I was also intrigued by Meljean’s comments on the idea of ethics as “personal” (meaning I’ll probably do a whole post on that topic at some point) and on Shannon Stacey’s comment that authors may have felt that readers wanted to sit over their shoulders to observe or monitor process. I had wondered about that, actually, and I’m glad someone commented on that.

I wonder how much frustration comes from miscommunication and paradigm differences. For example, while authors might feel that readers shouldn’t be involved in discussing what plagiarism is in fiction, since so much of it seems to be caught/alleged/reported by readers, it seems to me — as a reader — that we’re already part of that equation. Different paradigms, different perceptions. And, on top of that, how do our individual interactions affect our general perceptions and expectations of different “groups” (authors, readers, bloggers).

Anyway, thanks again, everyone, for some good food for thought.

In the example of the reader who wrote me an extremely over-the-top, personal and very ugly note-that would be contact 13 from that same reader on this same subject in the last four months.

Good Lord. I’d think one would be enough. More than enough. Sorry to hear about this.

I didn't see it as shutting down discussion when someone dared to ask her about a passage in her book. I read it as a challenge by someone wondering about possible plagiarism. After I went to the original threads on the Brockmann board I was clearer on the questioner's motivations, but I still think that kind of question could have been asked and answered through a private email exchange. Readers popping up on author blogs asking for the provenance of particular sentences or paragraphs seems like a bad idea generally, but in that case it struck me as stemming from the heightened emotions about plagiarizing and I'm not surprised PBW read it as accusatory.

I have to confess that to this day I am amazed at the shit storm that one question started. Particularly since the question itself was as the result of someone else’s statement, as fact and in a public venue, that a passage in Evermore had to be lifted from a text book because the author “clearly hadn’t been alive” during the time the character is talking about.

What on earth???

This same person had said in a previous post on whether CE has committed plagiarism or not,

I find myself agreeng(sic) on the out of copyright not being unethical. She did not publish the entire protion(sic) as her own, she took segments and formulated a plot and charazcters(sic) of her ow(sic) around them.

My motivations, which are spelled clearly in my comment, were and are to educate fellow readers to the fact (which up to then I had considered blindingly obvious) that no, authors don't need to be there in order to paint an accurate and realistic picture of a particular time or event. That's what research is for indeed. And no, research does not equate cut and paste from your sources, with or without acknowledgment. And not just yes, but hell yes, writers do care about accuracy and research in their DETAILS and BACKGROUND.

That aside, I have to say that from the first read I felt the tone of PBW's post in the same vein as Janet does, and that I believe she closed comments not because of my question-’which she so graciously answered-’but because of SandyW's comment, which reverses the argument and exposes the bias in the use of the term “witch hunt.”

I think some of this is simply organic. Reading is a kind of intimacy, and can foster a personal connection in the reader’s mind. It can be a good thing, or a bad thing.

Romance by its very nature adds a click. The books are about relationships and again intimacy. Emotions and more emotions.

The writer isn’t the book, but writers and readers often can–and do–link them like Siamese twins.

It may be a matter of finding boundaries there, as Jane said, but everyone’s going to have their own personal sense of where their boundaries are.

There are writers I can’t read. I knew one who was renowned for her sensitive characters and heart-warming situations. In reality she was known as a staggeringly insensitive woman, hugely egotistical and cold. I saw her humiliate a reader more than once at events. I doubt those readers felt inclined to read her again. I know I didn’t.

But I haven’t been able to enjoy a Woody Allen movie–and he’s brilliant, imo–since he cheated on his wife with her daughter.

I guess you could say, in these cases, my personal boundaries were crossed.

In the example of the reader who wrote me an extremely over-the-top, personal and very ugly note–that would be contact 13 from that same reader on this same subject in the last four months. This I document and make sure my publisher also has documentation.

Let me tell you, that is PERSONALIZATION.

The reader who writes she hated the book, and I’m a crap writer and probably a lousy human being? That I ignore.

Put that on a public blog that I frequent? I’m probably going to address it.

This fear has been bolstered, as someone said above, by the initially dismissive and patronizing reaction by Signet in denying any wrongdoing. And then it was bolstered even more by one disingenuous response from Cassie Edwards herself denying the need to cite sources, and then by the self-pitying and irrational response alleged to be from her. It was necessary for SBTB to continue to press the issue, and for us, the people who read and comment on that blog and others, to sustain it, because no one in a position of authority or directly involved wanted to. There was little or no comment on this in the mainstream press. There continues to be very little to none. Paul Tolme, one of the plagiarized and infringed authors, treated it publicly with bemusement and basically as a joke. No other author plagiarized by Cassie Edwards that I know of has spoken up. Of course it helps her that she stole so much from dead people who can’t defend themselves.

So, faced with potential indifference from readers, and with real indifference from the rest of the world, many of us wax indignant perhaps more heartily than we would otherwise. We have severe doubts that Edwards’ readers will desert her. We also have severe doubts that her publishers will do much of anything. And we know that many if not most of the authors whom she plagiarized simply are not in a position to mount a lawsuit to punish her.

But it’s the likelihood that the readers won’t care that is particularly galling. Because it says something about romance readers that most of us do not want to hear. We want to promote the world of romance as more tasteful and intelligent than that. Yet if we are truly confident about the worth of romances and of genre fiction in general, we can admit that some of it is trash. And that some romance readers do not have refined, discriminating tastes. And that they do not care about the ethics of their favorite authors. And further, that some romance writers may not be moral or law-abiding people. In other words, that there is nothing special or different about romance as a genre that exempts it from normal moral standards, or that makes us, the readers and the writers, all best buddies with but one opinion on everything.

I'm saddened to hear the same tone in some of the posts here particularly by Jane and Janet. Because of DA, I've tried more books by more new authors than I ever would have picked up otherwise. Some I've loved, some I've hated, some have been OK but I still love the reviews, discussions, and information. I guess I'm just a DA fangirl.

Speaking for myself, I can tell you that I blog first because I want to, and second for other readers, not for or because of authors. So having authors (or other readers) dump on me or DA or critical attention to Romance wouldn’t scare me away from blogging. Some of the comments I’ve been privy to have been eye opening in a good way, actually. What’s been unexpectedly disorienting is the sense that I’ve gotten from some quarters (and I’m just saying this is what I’m taking away, not trying to make any accusations) is that crapping on bloggers and readers is more of a priority than talking about plagiarism. Which creates this sense in me that some authors don’t take writing or the genre seriously. So in turn I find myself wondering: if they don’t take these books seriously, if they don’t communicate respect for professional authorship or for the genre, why should I? And while I realize that I should be able to separate these two things, right now I can’t completely do that, can’t answer that question satisfactorily, and that’s a bummer for me, both as a reader and as a writer.

Ultimately, it will probably come down to remembering that the real value of this for me is being able to talk about books with other readers (including authors who are, in those conversations, readers) and going back to that place where I don’t think of author x as the one who said that what Cassie Edwards did was okay, or that authors who stand against plagiarism (which, you’d think, would be seen as standing up for authors in a big-picture sense) are attention-seeking divas, or that readers who keep talking about it are power-mad witch hunters, etc.

IMO, DA provides information. It might not be information that everyone wants to read, but then, that’s the beauty of the back button. Just click out of the website if you don’t want to know what’s been written or if something offends you. (Thankfully, I’m not one easily offended-’okay, except by the reader who sent me a note saying that since I wrote erotica, she was expecting someone beautiful. WTF?? But I’m not bitter.)

At any rate, I said all this to say I’ve never understood people who come to sites like DA and SBTB, get offended by something they read, spew their disgust…and keep returning to post even more comments about how disgusted they are. Again, the back button is a wonderful tool!

Sigh, why did I follow that link to Eloisa James site.

Yeah, me too.

I don’t know how to organize all of my responses to Janet’s post and the links to other sites.

Margaret Atwood’s defense of “Atonement” made me buy “No Time for Romance” and it sits somewhere in the TBR pile. I will never be able to read “Atonement” just for pleasure because I don’t think that the acknowledgement was sufficient.

The day that Amy’s research uncovered the passages copied from “Laughing Boy”, I wondered how many other blogs would inspire a reader to do that much work. Plagiarism hurts. There have been so many publishing scandals that it is easy to look at my bookshelves with a jaundiced eye. But the discussions here, at SBTB, at AAR and at TeachMeTonight have been wide ranging. I’ve appreciated all of the input from authors, editors, readers, lawyers, academics, … These discussions revive/reinforce my love of books.

Just over a year ago, my favourite SFF blog (Emerald City) quit publishing with the saddest comment – “Some people have been saying nice things … Other people have been saying how it won’t be missed”. So, it is not only the romance community where there is a backlash against a blog that reviews its genre. I’m saddened to hear the same tone in some of the posts here particularly by Jane and Janet. Because of DA, I’ve tried more books by more new authors than I ever would have picked up otherwise. Some I’ve loved, some I’ve hated, some have been OK but I still love the reviews, discussions, and information. I guess I’m just a DA fangirl.

Sadly, there was sniping galore that I was referring to in that later assertion, lol.

And just as sadly… sigh… yeah, I can imagine. I’ve seen comments over this that have totally blown my mind.

And yeah, there were mindbogling comments of all sorts.

I guess, Shiloh, this is why I don't understand either PBW's post or the high fives she got over it over there or some of the defenses she's received here for it.

I’m not attempting to defend her, Janet. I don’t really agree with her view on things, but I can’t say I can’t see where she’s coming from, considering my initial reaction. I’m seeing that post from different viewpoints~I disagree with her perception, but defending it in my mind is sort of like saying she was in the wrong and I can’t see this as a matter of right and wrong, but as a matter of perception.

I’m just trying to explain my perception of her perception…. try saying that five times fast.

I really don’t think PBW needs anybody to defend her even if they felt compelled. I suspect she could handle it just fine on her own, if she felt the need.

So when I see authors and readers going after each other for daring to talk about this issue, it's mind bending to me, because it seems so against the logic of what every writer claims to value -’ protection of their own work as creative and original and THEIRS.

Again… on perception…lol… I didn’t read her post as a

Don’t You Dare Talk About Plagiarism

but more along the lines of…

… Just Because I’m Not Joining in Doesn’t Mean I Approve of the Plagiarism

What disturbs me far more than PBW’s witch hunt post was the many, many, … sigh… many comments I was made aware that because this is romance, why does it matter?

Or that fact that we should ignore it because of a person’s age. I’ve said once, I’ll say again, anybody that implies that a 71 year woman can’t handle herself in a debate, argument, scandal, needs to talk to my grandmother. I don’t scare easy. But she gets mad, I want to run for cover. The idea that a 71 year woman is too helpless to handle ‘mean girl bloggers’ is mind-boggling.

And the general implication of some comments about how nobody should pay attention to what a bunch of ‘mean girl bloggers’ say.

Then the comments from writers, of all people, that it wasn’t really plagiarism, just laziness, and it’s not a big deal.

Those implications bother me far more than anything else I’ve read on this matter.

But as others have said I think some are just using this as a smokescreen to take swipes at some bloggers. Too bad they don’t have the balls to say yup plagerism is wrong but I still hate SBTB/DA. But as others have said some people don’t have any personal integrity.

Back to McEwan. I think it's easier to be confident and at ease when you have Thomas Pynchon, Margaret Atwood, Kazuo Ishiguro etc. defending you and your publishing house counterattacking the charges with guns blazing. I definitely think that part of the difference in the two cases is that in his case, a literary giant was borrowing from a romance novelist's memoir. But there's still disagreement over whether it was plagiarism or not, even about how much he acknowledged her. For me, the acknowledgement (right under the one to the Imperial War Museum, apparently) would not have sufficiently communicated the extent to which Briony's thoughts and experiences were based on Lucilla's (unless his use of the term “indebted” was meant ironically).

I think Andrews deserved more, and that what McEwan did in appropriating some of her words was not as intellectually honest as I would expect of him. Not because Andrews was still alive, or because hers was a memoir, but because, as I’ve said before, I believe that if something is as vital and important as McEwan claims it was to his story, it’s worth acknowledging, and in this case, I think it deserved direct and specific acknowledgment. But then, one of the reasons I think these conversations are so important, and the McEwan comparison so valuable, is that there are many steps, IMO, on the road to out and out plagiarism, and we can talk about different levels of intellectual honesty because IMO there are a few. Especially given the fact that the purpose of fiction is opposite that of academic research, in that we reference in academia to show we didn’t make something up (and to provide a chronicle and a trail for others to follow), whereas in fiction the assumption is that stuff is made up. But the inversion here actually lands us in a similar place, IMO: that if we cite in academia to show we didn’t make something up, some acknowledgment in fiction serves the same purpose, even though the overall intent of the projects may be opposed.

But I think you’re right about the confidence Mcewan showed, and I think it’s a powerful example of what solidarity among authors — professional solidarity at least — can accomplish. Lit fic authors have their petty differences and hatreds, and sometimes they let those loose in public. But there does seem to be a core of self-confidence within the literary culture that generates and cultivates its own sort of authority. Which goes back to the comments about how Romance, as a cultural outsider, of sorts, tends to go into circle the wagons mode whenever certain issues arise. And I wonder — what’s it going to take here. Is external respect what you get when you show self-confidence, or is that confidence bestowed in the wake of respect?

I don’t mean that to be a rhetorical question, at all, because lit fic isn’t the perfectly loved baby in all circles. Look how often it gets slammed for being pretentious drivel in certain genre fiction circles. And I think many lit fic authors struggle with a sense of cultural irrelevance, as well. And yet the self-confidence remains, or at least the sense of cultural authority you see in McEwan’s comments and in some of those defenses you refer to. I’m not sure the personalization in Romance is ever going to go completely away, especially with the advent of the online community and the fact that readers and authors are interacting outside the pages of books, and we’re not just doing it in the traditional fan/author relationship. But I do hope that we can move away from the excessive personalization that seems to take center stage and even subvert issue-oriented discussions. How that’s going to happen, though, I have no idea. But then, I’m feeling particularly cynical these days.

Neither the DA or the SB bloggers did anything over the line, IMO. They handled it all with professionalism~and actually, they handled it with more professionalism than some of the professional authors.

I guess, Shiloh, this is why I don’t understand either PBW’s post or the high fives she got over it over there or some of the defenses she’s received here for it. Well, as for some of those high fives, I do understand those, because some folks are, IMO, overtly using the Edwards situation (and in a strange way, exploiting her) to exercise an existing campaign against some bloggers. But, as a friend of mine would say, that’s as transparent as a plate glass window on a clear and sunny day. But beyond that take this:

Imagine, losing your writing career because you wouldn’t pick up a torch and set another helpless writer on fire in front of a screaming mob. Not that something like that could ever happen or even be suggested in today’s enlightened, fair-minded and intelligent publishing industry. . . . Thank heavens we no longer live in the era of witch hunts, of the women or writer variety.

Now, it may be that my own view is being colored, as Jane said, because PBW is “well known for not liking blogger reviewers.” And it may also be because when I think of what Arthur Miller was standing up for, and what he represented in terms of artistic integrity, the metaphor doesn’t hold for me. Let alone the Crucible reference. And the tone of the post came across to me as derisive, especially given the fact that the tone of the discussion here and at the SBs was hardly, IMO, hysterical. In fact, the most extreme comments I saw came from the folks defending Edwards. And it also didn’t help that PBW had no apparent interest in engaging in public discussion despite the fact that she made her post — again, her only statement in the aftermath of the Edwards revelations — very public, so there was no chance at arriving at any kind of understanding like the one that happened here. I guess my bottom line here would be that those authors who had a negative reaction to Jane’s post (and whatever comments and posts I have made) are seeing my negative reaction to PBW’s. And at least Jane and I stuck around afterwards, which I would hope reflects a basic level of respect we have for other people, author or reader, and for civil and sincere discussion. Beyond that, I’m willing to let my views on PBW’s post stand, and anyone is obviously free to disagree, as several have.

And while I very much appreciate that you and Meljean have acknowledged the comment I made about Jane and I apologizing, I meant that statement more broadly, in the sense that there just seems to have been so many really extreme insults to readers and reader bloggers coming from some authors, an absolute trashing all couched in accusations of “mean girls.” If the irony of that didn’t kill me, I suppose the lingering disgust won’t, either.

It’s very strange, actually, because I have never put authors on a pedestal. I am equally uncomfortable with comments about how author x is the bestest ever as I am with comments about how author x is an attention seeking prima donna. And god knows I don’t need an author’s pat on the back to feel fully accomplished in my own life. But I find myself disappointed by so much of what has occurred around Savage Gate. By author comments like this (when Alice at Heart is such a wonderful book, IMO) and comments like some of these. And I say this as someone — to make this personal — who had an online dispute with Nora Roberts over a year ago that made me feel like it would be a cold day in hell before I conversed with her again, let alone read one of her books. So imagine my surprise that I continue to do both. I only offer this as a way of saying that IMO Roberts is completely justified in both what she’s said in the aftermath of Edwards Gate and that it’s disgusting to me that she is being dismissed as an attention grabbing diva for taking more shit over having been plagiarized. Why is it that authors like Eloisa James have no problem publicly declaring their love for Jennifer Crusie on her blog, but aren’t rushing to share a similar sentiment for Nora Roberts or Julie Leto or Leslie Kelly or every other author who HAS stood up for the principles of ethical conduct in Romance writing? What message is that sending to those authors, or to readers, for that matter, who DO listen intently to what authors say and consider them authority figures? I think we can see it on the message board to which I linked.

Now, do you think Kensington worried at all about the intellectual honesty of any future Dailey books when they signed her to a major contract? I ask this sincerely, because while I think the reader’s contract with a book is basically moderated by the publisher, I am not so convinced that publishers are going to protect the interests of readers and writers in this regard, especially if the countervailing consideration is lots of cash.

So when I see authors and readers going after each other for daring to talk about this issue, it’s mind bending to me, because it seems so against the logic of what every writer claims to value — protection of their own work as creative and original and THEIRS. And if talking about something that affects me both as a reader and as a writer in my own stead makes me presumptuous, so be it — I’m okay with that.

But as I don’t need to tell you especially, Janet, the lit fic author’s relationship to readers is miles away from that of romance authors. The personalization of the author-reader bond is really singular, I think, as is its on-line manifestation. I found Jane’s comment about liking or disliking authors really interesting. I can’t think of a genre in which I would even think about what a reviewer’s personal feelings were toward the author of the piece under review, unless there was a clear conflict of interest. But in romanceland it seems that the emotional pleasure we get from reading is extrapolated to be seen as the appropriate attitude for all interaction. And the the negative side is that negative emotions are just as legitimate to express. Not just negative opinions, but negative emotions. That was what I found troubling about some of the comment threads during the CE mess: some commenters (not the bloggers) seemed to think that it was open season to say anything in the service of wit and snark.

I can only imagine the kind of comments that you here at DA, let alone SBTB, received. I don’t have the internal fortitude to do what you do, but thanks for doing it.

I really enjoy the reviews and the discussions here, and I find the tone refreshingly matter-of-fact. I certainly hope you all (the Janes) have an agenda and continue to pursue it, because that’s part of what gives this site its coherence even when it ranges across so many topics.

Interestingly, just before Savagegate occurred I had finished reading a historical novel that had numerous books listed at the back as references. Just goes to show romance books can easily acknowledge other writers' influences without footnotes

This says it all for me.

Today, I received another that crosses every possible line in a personal attack. Vicious, almost violent and very ugly. Way, way beyond ‘mean girl’.

Oddly enough both these letters dealt with the same character.

You’ll have to take my word as I won’t quote any part of either of these on a blog.

Believe me, the bloggers at DA and SB do not attack the author. I know what an attack is. They review and report, and back up their opinions. Do they occasionally rant. Sure, we all do.

I can only think a writer who’s really offended by what these bloggers post hasn’t been in the business long enough to be contacted and attacked–as a writer and a human being–by a real mean girl.

Interestingly, just before Savagegate occurred I had finished reading a historical novel that had numerous books listed at the back as references. Just goes to show romance books can easily acknowledge other writers’ influences without footnotes.