Blog 4

Plagiarism has always a topic of confusion for me and I know most other students feel the same way. On the surface, it's so simple: credit given where credit is due. Obviously. But, then there is accidental plagiarism and the issue of common knowledge among the general public and intended audiences and it has me worried that my blog for my bibliography class will be pulled because a sequence of words ended up being too similar to a song that I didn't know existed by an artist I've never heard of before. Or worse: Metallica. When I've written papers in the past, frantically citing in fear of being expelled I've always felt that I flooded the paper with them. Many times, upon completing the paper I wasn't sure if I'd incorporated any independent thought at all. And I don't feel much better after reading the cases in the Sampsel. I suppose anybody can say it was an honest mistake and be lying about it, but the thought of having funds held because of one is terrifying to me.

In the Sands article, she talked about two things that had particular impact on me: the first being about double standards of plagiarism and the second about cultural differences. I find it especially interesting that I know of Led Zeppelin, John Lennon, Elvis Presley, and Randy Rhoads being accused of plagiarism but I had no idea that powerful figures such as Joe Biden and Rand Paul were. Why is there more attention given to those in the former rather than the latter? Since I just mentioned music, I think it's worth noting that using another's work in one's own was not always considered wrong. Composers quote each other all the time and back in earlier times might have inserted another composer's work into theirs for various reasons. That was standard practice at the time, and it wasn't different in academia. It's sort of akin to the issue of sampling in hip-hop. Then, there is the issue of cultural differences where what would be considered plagiarism in the West would be considered praise in another culture. It's very difficult to find where one should draw the line in many cases.

Onto the Goldsmith interview.

I'm not quite sure where I stand with Goldsmith's views. I thought immediately of Marcel Duchamp when I started reading the interview and then saw he mentioned him, so I felt reassured. I feel the same way about Duchamp in that I don't really know how to feel about Duchamp. Both of them say and do similar things with which I agree and they deal with expression in choice. My choices in music and fashion and literature say something about me much like a short story I write would. As Goldsmith says "There's so much information out there already," which is almost painfully true. It's hard to come up with independent ideas that others haven't already had. But, I'm not entirely convinced in the second half of Goldsmith's thought: "...that really one need not create any more." I think it's worth trying, because any new information is valid and important: it's just becoming increasingly difficult to come by.