Fool's Gold: A solid piece from Newsweek about sports and politics. It's a timely piece because of the Olympics and the upcoming World Cup. What are your thoughts on the tone of this piece? What did you learn? Is there an MA or greater San Rafael angle for this story?
The $555,000 Student-Loan Burden: This article made me think -- WHAT?! It's a story becoming more and more common as the cost of college goes up and the amount of financial aid goes down. There is an element of misinformation on the part of the subject of the article, but as college bound students, this is a reality in the coming years, especially as an undergraduate education is just the beginning of your higher education. Is there an MA angle to this piece? What's the cost of an MA education? Tuition, endowment, grounds and maintenance, etc ....
Mixing not plagiarism: hhhhmmm. What do you think? A sticky issue in the publishing world right now. This has also happened in the news industry as recently as last week. Thoughts?
17 comments:
Fool's Gold:
I think that the writer of this article had a lot of good points regarding his main thesis "why the Olympics and other sports cause conflict". He was spot on especially about the issues caused by international soccer matches and the problems with the World Cup in South Africa. But even though he was factually accurate and making a valid point, his tone made me (THE READER) so irritated that I just wanted to argue with him. I'm fine with anyone who isn't a sports fan, I myself can't understand the attraction of many American sports, particularly, with the un-athleticem and steroids found in baseball. However, Hitchens, (the author) wrote his piece in a way that made him sound elitist, arrogant, and pompous. For he went as far as comparing sports fans, or anyone who has ever read the sports section to children. He asks of newspapers "that they keep [sports] out of the grown-up parts of the paper." And as a someone who has casually reviewed the sports section (and not "suddenly [leaped] to my feet, face contorted with delight or woe, yelling and gesticulating and looking as if I am fighting bees" as Hitchens lovingly describes the common sports fan) I was insulted. So instead of gaining reasonable perspective on the downside of international sports, I discovered that stuck-up people that talk about how much they hate sports piss me off. FAIL.
Mixing: This one is tough. Having been conditioned by MA that everything must be cited, I understand where the author's critics are coming from. On the other hand, I believe that mixed work is just as much the creator's own as anyone else's. The way sources are taken and mixed is a huge part of the product itself. Especially in music, mixing is common and the result is often very different from any of the original pieces. The line has to be drawn somewhere that allows for artists to use their inspiration, while allowing the original creators to receive credit. In the case of Hegemann, she stands pretty much on that line, as she neglected to give any credit to the original works. I think in an ideal situation she would be allowed to use "strobo" as she liked, as long as the end product was clearly different (and her source was mentioned).
Fool's Gold:
As an avid if not obsessive sports fan, I could not agree more with Riley's criticism of the author and the tone of this piece. I understand that some people may not be into sports, but to suggest that they are a disturbance and liable to create international violence is just ridiculous. I disagree with his characterization that sports are even meant to bring countries together. Honestly (and cynically), professional sports are primarily for the financial benefit of the players, staff, and media, and the entertainment of the general public. While sporting events can and do become emotionally charged, any reasonable minded person understands that "It's just a game" and not some twisted plot to stir up hatred. The author has completely ignored the many positive effects that sports have, such as national/local unity and community building (See New Orleans after the Super Bowl).
On the topic of MA, I think there is an opportunity to investigate the presence of an "everybody wins" mentality, as well as an op-ed piece on the community surrounding MA athletics and the usually impressive support that teams get from the school community.
"Mixing," Not Plagiarism:
I agree with what Andrew said and what Mary always says that you must cite any source of information or inspiration. Sara Houghteling does immense amounts of research and reading before writing her novels to be more knowledgeable about what she is writing about, but in the end all of the words are her own. Hegemann could certainly use any sources she wished in order to write her novel, but in the end the final product should have been entirely her own. If she felt the need to copy exactly from a source, she could have found a way to incorporate it creatively as long as she had adequate permission. MA students have a pretty good sense of this and any plagiarism stories I have heard have only been due to miscommunication or something of that sort. The publishing world might want to establish their own version of the AP Stylebook with rules as technology advances and materials become more accessible and plagiarism grows.
The $555,000 Student-Loan Burden:
The topic of the piece definitely has a lot of meat to it, but this article came off pretty dry. I think the author really needs to focus on the human interest aspect (not the actual dollar amounts or banking details) to make it interesting. Also, more examples (sources!) would have made it stronger.
As for MA, I think information of this sort could make an interesting features graphic. We could do a pie chart showing where the money from one year's tuition goes. Having a side portion showing where additional money related to school is spent (bus, lunch money, incidental account) would be necessarily because those amounts can really add up.
Author, 17, Says It’s ‘Mixing,’ Not Plagiarism:
Hegemann was definitely walking a fine line with her novel, but it appears to me that she crossed it. To pull of 'mixing,' the concept of combining elements needs to be the point of your creation. This is why music artists like Girl Talk and Super Mash Bros can pull it off, in my opinion. They call themselves mash-up artists; the whole point of their work is to make something new out of other people's old snippets - and this is always clear.
Why I do not support Hegemann's side is because she did not make it known to readers that she was 'mixing' writing of others with her own (at least this is how the NY Times presents it). If it was clear the book was trying to be edgy and new by combining prose from different sources, it would be another matter. Not pointing this out in the beginning and only responding when accused makes it seem like Hegemann was trying to get away with something without being caught - showing that she probably felt her book was morally wrong or inappropriate on some level as well.
The Leipzig Book Fair made a serious statement by voting her book as a finalist. I can understand this if they are trying to promote modernization and new techniques in writing, but I hope she does not win the prize. If she wants to be respected for 'mixing,' that has to be clear in the first place.
Marshall
Fools Gold:
The writer of the article highlights the sense of nationalism there is for every country when it comes to their sports teams. The stakes are so high, everyone wanting the pride of being the best, that the importance of sportsmanship is put aside. There are so many insane measures taken after international sporting events including referees of the World Cup going into protective custody for month, hiding from angered fans. Hitchens took a rather radical point of view to illuminate the terrible events that come with international sporting events, however this made his thesis effective. For a solution, it seems impossible that the culture of hard core sports fans can ever change, just go to a Raiders game to see the ample amount of crazy people. Change must start on the field with sportsmanship and fairness being present
Mixing:
I was mad! This girl seemed to create a completely unoriginal story using almost full pages of almost unchanged text and she is receiving fame?! At MA we have learned how to cite sources in our sleep and are threatened with disciplinary action if our work is closely related to another's. The author's story gave a bit of both sides of the conflict, however, it is obvious that this 17-year old is full of it. On my minicourse BAAM!, we saw an art piece compiled of sunset photos taken by other people. There was absolutely no citation and the artist did not bother to even get the names of each person to notify them their work was being taken. THAT IS ILLEGAL! The artist claims she was creating something new that was hers, but it was comprised of nothing that was hers. It's ridiculous that this artist isn't having legal action taken against her and I am happy to see this author having legal action taken against her because what she claims to have created is not really hers.
Alec
Mixing Not Plagairism
I agree with many of the other people commenting here that that the writer should have been more open with her sources. I do not believe that mixing styles is plagarism. I am an aspiring novelist and I read many books on how to write (and how to not) write novels. Many of those books said stealing styles was okay and a few even suggested it. They did say that plagaraising ourright is wrong. Copying one style could be considered plagarism but mixing styles should not be. When you mix the writing styles of something, you are creating one new style. It is like you are baking cookies. You get flour, eggs, vanilla and other ingredients to create something completely different. When you use someone's style, it is still your own story and even if you share the concept, it should not be considered plagarism.
My point is basically that when you mix styles together, they do not remain excatly the same, do they? In my opinion, they do not so she should not be considered a plagariser.
Fools Gold:
I think the actual writing of this piece was well done. I don't necessarily agree with what he said but the author organized his points very well with support and all of that. However the tone completely ruined it. He acted as if he was far better than everyone else which made me not want to hear what he had to say. This piece reflects the importance of HOW you say something, not just WHAT you say. I think if he had changed how he was writing then he would have gained much more support from readers instead of simply radical sports haters.
'Mixing' Not Plagiarism:
There are so many things wrong with this girl's novel and actions. At MA, when writing term or research papers, we are collecting information from other sources and mixing it together in our own words into a research paper. That is the only mixing that should be allowed. She changed a couple words but she kept the main ideas of all the passages she stole. I am confused as to how she can even think that she didn't plagiarize. Its unfair to the other author whose work was stolen I would be mad because she took his ideas and got much more credit and money than he did. What's unfortunate is that this whole plagiarism scandal seems to be making her more popular and her book more famous.
The $555,000 Student Loan Burden:
I was originally shocked when I read this article, as I had difficulty comprehending that great a debt. I later connected this crisis to the housing collapse, which was also caused by high interests rates and an ignorance of the fine print. It made me wonder: how are student loans affecting our economy? Even though colleges are private institutions, the debt that students own must somehow show up in our own crippled economy. I think that some legislation must be put in place to deal with this magnitude of debt.
Article about the costs of a higher education:
As a senior who is preparing to enter college, this article freaks me out Seriously. As a student in Marin Academy i receive 100% financial aid, so I really haven't had to worry about the cost of a private school education, but after hearing multiple stories about the financial difficulties of college students, I feel a bit unprepared. When i was younger, I imagined college as simply another phase of education, but the more i learn about how much it actually costs to attend, i realize that its actually the beginning of our financial lives. not only do we learn how to sustain ourselves and make practical financial decisions, but we also take out loans that can potentially affect us late into our lives. For me, this is a bit scary. From elelmentary school, my parents told me that i would be the first to atend college in m familiy and when I become a doctor (which is actually what I DONT want to do in life) i can use my money to support my family and their families back in yemen. However, with the knowledge provided from this article, it is plain to see that I am not going to graduate from college and begin raking in the bucks. I guess all I can do is wait and experience the financial aspect of college for myself.
Fool's Gold:
I like Andrew, am obsessed with sports, but I did think that the author had a point. Sports in their very core are games, in the same way that hopscotch and monopoly are games, but the thing that separates these are their popularity. Where i disagree with the author is his underlying insisting that sports is nothing but trouble. A friend of mine described sports as a method of releasing inherit aggressiveness and competition between human beings, and I couldn't agree more. Humans naturally claim territories and form groups, and sports allows a healthy release of this inherent quality. Another release is warfare, and of course the release of this through sports is much preferred to the release of it through violence.
Where the problem occurs is when this competition is between nations. when the community expands, the more intense the competition, thus the more drastic the two sides will go to gain victory. for example, competition between families will be light hearted and only slightly competitive. Think Family Feud where the other families laugh and clap when their opponents score. Now when cities battle i.e NFL, NBA, MLB etc., things get more intense, but fans can still remain civilized. of course the avid fan + coors light will smtimes yield some ugly results, but this is a rarity. Now when countries compete i.e. World Cup, countries will go to drastic measures to defend the honor of their respective lands. Personally I think that these competitions do more harm than good and in time are simply softcore warfare. the MA UNI rivalry grows more intense every year and often UNI things get out of hand. We could possibly explore this. Overall I learned that the World Cup should be banned and the 49ers are the 2011 Superbowl Champs. WHOOO!
Fool's Gold:
Despicable.
That is my reaction to the author of the Fool's Gold article. Not to his points, but to the author himself.
Then again, I'm trying my very best not to stoop to his level here. I simply find it both incredibly unprofessional and ineffective when someone is trying to make a point to a particular audience, but decides to do so by completely belittling that audience's viewpoint. By pretending to be unaware of what luge is, by equating sports fans with drunkards, and by equating world-wide sporting events with immediate violence, this author not only makes a mockery of the subject, he also does so with very little credibility/accuracy.
I'm not going to get into the details because I'm sick and I don't want to explode with anger. But what Riley and others have said before is exactly right: the author fails to make his point because it is impossible to see through his incredible elitism and "douchebaggery".
That is all.
Mixing:
I'm in the middle on this one. I don't think what the author did was right per se, but i don't think the book is an insult to literature that should be burned. Mixing different things to create something new is ever more prevalent now, and I think it's going to become a much bigger part of our culture in the years to come.
Mixing:
One of things that jumped out to me about this article was the headline, particularly the mention of her age. It's a significant factor here because it is clear that this issue is not one that will fade away, rather it will merely grow as our generation moves into the workforce. We have grown up in a world where the information we desire and the space we must fill are one mere copy-and-paste away. We "mash-up" other's music together and call it unique, we upload and share videos we do not own, and we have the world's largest database at our hands to inspire any work we do. In a way, the author of the book in question is right when she says that originality will no longer exist and authenticity will become the "standard of integrity". The concept of "intellectual property" no longer exists; what you put out on the internet will almost always expand beyond the bounds of your control. So until we stop downloading illegally, getting everything online for free, and roaming the internet without caution, concepts such as plagiarism might not just change, they might become extinct.
Mixing:
There is no doubt in my mind that what Ms. Hegemann did with her book is wrong. There is a clear distinction between a DJ mixing music and an author lifting entire passages and pages from another's work, at least in my mind. Ms. Hegemann seems to just be hiding behind the excuse that other types of artists do the same thing and get away with it. This is solely my opinion, but I believe that a book should be written solely from the author's hand--a novel is, after all, an extension of the author's thoughts. An author's job is supposed to compile something of their own making and design. A DJ's job, on the other hand, IS to mix and match music. Ms. Hegemann was not charged with creating a mixture of inspiring quotes and passages from other writers for her book, so it is not her place nor within her right to do so.
I also agree with the Deef Pirmasens, who says that it would be understandable to use a few choice phrases or quotes from others, but that "to take an entire page from an author, as Helene Hegemann admitted to doing, with only slight changes and without asking the author," would be "illegitimate." Ms. Hegemann should not rely on others' work to bolster her own.
Fool's Gold:
As an avid sports fan, excuse me for not partaking in Hitchens' bashing of the sports scene. Like so many other people who try to completely prove that their point is correct, Hitchens merely skims over the evidence that might damn his argument. To top it all off, as Riley so rightly said, he comes off as an "elitist." While he has some good points, allow me to counter his argument:
I'd like to draw attention to a moment that happens often in sports, yet Hitchens openly mocks--the last second, goal, basket, home run, or any other type of score--and its ability to draw people together. With 24 seconds left in the gold medal Canada-USA olympic hockey game, and the United States trailing by one, an American player by the name of Parise slapped in the puck to put the game into overtime. Watching on the TV, and upon hearing the announcer scream "Parise scores! He scores!" I leapt to my feet and danced in delight, exactly as Hitchens says that we idiots who pay attention to sports--and perhaps love them--do. At that moment, I'm sure the 27 other Americans who were watching the matchup did the exact same thing as I did. They could have been republicans, democrats, pacifists, belligerents, whatever--yet they all leapt in delight for the same cause. That, right there, is the power of sports that Hitchens overlooks--it's ability to bring people together, if only for a moment. In my opinion, very, very few things in this world can unite an entire nation, and the olympics seem to be one of them.
Lastly, I'd just like to say that Hitchens also fails to mention that MOST things in this world nowadays can incite anger and violence. Hitchens seems to have no quarrel over our political system, yet I see far angrier conversations at dinner tables over politics than I do over the Yankees and Red Sox. Sports may lead to violence and hate, but so do other things.
Post a Comment