Hey Guys,
I enjoyed both of these readings because they seemed to be looking beyond the current hysteria concerning internet plagiarism. In Porter and DeVoss’s Computers and Composition 23 they talk about the idea of writing and ownership. On page 200 they say: “the purpose of writing in not to reward the author, or for the author to gain prestige” but they do say: “the ultimate aim of writing lies in its ethical effects: to improve society, inform individuals, expand knowledge, assist communities, and so on.”
In the next paragraph they say: “Whenever you write, you borrow ideas, phrases, images, sounds, details from others – and then you weave those pieces into a new cloth…” I find this argument about intertextuality to be very important because I use the ideas of so many people – from so many sources whenever I write anything. Sometimes it’s hard to acknowledge all of the different sources that we draw upon when we write (or when we speak), but we know that everything that we say isn’t wholly original. In this same paragraph they speak about this nature of intertextuality regarding some of our nations most important culture bearers. They say: “some of the most revered writers and speakers of American Culture – Thomas Jefferson, Mark Twain, Martin Luther King – could from a narrow perspective, be accused of plagiarism. But we see them, rather, as effective writers – who remix cultural tracks to create significant new compilations.”
This is not to say that we shouldn’t be concerned about the new nature of plagiarism and the Internet. In Howard’s article, Understanding “Internet Plagiarism”, she talks about the British “dodgy dossier”. This was the intelligence paper produced by the British government concerning Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. The paper had in fact been plagiarist from online academic sources. That this information was used later by Colin Powell in his speech before the U.N. Security I found to be very troubling. I think that there is an important lesson in this “dodgy dossier” affair. I think that it’s important to cite the sources of information that we use not for the reward of a particular author, but for the benefit of the reader as Porter and DeVoss state, “for its ethical effects”.
Steven
Steven,
When you said “Sometimes it’s hard to acknowledge all of the different sources that we draw upon when we write (or when we speak), but we know that everything that we say isn’t wholly original” — I totally agree. I just commented on Lucinda’s post and said exactly that.
What’s funny is that someone outside reading out posts might think one of us stole that idea from the other. But honestly, it is common knowledge for us.
~Meg
Meg,
That is funny. I didn’t even have time to read your comment to Lucinda’s post.
Steven