The (big?) plagiarism brouhaha
Apr. 26th, 2006 07:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jmc_bksThe first post I saw about Kaavya Viswanathan's alleged plagiarism and "unconscious" or "internalized" copying of Megan McCafferty in her book (How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild and Got A Life) was in ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
davidgallaher1's livejournal on Monday, with a link to the article in The Crimson. [Wow, what a run on sentence. But it's staying.] On Tuesday, articles appeared online at CNN.com and The Washington Post online, as well as in a couple of blogs, notably at CW's website, plus in a thread on AAR's Potpourri Message Board. More articles appeared online today.
My two cents: What I know about copyright law would fit on the head of a pin with space to spare, so I don't know what will happen with the book or the teen-author, but having read all three of the books in question, I find it hard to believe that the use of McCafferty's words was unconscious.
I probably would not have read this book but for all of the media attention. Even so, I still wouldn't have read it if a copy hadn't been standing on a display shelf at the library last night. Why wouldn't I have? A couple of reasons. First, the title. It's too long. Brevity in titles matters to me. Outside of articles for professional journals, titles should not be eleven words long. The cover design: while I liked the colors, I didn't care for the cartoon character w/ cell phone, handbag and ultra hip clothes. And the blurb on the inside flap -- it reminded me of a much better book (Vegan, Virgin Valentine by Caroline Mackler) except with name dropping. [Note: this is not a secondary accusation of plagiarism, just an observation that both books are about over-achievers obsessed with Ivy League schools to the exclusion of real life.]
The book opens with Opal going in for her interview with the Dean, which she totally bombs. After driving home with her stricken parents, she reveals that he told her that she needed to have fun. So her parents come up with the HOWGAL plan (how Opal will get a life) in order to complete the HOWGIH plan (how Opal will get into Harvard). Immediately, the parents start a crash course of what it hip, both for themselves and Opal. And they devote as much energy and resources to her becoming cool as they did to her education, including wardrobe, makeup, makeover, planning a party for Opal to "throw" while they are out. Opal gets in with the HBz, cool girls, but then isn't sure she wants to be. She finally gets the attention of a boy she has a crush on, only to discover maybe she doesn't want him. And she meets a guy that maybe she does like, then loses him when the truth of her HOWGAL plan comes out.
The story falls flat for me, mostly because the characters seem cartoonish and extreme. Opal has no close friends, literally, because she is too busy doing extra curricular things. The single focus (Harvard) that she and her parents have is kind of disturbing. I kept thinking that they all needed therapy. Her parents are frighteningly obsessive and kind of scary when it comes to the things they are willing to do for her to get into Harvard. Plan a party for Opal to throw while pretending to be out of town? Then crash it and take photos? While I know college admissions are competitive, especially to Ivy League schools, the source of their obsession is never clear. The family is Indian, but for the most part, they could have been any ethnicity at all; their Asian-ness has no impact at all on the story, although I got the impression that it is supposed to, based on the inclusion of a family gathering and a tiny side story for a cousin who dropped of out Princeton pre-med. The shallow girls are mere puddles, with no redeeming qualities. The not-shallow students are pretty undefined, even Opal's eventual love interest. Despite the fact that Opal is the narrator, she's pretty one dimensional, defined entirely by the Harvard obsession.
Style and content-wise, with all of the name dropping for products, bands, songs, TV shows, etc., Opal seemed more akin to a Gossip Girl or other similar YA book than to McCafferty's books. (Or so I assume; I haven't read a Gossip Girl book, only reviews of them.) I probably wouldn't have caught the alleged plagiarism, but for a few noticeable passages, all of which were mentioned in the various articles online. Sean, the love interest, seemed very much like McCafferty's Marcus, especially with the conversational constructs, the band, the t-shirts, etc. Is that plagiarism or copyright infringement? I don't know.
IMO, McCafferty's books Sloppy Firsts and Second Helpings are flat out better than Opal for a couple of reasons. The writing (for the most part ;) is better, the characters aren't caricatures, and Jessica Darling (main character) is the charming, self-aware, sympathetic heroine.
davidgallaher1's livejournal on Monday, with a link to the article in The Crimson. [Wow, what a run on sentence. But it's staying.] On Tuesday, articles appeared online at CNN.com and The Washington Post online, as well as in a couple of blogs, notably at CW's website, plus in a thread on AAR's Potpourri Message Board. More articles appeared online today. My two cents: What I know about copyright law would fit on the head of a pin with space to spare, so I don't know what will happen with the book or the teen-author, but having read all three of the books in question, I find it hard to believe that the use of McCafferty's words was unconscious.
I probably would not have read this book but for all of the media attention. Even so, I still wouldn't have read it if a copy hadn't been standing on a display shelf at the library last night. Why wouldn't I have? A couple of reasons. First, the title. It's too long. Brevity in titles matters to me. Outside of articles for professional journals, titles should not be eleven words long. The cover design: while I liked the colors, I didn't care for the cartoon character w/ cell phone, handbag and ultra hip clothes. And the blurb on the inside flap -- it reminded me of a much better book (Vegan, Virgin Valentine by Caroline Mackler) except with name dropping. [Note: this is not a secondary accusation of plagiarism, just an observation that both books are about over-achievers obsessed with Ivy League schools to the exclusion of real life.]
Opal Mehta is a young woman with a laser focus: getting into Harvard. Since her birth, Amal and Meena Mehta have raised their only daughter with Harvard emblazoned on her pajamas, her walls, and her brain. Everything she does is meant to add up to the perfect Harvard application. There have been flowcharts, diagrams, and endless checklists. At seventeen, Opal is valedictorian, president of three honor societies, and founder of the Science Bowl team. She even took welding classes to appear well-rounded. With SAT and AP scores to die for, getting in looks like a sure thing.
Then, at her interview with Harvard's Dean of Admissions, he sets aside her resume and asks her the single question she never prepped for: "What do you like to do for fun?"
For once, Opal is at a loss. The interview screeches to a nightmarish halt. The Dean says she still has a chance -- but only if she can show that she is more than just another 4.0 GPA.
And so the Mehtas turn their ingenuity and determination to a whole new plan: getting Opal a life. Dating, partying, and popularity are the new subjects of late-night cramming, and Opal's study guides are now MTV and the WB, Vogue and InStyle. The girl who wore high-water cords and hung out with her cat for fun is now rocking Manolos, cutting class to shop with the queen bees, and winning the attention of her longtime lust object.
But when Opal finally faces the Dean again -- this time in a Diane von Furstenberg blouse and Theory pants -- she is more confused that ever. Does lip gloss actually matter? Does life have to have a crimson theme?
The book opens with Opal going in for her interview with the Dean, which she totally bombs. After driving home with her stricken parents, she reveals that he told her that she needed to have fun. So her parents come up with the HOWGAL plan (how Opal will get a life) in order to complete the HOWGIH plan (how Opal will get into Harvard). Immediately, the parents start a crash course of what it hip, both for themselves and Opal. And they devote as much energy and resources to her becoming cool as they did to her education, including wardrobe, makeup, makeover, planning a party for Opal to "throw" while they are out. Opal gets in with the HBz, cool girls, but then isn't sure she wants to be. She finally gets the attention of a boy she has a crush on, only to discover maybe she doesn't want him. And she meets a guy that maybe she does like, then loses him when the truth of her HOWGAL plan comes out.
The story falls flat for me, mostly because the characters seem cartoonish and extreme. Opal has no close friends, literally, because she is too busy doing extra curricular things. The single focus (Harvard) that she and her parents have is kind of disturbing. I kept thinking that they all needed therapy. Her parents are frighteningly obsessive and kind of scary when it comes to the things they are willing to do for her to get into Harvard. Plan a party for Opal to throw while pretending to be out of town? Then crash it and take photos? While I know college admissions are competitive, especially to Ivy League schools, the source of their obsession is never clear. The family is Indian, but for the most part, they could have been any ethnicity at all; their Asian-ness has no impact at all on the story, although I got the impression that it is supposed to, based on the inclusion of a family gathering and a tiny side story for a cousin who dropped of out Princeton pre-med. The shallow girls are mere puddles, with no redeeming qualities. The not-shallow students are pretty undefined, even Opal's eventual love interest. Despite the fact that Opal is the narrator, she's pretty one dimensional, defined entirely by the Harvard obsession.
Style and content-wise, with all of the name dropping for products, bands, songs, TV shows, etc., Opal seemed more akin to a Gossip Girl or other similar YA book than to McCafferty's books. (Or so I assume; I haven't read a Gossip Girl book, only reviews of them.) I probably wouldn't have caught the alleged plagiarism, but for a few noticeable passages, all of which were mentioned in the various articles online. Sean, the love interest, seemed very much like McCafferty's Marcus, especially with the conversational constructs, the band, the t-shirts, etc. Is that plagiarism or copyright infringement? I don't know.
IMO, McCafferty's books Sloppy Firsts and Second Helpings are flat out better than Opal for a couple of reasons. The writing (for the most part ;) is better, the characters aren't caricatures, and Jessica Darling (main character) is the charming, self-aware, sympathetic heroine.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-04-27 02:43 pm (UTC)It matters to me to. The title spells out the plot just like the Hugh Grant film "The Englishman Who Went Up A Hill, But Came Down A Mountain". The title in the Opal book spells out the first, second, and third act for me.
Which is fine, because it saves me from having to read it ;-)
>> What I know about copyright law would fit on the head of a pin >>
There is a very fine line between 'homage,' 'fair use,' and out-right 'plagerism.' Ideas can't be trademarked, but execution of those ideas can be.
I'd imagine that she will either be dropped from her publisher, or have some sort of pretty harsh form of restitution. Publishers hate being embarrassed.