Smart Bitches Trashy Books | All of the romance, none of the bullshit.

~I never did understand the logic in the phrase bite me.  Shouldn’t it be something like, “Go bite yourself” or “May a rabid bat bite you”?  ~

My genteel southern grandma, far too proper to call someone an SOB, would sweetly drawl, “I hope your mama comes out from under the porch and bites you on the leg.” 

So maybe that’s where “bite me” originated from.

Though Talpianna’s reason made me LOL

Diane

Teddy, you win so hard. :D

A friend of mine commented tonight (male)

“How many non fiction writers of wildlife or native american history are going to EVER pick up a romance novel in their life and read it? ”

Maybe more than he’d think but really, even if they do, what are the chances they’d pick up the ones that plagiarised their work?

Really Candy and Sarah have done the literary world a big favor.. puts authors on alert.

I only read a few of the side-by-side comparisons.  Even I, under-educated and not near as articulate as you bitches, could see the blatant similarities.

This was not a witch-hunt.  Those are for unsubstantiated accusal(you know, like the real witch hunts that got ladies burned at the stake). 

Nora, you are terrific.  I know you don’t need anyone to defend you, but I think Samantha’s comments were way out of line.

I was a very lucky bitch once and got to have lunch with Nora (at HER table).  She was absolutely wonderful.  Not that that has any bearing on this, I just like to mention it.

Sam

Shame.  Check.

You’re all just jealous.  Check.

I’m never reading Nora Roberts Author X again.  Check.

You’re evil people who just have a hate on for poor Cassie.  Check.

And you kick kittens.  Check.

And you’re mean.  Check.

DOUBLEPLUSUNGOOD, PEOPLE!  DOUBLEPLUS!!!  DOESN’T THAT MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU?!  I’M WHINING HERE!

I think the coffee I was drinking hit the monitor via the nasal passage at Nora’s unreasoned comment. Comeback city! Way to go!

As for reasoned and thoughtful posts, I’ve read at least 6 of hers concerning the Cassie Edwards fiasco, so she gets to have at least one knee-jerk comment in resposnse to the hysterical finger pointing, and, dare I say, overwrought emotional accusations of Samantha. At least in my book.

People, people (by which I mean fangirls of Cassie) - why can’t you just settle your feathers and take a long hard sober look at the facts of the matter, instead of getting ruffled and throwing out the personal attacks on the poor lil whistle-blowing Bitches?

Gosh, I must just be confused about the whole thing. The fact that this insgnificant little blog (ahem) has made several notable newspages, as well as made the romance industry itself start issueing statements - well. It means nothing? Gimme a break.

If there’s smoke, surely there must be some fire? Or is the just the smouldering of fangirl fury?

Note to Samantha - WAKE UP!

God, Nora, that made me laugh so hard—especially because you are usually so diplomatic. But you know, the troll who reads anything but erotica, or anything that could be construed as erotica might get a bit too excited by the very suggestion of some girl-on-girl “bite me” action here at Ye Olde House o’ Bitches and keel over from an aneurism or something. Just saying…

(I thank God this is Smart Bitches and not Excruciatingly Polite Backbiters.com!)

Here’s a wearable statement on the situation:  Savage Plagiarism

Thank you so much for bringing Cassie Edwards’ plagiarism to light.  As a youth librarian in a small public library I’m constantly reminding students to put things into their own words and to cite their sources.  Just because one CAN cut and paste doesn’t mean one SHOULD. How very disheartening to learn that someone who makes a living with words and should damn well know better has been playing fast and loose with others’ works. 

Your research inspired me to run to the stacks on my break today and I’ve got two more notches to add to Cassie Edwards’ bedpost of shame.  15 minutes with RACING MOON (2003, ISBN 0451208412, Signet) and Google brought the following to light:

Pretty clear case of plagiarism #1, p. 100-101
“The stalks with the longest joints are selected and taken home,” Star Woman said, cutting and laying them aside on dry land.  “They will be kept damp until splitting time.  For splitting, a round stalk is notched across one end with a sharp knife, then twisted with a wringing motion of both hands.  The strips are split and split again until each one is about half an inch wide.  The smooth outside layer is then peeled with the teeth from the pithy white inner layer.  These peeled splits are placed in the dew for two weeks to bleach out the natural green color.”

Apparent Source Material…Chitimacha Basketry!
http://www.chitimachacrafts.com/basketry.htm#_edn1
“Stalks with the longest joints are selected and taken home, where they are kept damp until splitting time.  For splitting, a round stalk is notched across one end with a sharp knife, then twisted with a wringing motion of both hands. The strips are split and split again until each one is about half an inch wide. The smooth outside layer is then peeled with the teeth from the pithy, white inner layer. These peeled splits are placed in the dew for two weeks to bleach out the natural green color of the cane. ” 
This article, btw, cites the original source as:
Interview with Ada V. Thomas. Carpenter, Gwen. “Two Hands Hold the Secret of Chitimacha Basketry.” Louisiana Life Nov./Dec. 1984. 92-93.

Pretty clear case of plagiarism #2, still RACING MOON p. 239-240
“A little boy named U’stapu was lying ina bunk close to the shore,” Changing Bird said, his eyes roving slowly from child to child.  “His people had come to Louisiana land from the prairies and wanted to cross the river, but the wind was too high.  As he lay there, U’stapu discovered a boy fanning himself with a fan of turkey feathers.”

He held his fan out before them.  “A fan such as mine,” he said nodding.

Then he resumed fanning and talking.  “This boy fanning himself with a fan of turkey feathers was the boy that makes the west wind,” he said.  “Then U’stapu said to his people, ‘I can break the arm of the boy that makes the west wind so that the wind will stop.’  Al laughed at him, but he took up a shell, threw it at the boy who was making the wind, and broke his left arm.”

He smiled from child to child, then said, “Therefore, my children, when the west wind is high, this boy who controls the west wind is using his good arm, and if it is gentle, he is using his broken arm.  Before the boy’s arm was broken, the west wind used to be very bad, because the west wind maker could change hands, but since then it has been much gentler.  It is possible that this boy made the other winds, also.”

Apparent source material: “Indian Tribes of the Lower Mississippi Valley and Adjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico” by John R. Swanton aka Bulletin 43 of the Smithsonian Institution Bulletin of American Ethnology printed in 1911.  http://tinyurl.com/ypghx8
The following story is told of the west wind:

A little boy named U’stapu was lying in a bunk close to the shore of a lake.  His people had come there from the prairies in order to cross, but the wind was too high.  As he lay there, U’stapu discovered a boy fanning with a fan of turkey feathers.  This was the boy that makes the west wind.  Then U’stapu said to his people: “I can break the arm of the boy that makes the west wind.”  All laughed at him, but he took up a shell, threw it at the boy who was making the wind, and broke his left arm.  Therefore, when the west wind was high, the Indians used to say this boy was using his good arm, and if it was gentle, they said he was using his broken arm.  Before that time the west wind used to be very bad, because the wind maker could change hands, but since then it has been much gentler.  It is possible that this boy made the other winds also.

Pretty clear case of plagiarism #3 p. 324-325 of STORM RIDER (2002, ISBN 0786252197, Thorndike Press)  This was also published in paperback by Signet in 2002, ISBN-13: 9780451207555.
Their costumes consisted of deer skins, shirts, and leggings painted a bright yellow.  Their faces were painted with yellow stripes.  A dressed fox skin was spread out on each of their shoulders, the heads of which lay on their breasts.  The tails hung down their backs, and the whole skin was fringed with colored porcupine quills and bells.  Polished buttons were placed in the eyeholes.

The dancers each wore a headdress of fox teeth, bored and strung, and stretched across the middle of the head from ear to ear.  A lock of their hair was tied in front, projecting out several inches.  The rest was combed straight down behind, and decorated with four eagle feathers.

Their lances were wrapped with fox skins cut in strips, and the tails of that animal were sewn onto the handle every twelve inches or so.

Some of the warriors also would carry their bows and quivers at their sides during the performance.

Talking Rain saw several women go stand behind the drummers.  They began singing along with the drumming, and whistling as the warriors lined up for their special dance in front of the fire.

They began at a swift pace, moving in a circle that resembled the coiling of a snake.

After winding up in this form, they all commenced jumping up and down, striking one foot after the other on the ground as they kept exact time with the music.  Suddenly a flourish on the drums and a shout from the dancers concluded that round.  Their places in a straight line were resumed and they stopped.  A warrior stepped forward and pretended that he was counting coup with his lance, then spoke for a while of his exploits as a warrior.

This was followed by more dancing, which was again followed by another warrior speaking.  All who wished to spoke, the drums denoting by taps the value and number of coups counted by each.

Apparent source material, p. 561 of the Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology to the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution no.46 1928-1929 published in 1933.  Available on the web at http://tinyurl.com/ywq7p8
Their costume consists of a deer or antelope skin, shirt, and leggings painted a bright yellow, and their faces painted with yellow stripes, besides other forms.  A dressed fox skin being slit in the middle, the head of the man is thrust through, the skin spread out on his shoulders, the head of which lies on his breast, and the tail hangs down his back, the whole skin being fringed round with colored garnishing of porcupine quills, bells, and polished buttons placed in the eyeholes of the animal in the skin.

A headdress of fox’s teeth, bored and strung, is stretched across the middle of the head from ear to ear, a lock of their hair is tied in front, which projects out several inches, and the rest combed straight down behind, to which at about the middle is attached four war eagle feathers.  Their lances are wrapped with fox skins cut in strips, and the tails of that animal sewed on the handle every 12 inches or so.  Some also carry their bows and quivers of arrows at their side during the performance.

After, having been warned of the meeting, and preparing in the above manner, they assemble at the sound of several drums and whistles at the spot appointed, being generally near the center of the camp.  Here they form in line during the drumming and singing, which is kept up by five or six men and women who are invited for the purpose (this music) taking their stand to one side, the women as usual behind the drums, who sing, but take no part in the dance.

When ready they all start off at a swift pace and describe the movement of the coiling of a snake, and when wound up in this form, all commence jumping up and down, striking one foot immediately after the other on the ground, keeping exact time, and all singing with the music for the space of about a minute, when a general flourish on the drums and a shout or yell from the dancers concludes that round, and their places in line are resumed.

Some one of them now steps forward and counts his coups in the same manner as pointed out in the Brave Dance, which is succeeded by another movement in dancing, which is again followed by another speaking, and so on until all who wished have spoken, the drum denoting by taps the value and number of coups thus counted by each.

Off to write my letter to Signet,

Cindy

http://www.beyondutopia.net/writing-survival-guide/plagiarism/

http://www.ou.edu/provost/pronew/content/Nine-Things-Plagiarism.pdf

Here are two links explaining plagiarism.  Samantha, if you’d like to pass them on, you may.  The first time I learned about pagiarism was in middle school.  That education continued through high school and college.  For a person who claims on her website that she dreamt of being an English teacher and is a “prolific writer” (as you stated in your post) who has sold 10 million copies of her books, I would like to think plagiarism is something she would know about.  After all, it would be unfair of me to reprint her work, change the characters names, and slap my own name on the cover, right?

Ignorance is a poor excuse for what appears to have occurred.  I can respect someone who says “yes I did it, it was wrong, and I apologize to my readers and most especially to the writers from whom I borrowed words.”  I can respect someone who continues her craft after she has been shamed and does it in her own word.  What I can’t respect is someone who flat denies wrongdoing when the evidence is, frankly, quite startling and blatant.

I also respect an author who speaks out for what she believes in despite being called jealous, snobbish, and witchy.  Petty name calling is unneccessary.

I am glad that Nora Roberts brought whatever added attention to this issue that she did, and that she has no compunction in speaking out about plagiarism.  It’s kind of sad, though, that such a thing requires or is perceived to require any special level of courage.  That there is fear of backlash in speaking out about an issue that affects every author is the thing that reflects badly on the Romance community, IMO, NOT anything Roberts said. 

That said, I don’t think any author is a saint.  When I saw one of my favorite authors hammer a reader on a popular Romance message board, it was a good reminder to me that people are people no matter what they do, and no author is inherently superior of inferior to any reader.  Consequently, I don’t see Roberts as a savior or Edwards as a destroyer of Romance.  One of the problems we seem to keep running up against is this tendency to focus on personality rather than what happened in a certain author’s books.  And I see that happening on both sides of the Edwards/Roberts divide. 

Not that I don’t think we can take the *position* of authors into account when discussing their words or actions, but IMO we’re still very much in the realm of persona, not of the person, who exists beyond and outside public comments and appearances. 

One thing I periodically wonder, though, is whether you don’t see more moderate dissent in threads like this one because more moderate dissenters are afraid to post for fear that what happened to Samantha here will happen to them.  NOT that I endorse what Samantha said or how she said it.  I do, though, think I understand why it’s those more extreme voices that make it through, because IMO this place CAN feel intimidating, especially to someone who isn’t used to posting here or who doesn’t want to deal with even the possibility of being hammered. 

I’ve made comments I thought were pretty neutral over the years and have gotten a veritable shit storm in response, and I consider myself somewhat reasonable and fairly self-confident when it comes to standing up for my beliefs. So I lurked for a good while before I started posting here.  IMO this board feels very different from the inside than the outside, and while I don’t think that’s good or bad, sometimes I do wish more new voices felt comfortable being heard here, especially those of rational dissent.  I’m not sure there’s a good way to have that happen, though, without altering the open and free nature of the discussion that does happen.

It sort of makes the point that Edwards’ readers didn’t pick up on this stuff because they didn’t have the intellectual chops.

I *really* disagree with this, especially as someone who has had an almost uncanny knack for identifying plagiarism in my university students.  I don’t read fiction looking for lifted passages, nor do I think most readers do.  As a Native American Studies scholar, I think I might very well have picked up on the tone shift in the Edwards books, but I don’t know at all if I would have a) known to Google the phrases and b) thought enough about it to even pursue some kind of checking.  And obviously all the reviewers who gave Edwards’s books D’s and F’s didn’t check, either, and I wouldn’t characterize them as CE fans.

Also, I consider myself to be reasonably intelligent, and I have appallingly bad taste in lots of stuff, from food (yum Cheetos) to tv (every bad reality television show known to humankind) to movies (“Bio Dome” for god’s sake!).  Anyway, I don’t think there’s a positive correlation between intelligence and taste, and if I were a Cassie Edwards fan I’d be scared, frankly, to wander into this thread.

rebyj,

I don’t know, I’m a scholar and while I read a lot of fiction relating to my field when I was younger, I do so less and less the more educated I am on the subject I study.  Minor mistakes that could have been easily avoided by research bother me, but truth be told, I’ve discovered that even obscure inaccuracy in fiction within my field will completely take me out of the story.

So as a consequence I do avoid fiction within my field unless I’m reading it specificially for scholarly reasons, and in that case I’m reading it completely differently.  If I’m picking up a popular movie or novel to use in teaching it usually has to have some obvious unique point of view that will help students understand the subject better. 

Cassie Edwards books don’t scream that to me, and were I a Native American scholar she’d be the last thing I’d want to pick up for pleasure reading.  Add to that that it is not sufficiently unique within the subject area, and it’s unlikely I’d have picked up one of her novels to keep up on what popular material I could use in a class.

This blog has already been established as one where there are all sorts of opinions about a subject.  That being said, I have yet to see invective being hurled at people who avoid the words “shame”, “viscious” [sic] and “witch”.  Of course, I have yet to see a well-reasoned argument in favour of copy/paste/publish as your own.

Blakely said: Ignorance is a poor excuse for what appears to have occurred.  I can respect someone who says “yes I did it, it was wrong, and I apologize to my readers and most especially to the writers from whom I borrowed words.” I can respect someone who continues her craft after she has been shamed and does it in her own word.  What I can’t respect is someone who flat denies wrongdoing when the evidence is, frankly, quite startling and blatant.

I just wanted to clarify my above post, because this seems like it might be directed at me (if it’s not, well, it’s probably good for me to clarify as well).

It might not have come across that way, but I agree with Blakely. I think it is important that Edwards admit wrongdoing. I mostly don’t think that Edwards should be dropped by her publisher or have her romance writing career come to an end over this. And honestly, from the glee (yes, I’ll say it: glee) that people do seem to derive from this topic, I think that some people wouldn’t mind seeing that happen. I’m not referring to any one person in specific here - really not, the person who first discovered the plagiarism is a close friend of mine and I completely support the idea of bringing it to light.

But maybe I grew up in a different school system than you, Blakely, because in the California public schools where I got my grammar-middle-high school education, only the honors classes got taught about plagiarism (and I took both honors and non-honors classes; I know). I think that people assumed that non-honors kids wouldn’t care enough to plagiarize. As a writing tutor at a very selective college, I am often put in a position to explain plagiarism to my freshman tutees. Some of them have never been taught when they need to cite passages and when they are too closely aping another work.

I hate to say it, because it doesn’t say a lot for our world, but there is the possibility that a person like Ms. Edwards might be honestly ignorant. And that isn’t a “good excuse,” in the sense that she still needs to apologize. But I think it is important to talk about, if it is the case, because it’s a symptom of a serious problem.

Maybe I’m letting my outside experiences slip into this, maybe my experiences in school and in tutoring aren’t applicable… I’m honestly not sure anymore. Maybe I just have had bad luck meeting the few people who honestly never learned, or maybe I’m a pushover and have been accepting lame excuses. I don’t know, I really don’t.

“This continued talk of crediting sources is getting to me.  A number of people on both sides of the argument seem to be implying that if Cassie Edwards had just credited her sources everything would be OK.”

I don’t think it would be okay - but it would be a straw in the wind. In the Dan Brown case, and I think with Ian McEwan’s Atonement (certainly the copy I’ve got) the authors credited the source that they were later accused of plagiarising.
Which would suggest, to me, that at the time they felt they’d used the source material properly. Whether they had was then a matter of some debate.

If Ms Edwards had attributed the sources, and then said she hadn’t known it was wrong to quote word-for-word, I’d have still thought it was plagiarism, but I’d have considered the possibility that she genuinely didn’t realise what she was doing.

“I just wanted to clarify my above post, because this seems like it might be directed at me (if it’s not, well, it’s probably good for me to clarify as well).”

Madeline—I assure you that it was not directed at you or anyone else really.  Just my opinion on the whole mess.  And to be honest, I was in honors classes from 8th grade on, so you may be correct.  However, I do find it hard to believe that someone so involved in writing doesn’t know about plagiarism.  Perhaps it’s because English, English Lit, and writing have played such a huge role in my life…but, it’s just hard for me to swallow.  That said, I wouldn’t know Cassie Edwards if she walked up and stuck a feather in my ponytail so I have no idea what kind of education she received.

Totally off topic, but on a side note ~ this is the first time I’ve been to this site and it’s good to see a group of people with the same sense of humor as me.  I think I shall have to visit more often!!

I tried to voice my opinion, lost my temper and said some things I shouldn’t have.  For that I apologize.

I still stand on my belief that this could have been handle differently.

Instead of plastering the accusations all over the internet and involving the newspapers I feel that it would have been more professional to have approached the publishers with the issue first.

They wouldn’t have felt pressured, might have looked into the accusations immediately and took care of the matter.

I just hate seeing anyone trashed in the public eye. 

Imagine how it would feel to not have any idea something was going on and your telephone suddenly rings and it’s the associated press.

What if Ms. Edwards is forced to retire from writing because of this? 

I’m not saying anything else.  It’s just very sad to see someone’s life destroyed like this.

Samantha

I know that Candy and Sarah did contact the publishers.  Penguin’s first response was that Edwards did nothing wrong.  It wasn’t until after significant pressure from its own authors and readers that it changed its mind and said it would investigate.

Ms. Edwards may retire after this but not because of the public outing of her actions but rather because she might not know how to write any other way than through copying. 

While it might be painful to watch someone that you care about be accused of wrongdoing, it doesn’t make the accusers in the wrong because if Ms. Edwards hadn’t copied, if she had taken the time to internalize the information and then incorporate that into her fiction, there would be nothing to expose. 

Maybe I am too cynical, but I don’t think that Ms. Edwards will be adversely harmed by this.  She’s been financially rewarded in the past for her copying and I suspect she’ll be financially rewarded in the future.

What is important is that understanding of the issue of plagiarism is being spread and this is certainly a victory for the genre.

Samantha, you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, and to express it.

I would point out that the SBs didn’t plaster all over the internet—they posted their findings on THEIR blog. It’s what they do. And they contacted the publishers involved.

They didn’t involve the newspapers, the press involved itself. It’s what it does.

I can pretty well guarantee that by the time the AP got wind and contacted Ms. Edwards, her publisher had already done so. If they hadn’t, I agree, it would have been just awful to be caught unaware that way.

Samantha - This isn’t a career ending incident. There are any number of writers who have been accused of fraud, James Frey, Janet Dailey - both of them are still writing and bringing home the bacon.

This is a wake-up call to the author and the rest of the industry. This isn’t an isolated incident though I wish it was. CE couldn’t be the only writer in the world borrowing from non-fiction texts, she was the one who was ‘caught’.

If nothing else, she will learn the error of her ways and she and her publisher will work to correct it. If there are others out there doing the same thing, hopefully they will straighten up before they are ‘found out’.

Academics, most who labor in total obscurity with little pay, deserve the credit if their work is used word for word.

Samantha,

I think the point would be that Cassie Edwards will probably be forced to “retire from writing” because she won’t be able to copy anyone else’s work again.

And, if she wouldn’t have copied her stories from others the AP wouldn’t have called her.  For cripes sake, she’s over 70 years old and still doesn’t know that she’s supposed to write HER OWN story?...freakin’ unbelievable.

Wake up and smell the crap—the crap that Cassie Edwards copied directly into her stories. 

I’m a total fangirl of Nora Roberts, but if she had done something like this (forgive me Nora for the example as I know you never would) I would not be posting the crap you have on this site lambasting Nora, Sarah and Candy just because they commented/revealed the plagirism.

I’ve never read a Cassie Edwards book or I would be sending them back to the publisher and demanding my money back.

Diane

Samantha,

Bravo for having the courage to admit you posted in anger and to apologize for it.

With that said, I still disagree with you. Fraud of all kinds flourishes in silence. The only way to stop it is exposing it to the light of public opinion.

The person who started all this was Cassie Edwards the very first time she copied entire passages from other text into the novels she sold to her publishers as her own work.

Should her career end?

I’m a vindictive person myself, and believe that someone who’s defrauded both her readers and her publishers for years (and this can apply to Janet Dailey just as well), should no longer be published. Run out of town in a rail? A bit drastic, yes. No longer published? Hell, indeed.

And, lets face it: if Ms Edwards has sold the millions of books she claims, she’s made millions of dollars off other people’s words over the years—she can damn well live off that money.

I agree with Sam, this could’ve been handled differently.

Not only do I think it couldn’t have been handled differently, I think it shouldn’t have been handled differently.

As a non-fiction writer, I do feel that many of Ms. Edwards’s defenders are downplaying this specifically because she stole from non-fiction. There are no words in this language to explain how enraged I am by that.

She stole. It is wrong. It needs to be brought into the light. The Bitches were more than polite in just presenting the facts.

Samantha, Tammy: imagine somebody stole your pet. Now imagine that as you were putting up flyers and calling the police and getting your friends to search, someone came up to you and accused you of being too pushy/bitchy about it and ordering you to “handle it differently”. How would you feel?

Ya know; I think that Cassie Edwards is a reasonably intelligent, fully functioning human being.  Therefore, I think that she was fully in the know when she copied and pasted.  For those of you who think that there’s a reasonable doubt that she didn’t know… it was HER RESPONSIBILITY TO FIND OUT. 

To say anything else is to say that Edwards is on the mental level of a four year old and couldn’t possibly understand why copying Mary Sue’s homework is wrong. 

Make up your minds.  Either she’s a savant with a fondness for the word “savage” or she’s fully cognizant of what she does and chose to pass off chunks of someone else’s work as her own.

I don’t think that there’s anything remotely sad about watching the downfall of someone who makes their living leeching off of other peoples’ work.  The destruction of Ms. Edwards’ career, if it comes to that, is fully the fault of Ms. Edwards. 

Unless you think that either Candy or Sarah (or both) were over at her house, holding the books open for her to copy.

Goodness. I teach sixth-graders, and those 11-year-olds know that you don’t, just DON’T, copy word for word and pass it off as your own. Sheesh.

As to the idea that “it should have been handled differently.” I would suggest that if the allegations (and associated evidence) had first appeared on network news or in the NY Times, no one would bat an eyelash. The information coming from a blog is what’s got people’s knickers in a twist. Honestly, can you see the 60 Minutes crew playing “nice” with this evidence? (Though it would be interesting to see the Bitches camped out on the Edwards doorstep with microphones and camera crew to get a statement)

I think this blog has been remarkably restrained in covering the story.

I am not trying to be snarky here (despite my user name), but I have a question for those who think it “should have been handled differently.”

How?

Look, even if Candy and Sarah had quietly contacted Signet and the RWA or whoever, it’s highly likely those entities would have had to make a public statement sooner or later. The papers would have gotten involved eventually. The only difference is that this blog would not have been directly involved.

There is no way that this could have been kept entirely under wraps.

Nor should it have been. For all that I’m a giant fan of privacy, when someone commits a wrongdoing, especially one that involves work available to the public, then the public has a right to know.

I don’t think it should have been handled differently. Contacting the person first is what you do if they stole your fanfic or if they’re in your Creative Writing Class. When it’s published material, you contact the proper people first, which means the publisher.
The media picked up the story on their own.
As for what this will do to Cassie Edwards’s career, think about this. She has managed to publish books that constantly get bad reviews in a subgenre that needs to go away. I consider Indian romances the bastard child of the genre. They are stereotypical and offensive. It’s time to phase them out in favor of something else. How about expanding the definition of historicals? Readers have been asking for years to include the 20th century in historicals. If readers are asking for it, there must be a market for it.

Contacting the person first is what you do if they stole your fanfic or if they’re in your Creative Writing Class.

I caught a plagiarizer this past semester, and not only did I not contact her first, I went straight to the department with the information. Then I contacted her.

OMG I must be EVIL!!!

My cynical mind:
Is it absolutely certain Ms. Edwards plagiarized non-fiction only?

I am a freelance copyeditor (I do not work on fiction) and have come across plagiarism a couple of times in books I was copyediting. It’s not hard to figure out—as previous people have said, the sudden and complete change of tone should have alerted SOMEONE. As a copyeditor, I get a feel for when an author is cheating. In the cases I discovered, I flagged it for the editor and author to address; I forget if I tried to rephrase some of the text.

While the fault clearly lies with Edwards, part of me wonders where others’ responsibility lies. The genre fiction market is notorious among freelancers for having the lowest rates in copyediting and proofreading; people who choose to freelance for those titles generally do it because they are fans of the genres. I have no idea how many titles her in-house editor is juggling, or if her in-house editor even reads her ms now that she’s an established author. Part of me wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t hand in her ms and have it go straight to press, then a quick proofread, and out the door.

This strikes me as complete and utter sloppiness and acceptance of minimal standards—perhaps because it’s “only” genre fiction, just mindless romance novels for the lonesome and horny? Frankly, I’m disgusted and appalled by the whole thing. Miss Snark once said, “A novel is not a product. It is art.” It’s a pity that Edwards and her publishers do not seem to ever have thought of that.

Contacting the person first is what you do if they stole your fanfic or if they’re in your Creative Writing Class.

That’s lovely for high school.

In the adult world of online fiction, the FIRST thing a plagiarized writer is expected to do is immediately make a public report so that other writers can make sure their work hasn’t been stolen as well. You do this BEFORE you contact the writer or any groups or archives the work’s been submitted to, because if you don’t Little Miss Plagiarist will sure as hell remove her work so you can’t prove she really is a plagiarist - only to put it up six months later under another name when the kerfuffle’s died down.

And that’s just online fiction. In the commercial world, both the victim of plagiarism and any third parties have not just the duty but the responsibility to make sure that allegations are fully and completely reported, and not just to a publisher who could easily sweep it under the carpet.

I am so tired of young people thinking the world is run as it is among high school girl-cliques. The Bitches did nothing wrong.

Her career should absolutely end, but at this point she’s made enough money to end it anyway.

Frankly, the lynch mob attacking SBTB while insisting SBTB is the lynch mob is pissing me off.

This is an IMPORTANT ISSUE and a TERRIBLE ACT to readers and writers of romance.  Plagiarism is getting more common in fiction.  A site like this one is PRECISELY the right source of change.

And if Signet was dismissive when politely queried, what makes the Pollyanna twerpwads of the world think they EVER would have come clean and done the right thing without the shouts from the internet that SHOVED this story onto front pages and into wide release?

Important change does not happen because a few quiet souls clear their throats over their glass of lemonade.  Important change happens because somebody is willing to be called a bitch, but is smart enough to know it’s worth it. 

There are no family crests, battle shields, or flags bearing a weasel, fingers steepled politely, and the legend “FREEDOM, AT SOME POINT, WOULD BE LOVELY, IF IT ISN’T TOO MUCH TROUBLE.” 

Discoveries of plagiarism in the romance community should have powerful, loud, and uncompromising voices drawing attention to them.

Thank you, SBTB.  And enough with the witch crap.  We DO curse, you know.  (I blogged about that—really annoyed me.  My Blog).

I’m mostly just following this here and at Dear Author. Are there any other sites that I should be looking at?

-becca

I’ve had my fanfic plagerized before. And I made sure I had my facts straight before I contacted the person. I asked around first, showed it to people who knew my story, asked their opinion. One person contacted the other writer before I did. I was nice to the person, even offered to help her with her story if she needed it. She took the story down.
But fanfic is a lot different from a published novel. In fanfic you have no legal recourse if your stuff is stolen. You just complain loud enough that somebody listens and hope the situation is taken care of.
In academia, you complain to the proper people, the professor, the dean, head of the department, etc. Every professor I know has always stressed the importance of not plagerising and how to do proper citation. As a history major I was required to take a research methods class where I learned to analyze and interpret source material. I had to write a 15 to 20 page research paper using a set number of primary sources and a very limited number of secondary sources. I worked my ass off on that think and was on the verge of a nervous breakdown by the time I finished. But I got an A on that paper. I made sure I had my citations correct. I made sure that anything not quoted was my own words.
I don’t think I should expect less from a published novelist then a professor expected of me as a student.

That there are these assertions that the SBs should have handled this privately suggests to me that this is EXACTLY the kind of issue that would have been swept under the rug unless they had made it public.

They’re readers; they owe loyalty first to themselves, and in this case they also expressed loyalty to the principles of intellectual honesty and community awareness of an issue of importance to readers AND authors AND publishers.

IMO Signet’s initial response was a blow-off, and a bad one at that.  Would they have revised their statement had the press not started picking this up and readers writing letters?  I don’t think so, precisely because it is so unpleasant, both for fans of Cassie Edwards and fans of the genre more generally (let alone the publishing dollars at stake).

I understand being uncomfortable with some of the comments aimed at Edwards, because I’ve winced at a few myself.  But Candy and Sarah haven’t done that; even when they’ve “savaged” Edwards’s books, it’s been about the books, even if that kind of snark *feels* mean to some readers. 

There’s a certain kind of snark that comes from feeling insulted, whether it’s by a Romance novel, the discovery of MULTIPLE unattributed duplication and close paraphrasing of external sources, or the initial response of a publisher.  And I think that’s a lot of what’s going on here, just as I think there’s a lot of counterweight that comes from what tthomas(?) called the ‘nobody’s perfect’ theory (I’ve been calling it the ‘margin of error’ phenomenon, but it’s the same thing).  Sure nobody’s perfect, and ultimately Signet is going to be the arbiter of what will happen to Edwards’s books.  The public will make its own judgment about whether to support an author like Edwards with our money, as well we should.  Because readers owe any particular book no more loyalty than we owe our ethical principles, whatever they may be.

Does this whole situation make me feel uncomfortable?  Of course.  But I’m grateful that someone was willing to take it public, because if it weren’t made public, I don’t think ONE THING would have happened, and Edwards would still be writing books the way she always has, and her publishers would be raking in the money, and readers would not know what they were reading, and scholars in other fields—dead or alive—would have their own original, creative work used in ways that would be wholly inappropriate and possibly career ending in their own fields.  That’s just not right, and IMO it’s hardly the greater good just to spare some public embarrassment to Edwards. 

Speaking of which, if Edwards really thought what she did was okay, there is a HUGE problem with editors, publishers, and writing/reading communities in general.  If she did think it was okay, it wasn’t because she’s 71 or whatever and a doddering old lady who doesn’t deserve this.  None of those scholars whose work was used the way it was deserve it, that’s for sure.  And if Edwards did know what she was doing wasn’t right, then she shouldn’t have done it.  I won’t speculate on whether or not she did know it wasn’t right, because it doesn’t much matter to me.  I can feel sympathy for the unwanted public attention she’s now experiencing without feeling like what she did was right or should be brushed under the carpet without apology or alteration.  And I most definitely think Signet should be deeply embarrassed for that initial public response.

I don’t wish any personal harm to Edwards, even though I expect her publishers to take full responsibility for the books they have and are publishing, even if that means reprinting every single one of her books without the lifted material. That will be my focus as a reader, since keeping the pressure on publishers is the only thing, IMO, that will ensure that they take the time to vet manuscripts properly and ensure that their authors know the rules.  Edwards is responsible for what she writes and the publisher is responsible for what it sells, and both now have a baseline duty to conform their conduct to a higher ethical standard, IMO.

I don’t think I should expect less from a published novelist then a professor expected of me as a student.

EXACTLY!!!!

As for consulting the writer in question first, IMO that’s risky, and can create a situation where the person who approaches the author can find themselves the victim of an offensive public attack even worse than what happened to the SBs who have been carrying on their investigation publicly. 

More importantly, though, it is not, nor should it be, the reader’s responsibility to vet Romance novels and inform the author of anything they find that’s not honestly used.  It’s not the reader’s responsibility to “advise” the author privately (and in fact, I think that’s presumptuous of any reader to do in that kind of situation).  Someone, or a number of someones, fell down on the job here, and unfortunately, readers ended up doing the work the author, editor, and publisher should or could have done much, much earlier.

One thing I wish to point out (as many others already have) is that Nora Roberts has behaved with class and restraint.  Her opinion has been sought since she is considered a major author in the romance field.  For this she has been insulted.  This is probably just a small percentage of what she dealt with during the JD fiasco.  I imagine this has had to dredge up many bad memories and flashbacks.  For that I am very sorry. 

Also I commend Sarah and Candy for behaving with class and handling the firestorm during their busy lives.

Part of what is keeping this alive is the comments from supposedly rational people that CE did nothing wrong.  Also in one authors list a member recommended CE sue SBTB for slander (I guess Jane’s blog about libel vs slander didn’t do the trick).  No I don’t think people should be clammoring for blood but I do think if people would simply acknowledge that plagerism is wrong some of the furor would die down.  Also if there was less of killing the messenger and blaming the vitims that would help too.  I too am sick of the “mean girls”, “bullies” and other charges leveled.

There are no family crests, battle shields, or flags bearing a weasel, fingers steepled politely, and the legend “FREEDOM, AT SOME POINT, WOULD BE LOVELY, IF IT ISN’T TOO MUCH TROUBLE.”

This should be a t-shirt.  Brava!

I guess I’m naïve.  I would think that anyone who is a reasoning adult knows that stealing is wrong.  If you copy someone’s words, verbatim, into your work (using his/her voice, no less!), without citation or even acknowledgement, that’s stealing. Period.  End of story.  No excuses, no rationalization.  It’s wrong.  It doesn’t matter if it’s non-fiction and you’re using it in a fictional account.  It doesn’t matter if they will ever see it.  It doesn’t matter if you did it years ago and nobody noticed until now.  It doesn’t even matter if it is an actionable offense under the law.  It is still wrong.

Therefore, attacking this website, Candy and Sarah, the people that post here, and/or Nora Roberts for pointing out what happened and that, yes, it’s wrong, is pointless and silly.  I understand that these detractors, be they fan-girls or (my pet theory) close relatives, may be angry because someone that they care about is upset at the public humiliation.  If it were my grandmother or spouse, I’d probably want to man the gates and pour boiling oil on the siege machines, too.  (Which is why I think they are relatives.  Frankly, if I found out my favorite author did this and the evidence was so damning, I’d be enraged—at the author.)  But lobbing ad hominem attacks doesn’t change the truth.  What she did was wrong.  Opposite of right.  To the right of naughty.  Wrong.  And if she suffers a little public humiliation from what she did, she can comfort herself with the knowledge that many people have very short memories and Britney Spears (or some other celebrity) is sure to do something stupid in public soon, making her yesterday’s news.  She can then go on, churning out racist drivel for whomever it is that is buying her books, secure in the knowledge that it has all blown over until the lawsuits from the copyright infringement begin.

~Part of me wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t hand in her ms and have it go straight to press, then a quick proofread, and out the door~

This is just not how it works. A ms (mine included) is read by the editor, line editing by same, then is copy edited by a copy editor. It’s proofed by the author in galleys, and by at least one outside proof reader.

Despite this, as we all know, mistakes get through. Often mistakes that weren’t in the ms, or corrected in proofing by happen in the typesetting.

Shit happens.

As I said before, I suspect that—given the long-term career here, that both editors and copy editors simply took this as authorial style.

Despite what many may feel about the quality of Ms. Edwards books, there are many, many readers who enjoy them. That doesn’t make them wrong. It just means they have different tastes in reading. No one should have to defend what they enjoy reading.

The issue is, and remains, plagiarism. Not quality as some may judge it.

re: quality of work vs. plagiarism

I agree 110%. I feel the same outrage over the Marion Jones fiasco that I feel over this. Cheating is cheating is cheating is cheating. With apologies to Gertrude Stein.

As for handling it differently, as in contacting the allegeded plagiarist first? That is exactly what I did (through my agent to hers) in the Dailey matter.

See where that got me.

someone, many posts ago, raised a question that is getting lost amid all the outrage: what would make things right? what solution do we, as romance readers, really want?

it seems to me that, *at minimum* all suspect books should be pulled from the shelves and reviewed. What then? will we accept a blanket statement saying “I did wrong, I won’t do it again” and go on? Is it really appropriate to not want Edwards to ever publish again, even in books where there is no wrong-doing? Should suspect books be re-written and re-published?

After the outrage has died down, what do we want to have happened?

Becca said: After the outrage has died down, what do we want to have happened?

Well, since she could face charges of copyright infringement, her lawyers may be telling her to wait and see if any of those whose works were illegally copied start lawyering up. But from a PR and an ethics standpoint, she can’t afford to sit on her hands, at least not in my opinion.

She’s made enough money from writing over the years that she should bite the bullet and admit her mistakes, and then she should offer to meet with those writers and come up with a reasonable settlement. She should return her most recent advance to her publisher before they get around to asking for it back. And finally, she should make a public statement of apology to her readers, her publisher, and to the writers whose work she infringed. No “I have an extremely rare mental disorder which gives me a photographic memory of others’ exact sentences and makes me think they were mine” excuses, either.

That’d be the grown-up solution, IMO, but what do I know?

Nora - You Rock My Socks.

That is all.

E. Ann Bardawill: Try the McGregor series, some of Nora’s earliest work, especially Rebellion. She also has some great ones set in Ireland. I especially like the trilogy that begins with Jewels of the Sun and the longer novel Three Fates. I’m so jealous you get to read these for the first time!

Goddess help me, I can’t belive I’m doing this…

Nora I disagree a little about the reader thing.  Yes, the issue here is plagiarism.  But the lifting of passages and attribution of them as dialogue to her characters was part of what made the books SO INCREDIBLY BAD.  And my feeling is that better readers would have outed all of this a long time ago.

Case in point… some smart bitches forced themselves to read notoriously poor quality books and look what happened?  It is, of course, my opinion that they are awful… but it is a widely shared one. 

So yes, her readers are blameless, you are right.  I just can’t help but feel that she got away with this for as long as she did because her readers have lower standards.  Doesn’t make them bad people and yes—let the lynch mob assemble, I’m ready for my punishment.

It also, in light of the recent stuff, makes me wonder if she just got caught up in NOT GETTING CAUGHT.  I mean, she got away with it once… had a deadline… got away with it again… that was easy… hey, I keep getting away with it… it must not count.

Bad logic, bad behavior, but maybe??  And maybe in that sense having a readership that will accept terrible stereotypes and incredibly stiff dialogue full of info-dumping contributed to the problem?

Just thinking out loud.  I’m curtseying, if it helps.  I always genuflect when I read you posts.  (It’s a bit scary how close to the truth that is…)

<

I’m not saying anything else. It’s just very sad to see someone’s life destroyed like this.>

>

Sure, it sucks for Ms. Edwards that she’s been so publicly found out.  It’s got to feel humiliating.  It’s embarrassing for her, for her family, for her publishers and agents, I’m sure.  But on the other hand—why is that the fault of ANYBODY other than Ms. Edwards?  Do I, your average reader, want to see Ms. Edwards’ life “destroyed” by this?  Of course not!  But if she DOES stop writing as a result of this, that’s not going to be SB Candy or SB Sarah or Nora’s fault.  It’s Cassie Edwards’ fault.  We all make choices…and we all have to live with the consequences of those choices.  Cassie Edwards’ made a choice when she plagiarized material—REPEATEDLY—from all those other sources.  That was HER choice.  Unfortunately, that may mean she has to deal with the consequences of that choice, whatever those consequences may be.

This isn’t a case of Cassie Edwards unjustly up before a firing squad. This is a case of Cassie Edwards shooting her own self in the foot.  It sucks, but it’s nobody’s doing but her own.

I’m a newbie to this site, but here it goes.  CE had to know or at least have qualms about what she was doing.  This is not the first time (or last) that plariarism has hit the romance writing community. I know of at least one case that was hushed up. 

I pity CE and hope that this situation can be resolved quickly.  It makes me sad that she didn’t have enough confidence or belief in her writing to let it stand on its own.  I’m sad for all the talented writers who had to wait to be published or haven’t been published because Signet decided to go with CE’s books.  I’m sad for all the readers who bought her books—only to be cheated.

The whole situation makes me sad.  I think I’ll pick up one of NR’s books. :)