to use, or beauty or form, we are borrowers." (Wendell Phillips)
Amore.
No comments:
Post a Comment