plagiarism vs. homage

[sanchopanza]

I've been wondering just how thin the line between plagiarism and homage is. I'm in the middle of writing a story that is not so much personal and private as a private joke - some of the references many people will not understand. Anyway so I'm writing the story and I've realised just how many times I've quoted Shakespeare or Spenser or some obscure sonnet. Does anybody have any qualms about overly quoting other authors? (I never mention who I quote by the way)

 

[Angeline]

This came up in a thread on the poetry board--I'll try to find it for you. For me the decision to cite depends on whether I'm directly quoting as opposed to loosely paraphrasing or doing a wordplay on a quote. Look at TS Eliot's "Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock," with all its unattributed references to "Hamlet." There are loads of examples in literature across genres, particularly pertaining to Shakespeare.

Of course if you do a wordplay with something very well known (e.g., alas poor Joey Buttafoucco I knew him--ok I'd *never* say that again, but you get the idea), it seems silly to reference. A full, direct quote though, even a well known one should be cited, imo.

 

[sanchopanza]

I tend to only quote from obscurity or simply lesser known quotes, examples:


Come sleep, o sleep, the certain knot of peace.
My thoughts in you, though yours elsewhere do rest.
Upon the altar of her beauty, I sacrifice my tears, my sighs, my heart.

 

[Angeline]

If I were editing a book and saw that, I'd recommend citing it, either by an informal reference worked into the text (which maybe is best for fiction) or a formal reference that appears as an end-note. The latter, would be a pretty standard citation recommendation in most American style manuals--although they tend to deal with nonfiction.

And most editors I guess would say that if you think you may be plagiarizing, however unintentionally, it's probably best to cite.

That's sort of indecisive, I know, but I think editing--especially citation rules--is more art than science sometimes.

 

[sanchopanza]

hmm but the thing is i'm not quoting anything from copyrighted material - so is there a problem? i think it should be okay to quote great works off-hand and not state where they came from . . . who is going to complain? a distant relative of Shakespeare?

 

[Angeline]

Maybe others will weigh in on this. I'm interpreting the rules as I understand them, and I do see your point. Copyrights are tricky though; sometimes you can think something is "fair use," but it appears in a modern edition that's protected by international copyright law. I'm in over my head now though, lol. That's probably a good question for the editor's board--I bet Weird Harold or Hawaii Bill knows.

And let me clarify this. Say your "source" is not your grandfathers Complete Works of Shakespeare, but some modern publication in which the material you're quoting is excerpted. The editors of that text may have made some miniscule change--a comma, whatever. Now that excert may be protected under current copyright law.

Admittedly this is all farfetched (and I hate getting too hypothetical, lol). On the other hand, it's smart, imo, to be careful about these things. (I have this vision of George Harrison writing My Sweet Lord and thinking "Hmmmm. He's So Fine? Nahhhh.")

 

[Guest]

hmm but the thing is i'm not quoting anything from copyrighted material - so is there a problem? i think it should be okay to quote great works off-hand and not state where they came from . . . who is going to complain? a distant relative of Shakespeare?

Personally, I don't think it's an issue of whether or not anyone will complain, it's an issue of ethics. You are not attributing these quotes to the original authors, therefore anyone who doesn't know the origins of the quote will think you actually penned it. They might think "hey, that's brilliant, this guy is impressive" whereas in fact, you are misleading them, which probably isn't deliberate on your part, but could be construed that way. It's my opinion that you should at least put a mention of the fact that you have quoted Shakespeare, Spenser, or whoever, in the footnotes.

 

[Angeline]

Personally, I don't think it's an issue of whether or not anyone will complain, it's an issue of ethics. You are not attributing these quotes to the original authors, therefore anyone who doesn't know the origins of the quote will think you actually penned it. They might think "hey, that's brilliant, this guy is impressive" whereas in fact, you are misleading them, which probably isn't deliberate on your part, but could be construed that way. It's my opinion that you should at least put a mention of the fact that you have quoted Shakespeare, Spenser, or whoever, in the footnotes.

And also that.

 

[oggbashan]

Don't copy Shakespeare - it's not right

Shakespeare plaigarised his sources and didn't acknowledge them.

That was allowed in his time but isn't now. If you are going to quote, identify the source. Copyright laws now exist and can be difficult for modern authors.

Some, like Dean Koontz, make up their own quotes to avoid copyright tangles. He refers to "The Book of Counted Sorrows" which he hasn't written yet.

Og

 

[sanchopanza]

hmm footnotes eh? i suppose that won't change my story. i don't won't to have to say in the story

' "I am not what I am." Limp wristedly gestured Sebastian, as he felt like quoting Iago from Shakespeare's Othello, no particular edit either, he wasn't intending to quote from the Arden Shakespeare, for example. '

 

[otherdarkmeat]

I agree with Tate on this one, and couldn't explain it any better than she had. Copyrighted or not, as a matter of ethics you should note the source of the quote.

If a character doing the quote, then it is easily revealed in dialogue. If it is a quote at the beginning of a chapter, you can easily reference the original author there. I rarely see footnotes used when using quotes in fiction.

On a side note, I loved how Dean Koontz would quote from the Book of Counted Sorrows. I think it is brilliant when authors create excerpts and quotes from non-existent material.

And for the Koontz fans, Charnel House released a limited edition (1,250 copies) of Book of Counted Sorrows earlier this year. I never would have known it myself, if I hadn't subscribed to a specialty bookstore's newsletter.

-Mike B.

 

[sanchopanza]

i can see no problem with what you say - should i just put the authors i've quoted or from what i've quoted, e.g. titus andronicus. how far should i go?

 

[dr_mabeuse]

This is a very difficult question which is currently engaging an army of lawyers. Can Emerle Lagassi really copyright the word "Bam"? He thinks he can. Can Billy Joel copyright his name? Can Brent Musberger copyright the term "March Madness", which he claims to have invented?

Ethically, it seems to me that plagiarism is a crime not because you use someone else's material, but because you take the authorial credit for that material. If you have some people singing "Happy Birthday To You" in a story, I think everyone would know that you didnt write that yourself and you wouldn't need to note that you've borrowed it.

However, If you tell us that the night was stretched out like a patient etherized upon a table, then that's theft from "The Waste Land". You're misrepresenting that prose as your own, and that's unethical.

It's a very complicated issue. Just how free are we to steal a particular turn of phrase that appeals to us? We've probably all done that, consciously or unconsciously, and we don't give it a second thought. And I doubt there are more than a couple dozen original plots in all of Lit, and everything else is a swipe, intentional or unintentional.

If you're writing a satire or parody of a peice, I think it might be a good idea to say so at the start. Better that than to be accused and found guilty of plagiarism.

---dr.M.

 

[gauchecritic]

At a guess I'd say that quoting single well known lines which have become commonplace (who do you cite for 'the whore of babylon' as a quote) then, as in music you would in my opinion be sampling. No royalties, no citations.

You are stuck 'between a rock and a hard place' if you have to quote every source of every sentence.

As I understand literary law; a title, which is often a quote, is not covered by copyright. I'm guessing that a single sentence (except one of Og's which can be a novel in themselves) is no more copywrit than a title.

What about pastiche, comedy or satire? You don't see any specific citation for a 'Star Wars' sketch when you steal whole characters, except something along the lines of 'The producers acknowledge all copyrights pertaining'.

In my opinion if it's identifiably someone else's work and you attempt to pass it off as your own then that is theft rather than accepted borrowing, copyright notwithstanding.

Gauche

 

[sanchopanza]

anyway ponderings aside what would you say i do? in terms of endnotes

 

[MathGirl]

Footnotes, schmootnotes

Having written a doctoral dissertation this year, I will NEVER again write anything that requires footnotes or references. NEVER, DO YOU HEAR ME? NEVER! HAAAhahahahahha
MG

 

[sanchopanza]

ha ha ha ha no wait i don't get it

 

[Guest]

Hey, Sanch, you sure have lots of questions, interesting though. I do want to say that Shakespeare's plagiarism was not the thing as we know it. His colleagues, if not the majority of his audience, knew his sources, certainly Elizabeth I did.

As for the obscurity of quotes, I daresay they will remain so among Lit. readers, but as your work is copyright here I'd be careful. For myself I use the old "I know when it's art/smut" guideline. If I quote "Antony and Cleopatra", especially with the character name(s) in the quote I don't stick in that it's a famous Elizabethan play. But "Titus" is a different matter, simply not as well known (I don't think the fine film of a year or two ago was a blockbuster).

I might not recognize a Spenser quote as Spenser, but I'm certain I'd know you didn't write it. Could bring you some interesting feedback though.

regards (again), Perdita

Edited to adjust Spen's'erian spelling; the good Maths corrected me privately via PM; I'm not proud and always give my sources.

 

[sanchopanza]

i have a lot of questions because i know they will get answered here. the story i am referring to here will be finished in about a week - i have many people waiting so i'll finish it quickly

 

[Pure]

Hi SP,

I'm with those that say 'acknowledge' but I have two ideas.

1) merely put the exact quote in italics. and/or

2) use the system of endnotes, possibly with no identifiers in the text; there, you say, "page 3 line 4 'how sweet the moonlight...'; from Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice.

Lastly, the obscurity issue can work against you, as might not be the case in my example. Using it unacknowledged looks like a cover up, and invites some to 'sleuth' and make an accusation of unacknowledged borrowing (you thought you'd get away with).

 

[Seattle Zack]

This topic arose on another author's board I frequent, and the discussion there centered around the "fair use" exceptions:

You don't need a license to use a copyrighted work if your use is "fair use." Unfortunately, it is difficult to tell whether a particular use of a work is fair or unfair. Determinations are made on a case-by-case basis by considering four factors:

Factor #1: Purpose and character of use. The courts are most likely to find fair use where the use is for noncommercial purposes, such as a book review.

Factor #2: Nature of the copyrighted work. The courts are most likely to find fair use where the copied work is a factual work rather than a creative one.

Factor #3: Amount and substantiality of the portion used. The courts are most likely to find fair use where what is used is a tiny amount of the protected work. If what is used is small in amount
but substantial in terms of importance, a finding of fair use is unlikely.

Factor #4: Effect on the potential market for or value of the protected work. The courts are most likely to find fair use where the new work is not a substitute for the copyrighted work.

"Fair use" especially protects parody. The "fair use" exemption to was created to allow things such as commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author.

The conclusion on this other board was that if you use a line from Shakespeare in a story, especially on a site like Lit, you're unlikely to encounter any problems. A published work for sale with a quote from a contemporary author that is copyrighted is another matter, however.

It is true that de minimis copying (copying a small amount) is not
copyright infringement. Unfortunately, it is rarely possible to tell where de minimis copying ends and copyright infringement begins. There are no "bright line" rules.

Copying a small amount of a copyrighted work is infringement if what is copied is a qualitatively substantial portion of the copied work. In one case, a magazine article that used 300 words from a 200,000-word autobiography written by President Gerald Ford was found to infringe the copyright on the autobiography. Even though the copied material was only a small part of the autobiography, the copied portions were among the most
powerful passages in the autobiography.

Much of the above was taken without permission from this article: http://www.cetus.org/fairindex.html

 

[Jenny _S]

Well Jack,
That puts us back to informal crediting as in "As old Bill Sheakspear said..." or more formally as an end note. This means MG can never, ever use someone elses quote again.

 

[sanchopanza]

i can't remember half the people i've quoted now, i use quotes that i can remember - some things just stick in your head i guess. i've decided that in a forenote (no endnotes for me) i'll simply acknowledge my great debt to Shakespeare, Sidney, Gorges, Spenser, etc. that should keep the rabid dogs amused for a while.

 

[Weird Harold]

Hi SP,

I'm with those that say 'acknowledge' but I have two ideas.

1) merely put the exact quote in italics. and/or

2) use the system of endnotes, possibly with no identifiers in the text; there, you say, "page 3 line 4 'how sweet the moonlight...'; from Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice.

Angeline asked me to comment on this thread, but I think Pure has come the closest to my thoughts so far.

The distinction between plagiarism andHomage, IMHO, is whther the borrowed words are used in a way that implies they are your words.

As long as you make each quotation clearly a quotation, even if there is no attribution, then you're unlikely to be accused of plagiarism.

There is also the issue of whether your character or narrator is doing the quoting -- characters can get away with less attribution than narrators can; especially on well-known quotes.

Song lyrics are a common problem in fiction. If you use an entire song or even an entire verse, then you should attribute the copyright along with your copyright:

Story copyright Weird Harold
Lyrics to the song I stole copyright some big artist.

Having a character sing a line or two of a song wouldn't usually require such an attribution, but using more than a couple of lines probably does.

If you're concerned about the amount of material you borrowed, it probably means you should attribute it along with your copyright notice. I'd only use footnotes or endnotes if you're concerned about people not recognising the quotes. Questions of copyright should be answered in the copyright notice.

In summary:

1: Clearly identify borrowed words as being a quote. Use Italics and/or an informal mention to set them apart from your words.

2: Acknowledge the copyright holder along with your claim to a copyright if there is any question about copyright issues.

3: Identify the quotes informally in the narration and/or in endnotes only if you feel they're too obscure for your readers to identify.

4: Characters have more freedom to borrow quotes without attribution than the narrator does, just as they have freedom to use bad grammar.

 

[Mysteryjj]

Can't see too much of a problem

So quote them and be damned, I can't see too much of a problem here as long as you don't make any wild claims to anyone elses work.

You say this whole story or whatever is light hearted, so I think most observers would recognise this.

I would recommend that you do quote mark each line you use, and if possible make some reference to the author/originator somewhere.

Maybe a brief footnote worded to cover your arse as much as possible without going over the top. I don't see the need for anotation of every quoted line carried into a footnote, just "with acknowledgement to Shakespeare, whoever, whatever, whoever, etc for the use of their well known quotes within this story"

I can't see too much grave turning in Stratford-on-Avon.