The case of Harvard plagiarist Kaavya Viswanathan has already been flogged to death, with several people who should know better trying real hard to insert the phrase "schadenfreude" into their opinions as if they use it all the time. Sadly, the first thing that popped into my head is my own moronic childhood version of schadenfreude (oh yes, it just so happens I use that word all the time, 'cuz I am so smart), which of course must be chanted in an irritating sing-song: "Cheaters never prosper! Cheaters never prosper!"

(...and yet I wonder why I never had any friends.....)

Despite the profound wisdom inherent in cruel playground teasing, we all know in real life this particular "truism" is not true. Many, if not most cheaters--assuming they are reasonably intelligent--are NEVER caught and benefit GREATLY from their cheating, so long as you look at the instant gratification financial part and not at what may or may not happen in the afterlife. I am not an authority on karma or the afterlife, but my own anecdotal observations is populated with many, many people I have known who have cheated and lied and stole and ended up prospering most remarkably. Meanwhile those of us suckers who insist on playing by the rules--or who possess some sort of conscience, or at the very least a mother whose disapproving glare can wilt the steeliest criminal heart--we continue our obscure toiling in the salt mines. And we groundlings grumble at the cheaters from our burrows, and console ourselves with the groundless conjecture that their family lives must be somehow lacking, or their conscience bothers them deep down, so they are not TRULY happy, nosirree, not like us.

What REALLY irritates me about this latest plagiarism affair is the constant comparisons to Doris Kearns Goodwin, a FABULOUS writer of nonfiction history books who teaches at Harvard, and who also came under fire a few years back. Unlike this latest case, I (perhaps naively) fully accept Goodwin's explanation, since I myself have written giant tomes involving vast amounts of research and a database of thousands of references and notes and minutia. Goodwin explained that, in the course of note-taking and writing drafts and dealing with thousands of references, somewhere along the line a quote or two got garbled until it mistakenly became "hers". And indeed, if you consider this woman's entire ouvre, even the most cynical among us would have to admit she didn't make plagiarism a habit, let alone a step-on-all-the-dead-bodies-on-your-way-up-the-ladder career-building standard. Besides, nonfiction is made up of facts, which (like ideas and themes) cannot be copyrighted. Only the manner in which the facts or themes are stated can be copyrighted. And there's just so many ways one can state a fact without sounding derivative, even if you use your own words. ("Lincoln was, um, made to not live anymore by a big round chunk of metal that came out of a big-round-chunk-of-metal-accelerating-device held by John Wilkes Booth.")

I find Goodwin's explanation FAR more palatable than Viswanathan's painfully teenaged attempts to explain and defend. (I guess a photographic memory doesn't include remembering the author's name?) Granted, when most people are caught their first response is to deny, deny, deny but when it's obviously dead-to-rights it's really in your best interests to just 'fess up and take your punishment. (I suppose that's something you learn when you're older?) And while yes, it's unfair to subject a teenager to a media circus, I do not wholly buy the "she was totally naive and didn't know what she was doing" defense either. Forget larger issues of right and wrong and how today's youth has little or no respect for intellectual property, what with the cut-and-paste mentality of the Internet. Let's just ask one thing: at what age is it beaten into us that one cannot copy another's work and hand it in as your own? Certainly by the age of, say, ten?

Ahem. Let me repeat myself for those who might have been out that day at school. Plagiarism is not "corner-cutting". It's not an homage. It's CHEATING. It's also LYING and STEALING, if you want to be technical. And while I suspect most people, if they are brutally honest, lie and cheat and steal to some extent ("Wow! That dress looks FABULOUS on you! And here you are out in PUBLIC with it! GOOD for you!"), there are degrees, just like the grey area that constitutes "fair use" under copyright law. When a publisher goes through the expense of a total recall ya gotta figure the plagiarism must be pretty blatant. (For the record, I have not read either work, nor do I ever intend to, since just reading the excerpts in the news makes my brain shrivel.) While the actual line of delineation (is that redundantly redundant or what?) might be murky, I think most reasonable people would agree there is a vast difference between the lying/cheating/stealing behind the "Great dress!" lie vs. the "I'd better cheat in order to keep my six-figure advance!" lie.

I also wonder (this is just me, now) what clear-thinking adult would EVER want to sign a legal contract with a teenager? Even if he or she is the best, most well-behaved, well-meaning teenager in the WORLD. I know plenty of teenagers; they're great kids; I like them and respect them, but would I want to make any of them legally responsible for my financial wellbeing? I DON'T THINK SO. Sorry, kids, but that's just the way it is. Adult responsibilities are for adults for a REASON. And there are plenty of adults I wouldn't trust in that capacity, either, so don't feel so bad....

Regardless of how everything turns out, we all know in the end that cheaters never prosper. Even if they seem financially successful, we all know deep down their consciences bother them terribly and their family lives are totally screwed up. So there. Nyeah!

The only line that I really enjoyed about this whole sordid, sad affair was written by one of the moderators of a NWU listserve. Since it is a private listserve I don't feel really comfortable giving his name without his permission, but he said "...no matter what else she might go on to accomplish in life, at 19 she already knows the first line of her obituary."

What a great line! I shall have to steal it. Wait, I think I just did....

Mojo