Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



pepperlandgirl4 ([info]pepperlandgirl4) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2008-01-07 23:19:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:person: cassie edwards, plagiarism

First We Stole Their Land---Now Cassie Edwards Steals Their Prose
Or Raccoon Penis Quill Wank.
ETA: Part 4
Cassie Edwards lifted passages from 1930 Pulitzer Prize Winner Laughing Boy.


ETA: THE RETURN: Signet responds. Don't worry. It's not "really" plagiarism because it's not copyright infringement. Cassie Edwards responds in an AP Article. It can't be plagiarism. She didn't know it was wrong. Fortunately, as per her publisher, it wasn't wrong.

I wasn't sure if I should put this here or OTF_Wank, but I figure since the Anne Rice wank shows up here, I'd go with F_W. If it's wrong, my deepest apologies.

Earlier today, Smart Bitch Candy makes a rather serious accusation about popular romance novelist Cassie Edwards. If you don't know the name, she's the author of over 100 books, including such classics as Savage Winds. Candy gave her friend a book called Shadow Bear, and her friend immediately did what professors across the country do every day--notice a huge discrepancy in writing styles and suspect something strange is afoot at the Circle K.

Cassie Edwards is a plagiarist.



Here's a brief example of what they found:


"I read that ferrets stalk and kill prairie dogs during the night. Using their keen sense of smell and whiskers to guide them through pitch-black burrows, ferrets suffocate the sleeping prey, an impressive feat considering the two species are about the same weight," Shiona said, shivering at the thought, for to her one animal was as cute and precious as the next. It was a shame that any had to die to sustain the other. Shadow Bear p. 221


Compared to...

Ferrets stalk and kill prairie dogs during the night. Using their keen sense of smell and whiskers to guide them through pitch-black burrows, ferrets clamp a suffocation bite on their sleeping prey -- an impressive feat, considering that the two species are about the same weight."Toughing it Out in the Badlands," Defenders Magazine, Summer 2005.


But her fangrrrls aren't taking this sitting down!


This author has thousands of readers who are loyal fans.

You people are sick. Are your lives so pathetic that you have to single people out and attack them?

Do you even know any of these authors that you are always attacking?

Maybe you should get to know some of them before you go around bashing them.

You may think this is funny and makes you look good. It doesn’t! All it does is show what kind of evil person you are.

Instead of trashing people and their work promote a charity, or do something nice.

I’ve yet to meet anyone who has said anything nice about your website or the people on it.

This might be from the same person, though it's difficult to tell.

You people need to get lives! Shame on you for attacking authors the way you do.


The name of your website tells exactly what kind of people you are!

One day someone is going to sue you and when it happens a lot of people are going to be very happy!



People are shocked/angry/outraged at this discovery, but things don't get terribly wanky until the comments in post 4. Yes, there are four posts so far detailing the huge amount of plagiarism.

That's when Jenny Cruisie and her friends start accusing Candy and Sarah of using Cassie Edwards as a scapegoat. It begins in the 2nd post with this Here’s a question I’ve been meaning to ask for a long time: Did Cassie Edwards run over your dog? . Most people don't appreciate Crusie's tone--is that all she really has to say to such wide-scale plagiarism--and heats up from there. Crusie elaborates:


So when I saw another “Cassie Edwards, ohmygod” post, the fact that it was about plagiarism is not what annoyed me first, it was that it was another shot at Cassie Edwards, discovered because people were reading her to make fun of her again. She plagiarized, I hope she goes down for it. But she doesn’t deserve the constant humiliation this site heaps on her, nobody does.



It's okay to point out plagiarism, but don't humiliate the woman who stole from countless sources!

FTR, there are more posts praising Crusie at Smart Bitches than there are posts criticizing Edwards.
Wait! This is a witch hunt! Now I wonder if Edwards weighs as much as a duck?

I’m no fan of Cassie Edwards, or of plagiarism, but neither am I comfortable with the witch hunt tone of these postings. Is Candy disillusioned by Edwards, or by romance in general? She’s complained about the genre being too predictable and seemed to dislike JR Ward partly because her books are popular. Is this like high school, where everything commercial isn’t cool?
(ETA: I didn't mean to imply this particular quote came from Crusie. It came from "Jill Sorenson")

ETA: She's not above plagiarizing herself.

From Savage Obsession, 2006:
“It was the most attractive lodge in the village, a long narrow structure of handsomely fashioned bark. The ends were beautifully rounded and the roof gracefully arched. The snow-white birchbark sides were decorated with striking totemic designs in brilliant but harmonious colors.”

From Savage Torment, 2007:
“This lodge, the Chippewas’ council house, was a long, narrow structure, handsomely fashioned of bark and appearing to be sixty feet or more in length and about twenty feet wide. The ends were beautifully rounded and the roof gracefully arched. The snow-white birchbark sides were decorated with striking totemic designs in brilliant but harmonious colors. Slow spirals of smoke rose from four smoke-holes and an Indian stood guard on each side of its front door.”

I imagine this isn't going to go away for awhile. I, for one, eagerly await Cassie's response. Or the response from her publisher--they have been notified by Candy.


ETA: But wait! There's more!

ETA 2: As seen at SBTB. The guy she ripped off? One Charles Alexander Eastman. If you don't recognize the name, you can find out more here. Including the interesting fact that he helped to found the Boy Scouts of America in 1910.


(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]doyle
2008-01-12 03:20 am UTC (link)
I found a Cassie Edwards historical romance in my ebooks folder. I managed a whole page before spotting a description that seemed off:

Sasha's heart had gone out to the pup with the
short soft fur, bushy tail, and erect, pointed ears. Its color varied
between yellowish and reddish brown, with white underparts, feet, and
tail tip, and a marking on its head that set it apart from all the other
dogs in town a patch of white in the shape of a star.


And lo and behold, she lifted a description straight from Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Similar to the domestic dog in structure and habits, the dingo has short, soft fur, a bushy tail, and erect, pointed ears... Its colour varies between yellowish and reddish brown, often with white underparts, paws, and tail tip.

Almost every descriptive passage in the damn thing is from a book called "The Fatal Shore" by Robert Hughes. Like this paragraph:

The dragon of the outback, a carrion-eating lizard known as a goanna,
rushed up a tree at Sasha's right side and clung there staring at her as
she passed by, its throat puffed out in soundless alarm. Other animals
crept, slid, and waddled through the dry brush ahead. A silvery-coated
eastern gray kangaroo bounded away, emitting a faint, querulous sort of
bleat.


Three different sections from the Hughes book:

Even the dragon of the bush, a carrion-eating monitor lizard known as a goanna, would rush up a tree when approached and cling there, its throat puffed out in soundless alarm, until the intruder went away.

Many of them were camouflaged fossils, throwbacks that crept, slid, waddled or bounded through the dry brush.

The silvery-coated Eastern Gray kangaroo, Macropus giganteus, moved in flocks of dozens; "the noise they make," a colonial diarist was to note, "is a faint bleat, querulous, but not easy to describe."


(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]huehau
2008-01-12 04:41 am UTC (link)
Sasha has a dingo? I hope she keeps it away from the baby.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]puipui
2008-01-13 07:59 am UTC (link)
*snickers madly*

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Copyrighted works
[info]cill_ros
2008-01-12 05:29 am UTC (link)
But neither of those works are in the public domain. Hughes's book was published ten years ago, and Encyclopedia Britannica's articles are copyrighted.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Sorry, posted too soon
[info]cill_ros
2008-01-12 05:30 am UTC (link)
Which makes the case slightly different.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Re: Copyrighted works
[info]melyanna
2008-01-12 05:40 am UTC (link)
By my count, nine of her "sources" were copyrighted while only four were public domain.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: Copyrighted works
[info]cill_ros
2008-01-12 05:50 am UTC (link)
Thanks, I missed that.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]kuromitsu
2008-01-12 02:21 pm UTC (link)
I'm sorry to say but this is obviously paraphrasing, not plagiarism. For one, the tenses are obviously different. Two, the Encyclopaedia Britannica doesn't mention Sasha or star shaped patches at all. And in the second case, the word order is clearly original.

Liek, totally.

...and if this is really breach of copyright, you may want to mention it to the publisher (or on the SB blog).

(reposted 'cos I'm too sleepy to write)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]doyle
2008-01-12 02:30 pm UTC (link)
I put it on one of the comment threads, although now I've forgotten which one...
Anyway, more fun with plagiarism from the Robert Hughes book!

As she walked, the ground became mantled in a crackling skin of dry gum leaves and grasses. The fallen strips of eucalyptus bark were like a stretched drum, a delicate resonator that informed every animal of Sasha's approach. She moved stealthily onward. A wombat, a marsupial resembling a squat, blunt-skulled bear, peeked from a hole, then dove headfirst into it when Sasha came closer. (Ch 8)

And Hughes:
The bush, baked tawny and bronze by the summer heat, its ground surface mantled in a crackling skin of dry gum leaves, grasses and fallen strips of eucalyptus bark, was like a stretched drum, a delicate resonator that informed every animal of each approach.
Wombats--lumbering, eighty-pound marsupials resembling squat, blunt-skulled bears--dug their meandering catacombs beneath the soil.


Edwards:
"The Aborigines do not hesitate to burn off a few square miles of territory just to catch a dozen or so goannas and marsupial rats at the cost of destroying all slow-moving animals and trees of the forest within that area," he explained.

Hughes:
Bushfire is the natural enemy of property. But the black Australians had no property and did not hesitate to burn off a few square miles of territory just to catch a dozen goannas and marsupial rats, at the cost of destroying all slow-moving animals within that area.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]kuromitsu
2008-01-12 03:17 pm UTC (link)
.....*facepalm*

You know what pisses me off? That she's an acclaimed writer in her genre and, according to Wikipedia, "known for her meticulous research."

WELL DUH.

Even when once in high school I had only one day to write an assignment and ended up taking a book and, ahem, paraphrasing the content, I paid so much attention to write everything I read with my own words instead of just copying the book verbatim.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

She's *NEVER* been acclaimed
[info]chvickers
2008-01-12 06:08 pm UTC (link)
Never. She's been a laughing stock among readers (and a source of rage for the aboriginal writing community) for years. She's popular among a certain group of readers (mainly older conservatives), but so are a lot of hack writers in many genres.

Sorry, but comments like that really annoy me. A hack in science fiction or crime or mystery is never held up as a representative of a genre, but a hack in romance always is. I suppose it's to be expected in a genre specifically directed at women, whose interests are considered less valid than those of men and whose intellects are always suspected to be inferior. It's the mantra of the publishing world: never respect anything that wasn't written with men in mind.

And "known for her meticulous research"? That's right off the advertising copy on the back of her books.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: She's *NEVER* been acclaimed
[info]kuromitsu
2008-01-12 06:32 pm UTC (link)
Er, sorry? I'm not familiar with the genre at all, I was just going by what Wikipedia teold me.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: She's *NEVER* been acclaimed
[info]white_serpent
2008-01-12 07:40 pm UTC (link)
Yes, see... the problem with Wikipedia is its requirement for sources. If 50% of the people who had read a Cassie Edwards book posted in a blog and said, "This is utter tripe with no flow whatsoever," none of that would be considered valid to include in a wikipedia article because the source isn't reliable.

However, the publisher's website? The paid reviews in that little magazine on romance novels you see in the bookstore? (No, honestly, they never print negative reviews.) No problem!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: She's *NEVER* been acclaimed
[info]kuromitsu
2008-01-12 07:46 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, I remember reading the discussion on the CE wiki article, before it all magically vanished sometime today. They didn't accept the SB blog as a reliable source, never mind all the excerpts and the available sources.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

Re: She's *NEVER* been acclaimed
[info]frequentmouse
2008-01-12 08:41 pm UTC (link)
(Aeryn is threatening Jimmy Wales, not you).

The more I find out about Wikipedia- mostly by reading the administrator's noticeboards and requests for arbitration and the Wikien-l mailing list - the less I trust anything there. Reliable sources is a particularly deep and dark pit of spooge, and any article where there's the possibility of politcal or religious factionalism is going to be chaotic and unfactual.

And Wikiwank ain't got no edges.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]sudaki
2008-01-21 04:04 pm UTC (link)
Someone probably just copy-pasted that bit from Jack London's wiki page. It would be in the spirit of things!

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]napalmnacey
2008-01-12 06:48 pm UTC (link)
Many of them were camouflaged fossils, throwbacks that crept, slid, waddled or bounded through the dry brush

Totally off topic, but Fuck You, Hughes! They're the height of their evolution. If they weren't, they wouldn't have survived so well.

(I love goannas! And I'm not totally serious here LOL)

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]brown_betty
2008-01-15 08:35 pm UTC (link)
Throwbacks? Someone is srsly confused about how evolution works.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]napalmnacey
2008-01-16 07:38 am UTC (link)
Well, it's an old text. There used to be this way of thinking that anything that's not human isn't fully evolved. It's so funny reading old books about evolution.

(Reply to this)(Parent)


[info]carolinga
2008-01-13 02:18 pm UTC (link)
I don't know if you saw, but they reposted the comment at SB over at Dear Author--http://dearauthor.com/wordpress/2008/01/11/more-evidence-of-cassie-edwards-lifting/

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map