My Reaction Paper Assignment~ Originality vs Authenticity

Cheryl Names
N001763246
Discussion Sec. 7580
Reaction Paper #1~ 3/22/10

IN THE NAME OF ART: CREATIVE PURPOSE DRAWS LINE BETWEEN ETHICAL AND UNETHICAL BORROWING

"Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don’t bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: ‘It’s not where you take things from - it’s where you take them to.’" (Jim Jarmusch).The argument that originality has died, and only authenticity reigns is becoming the battle-cry of Generations X, Y, and Z to justify their hybrid creations of art. Plagiarism is becoming more and more a hot topic of contention as the frequencies of award-winning novelists confess to stealing from their peers and are consecrated, yet their works are successful and blaze new trails for the literary world. In my opinion, the appropriation of the work of others in the creative art world is acceptable because it conjures the imagination and unique interpretation of each individual the art speaks to and keeps the original alive in a more contemporary context. However, the academic arena of research requires more discipline and integrity, where not citing sources or giving credit where credit is due is irresponsible and sullies the work as lazy. In conclusion, I believe the communal sharing of creative works of art is acceptable because it keeps the original alive in a relatable context for future generations, and challenges authors and artists to develop something really successful to debunk the borrowing stigma; yet it is unethical to plagiarize academic writing because plagiarism renders the work unfounded with lack of proof.
First, the borrowing and sharing of creative works of art breathes new life into the original by making it understandable to an ever-changing population. For example, the same story is essentially told in West Side Story as it is in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. However, the West Side Story adaptation builds upon the original by adding contemporary use of present-day symbolism with an old plot, making it more appreciated by present and future generations that are not familiar with the original. “Mention of Shakespeare brings to mind that West Side Story is just one of the links in a chain of plagiarisms that began with Ovid’s Pyramus and Thisbe and continued with the forgotten Arthur Brooke’s the Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet, which was plundered heavily by Shakespeare.” (Posner 23). Furthermore, plagiarism in the creative sense validates the original by its sheer usage and ‘imitation being the sincerest forms of flattery’.
Next, if a work of creative art is truly ground-breaking whilst borrowing from a fellow artist, it has the potential of overcoming the plagiarism stigma while raising the bar on the standard of art. “Louis Menand, the Harvard professor and New Yorker staff writer, suggested that, as with any creative movement, if the results are compelling and profound enough, even rigid conventions come around to making what seemed like a sin into a virtue.” (Kennedy). For example, in 1996, there is the case of the “Beyala Affair” in which an African woman author (Calixthe Beyala) was found guilty of plagiarism in the High Court in Paris while in the same year she was awarded the prestigious Grand Prix du roman de L’Academie Francaise for one of the novels she allegedly plagiarized (Hitchcott 100). The unique situation of the “Beyala Affair” is a trend that is becoming more and more prevalent as more online resources- blogs, Twitter, etc- impact and inspires the literary youth.
Finally, the academic arena is where I view plagiarism as unethical and lazy because the educational institution strives to maintain and preserve intellectual honesty. “Copying text wholesale and claiming it as one’s own, particularly while attempting to hide the action, benefits no one except the lazy author “(Posner 23). Academia’s purpose is to collectively credit each contributor as an authoritative source of which can be referenced for years to come to legitimize ideas, while paving the way for students to develop more theories using the original as a precedent. Furthermore, “plagiarism is intellectual fraud that can impair ones’ (be they professors or students) academic career. It is indeed an intellectual sin for a professor to have committed plagiarism.” (Sugiharto). It is imperative for professors to play the purest role model in sourcing and citing works correctly so their students can perpetuate the discipline for generations to come.
In Conclusion, I agree with the Jim Jarmusch quote of ‘stealing anything that speaks to your soul’ only as long as it is for a creative/artistic purpose. “The artist finds she has a duty to share her work with other artists, because artists gather their inspiration from the works of others-‘a dwarf standing on the shoulders of a giant can see further than the giant himself.’” (Lacey 1533). By doing so, originality can inspire others to build upon each interpretation of the original and challenges the artist who borrows to make the work of art totally worth the prospective scrutiny and criticism. Conversely, in the realm of academics, intellectual property should stay true to form, and steer clear of plagiarizing with giving credit where credit is due; otherwise it is a gross violation of Academia. Henceforth, I believe it is unethical to plagiarize academic writing because plagiarism renders the work unfounded with lack of evidence; however the communal sharing of creative works of art is acceptable because it keeps the original alive in a relatable context for future generations, and challenges authors and artists to develop something really successful to debunk the borrowing stigma.


Works Cited
“Jim Jarmusch.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 16 Mar. 2010. Web. 16 Mar. 2010.
Kennedy, Randy. “The Free-Appropriation Writer.” Nytimes.com . New York Times,
26 Feb. 2010. Web. 15 Mar. 2010.
Lacey, Linda J. “Of Bread and Roses and Copyrights.” Duke Law Journal. 1989.6
(1989):1532-1596. Print.
Posner, Richard A.” On Plagiarism.” Atlantic Monthly 289.4 (2002): 23. Print.
Sugiharto, Setiono. "Our culture: A culture of plagiarism." Jakarta Post 17 Feb. 2010.
General OneFile. Web. 22 Mar. 2010.