Tuesday afternoon, shocked

[cleolinda]

Holy crow. Smart Bitches, Trashy Books has posted a massive Cassie Edwards plagiarism exposé. And then Jenny Crusie commented wanting to know if Edwards "ran over their dog." And then Nora Roberts commented in favor of the Smart Bitches. And then--I don't even know what happened then, but I have a feeling that by the time I get there, it's going to be good.

Comments

[evilstorm.livejournal.com]

.......Oh, woooooow.

[quizzicalsphinx.livejournal.com]

Thing of beauty, ain't it?

[amberdulen.livejournal.com]

Oh myyyyyyy. This WILL be interesting.

[queentab.livejournal.com]

Ouch. I know I've read a Cassie Edwards book and I could have sworn it was about a pirate, but it appears all her books are about Indians. :/

[life-on-queen.livejournal.com]

You might be confusing her with Connie Mason, who's last book was so stupid I couldn't bear to finish it and I was ON A SIX-HOUR PLANE TRIP.

Mason writes about pirates all the time.

[queentab.livejournal.com]

I knew there was a reason I stopped reading historical romances. There comes a point when you just can't differentiate between the authors and stories. :P

[particle-person.livejournal.com]

Wow, Smart Bitches won't load now. We must be hammering the server.

ETA: It does load, but very slowly.

[particle-person.livejournal.com]

My favorite comment so far (even if it's not strictly accurate, because the plagiarized bits were about the Native Americans, not written by them):

Not only did we steal the American Indians’ land… we stole their prose. (http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1756/#44972)

ETA: Oh, and, "It’s not hard to spot the didactic shifts in writing voice, and it’s not hard to type 'raccoon penis quill.' (http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/comments/1757/#44869)"

[evilstorm.livejournal.com]

Enquiring minds need to know--what the hell is the context for the raccoon penis quill comment?

[particle-person.livejournal.com]

I did link the quote?

She was talking about how easy it is to google keywords from the book to check if a passage is plagiarized.

[evilstorm.livejournal.com]

Oooh. No, I did see the quote, but I missed the bit about googling keywords. Sorry and thanks.

[themadfish.livejournal.com]

It reads like a high school paper when the student is really bored of the subject, and is trying to put things in their own words and utterly failing. In other words, she probably tried to do research and then got lazy. Or she doesn't remember her english classes lessions on how to apply the knowledge rather than repeating it.

[fiberaddict.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I've been watching this one....which reminds me, I need to get some more popcorn. :grin:

[coneycat.livejournal.com]

The thing about Jennifer Crusie's comments as reported on Fandom Wank is this: I've been on other readers' lists and encountered other authors who get all up in arms about readers criticizing authors, or disliking books, or (as in this case) reading the books just to laugh at them. (Actually, at the moment the Smart Bitches appear to be reading the books just to find more instances of plagiarism, which is different.)

Here's the thing, and one that as an aspiring author myself I had best remember: once your book is published, readers get to read it, they get to have any old opinion they want to, and if they don't like the book they get to say so especially on readers' opinion lists and their own blogs. If you can't stand hearing that readers dislike some books, stay off their blogs and discussion lists. And once the book is published, readers get to read it for any damned reason they want to--including for purposes of snark and mockery.

Which makes me reconsider whether I really want to be published all that damned much...

No, it doesn't. It means this is something I have to remember. Because Crusie's defense ("don't pick on her! She's an author!") just sounds silly. If you can't take the heat, don't plagiarize in the kitchen.

[raanve]

once your book is published, readers get to read it, they get to have any old opinion they want to, and if they don't like the book they get to say so especially on readers' opinion lists and their own blogs. If you can't stand hearing that readers dislike some books, stay off their blogs and discussion lists. And once the book is published, readers get to read it for any damned reason they want to--including for purposes of snark and mockery.

So, so, SO important for any writer seeking publication to remember. I don't think that writers are reminded of this enough, and everyone right on up to Anne Rice needs to be reminded of it occasionally. (I sometimes think that there ought to be a whole writer's workshop on this. Or a full week-long seminar for creative writing students.)

[eleigh.livejournal.com]

It seems that Crusie, and later Lani's (Lani Rich, I'm pretty sure, who is co-authoring a book with Crusie at the moment) comment supporting Crusie, takes issue with the fact that this isn't the first time SBTB has ridiculed Cassie Edwards. Which is true. They've posted a few unfavorable reviews of some of her books and her name will occasionally appear for mockery in a comment thread or something.

What they seem to be missing, which I don't get since I know that Crusie is a reader of SBTB, is that that's what they do. They review great books, they review good books, they review mediocre books, and they review godawful throw them against a wall books. It just so happens Cassie Edwards has written more than a few of the latter. Frankly, they do me a service because now I know to skip the Cassie Edwards books in Kroger.

Whether or not CE has been a scapegoat is irrelevant to the fact that she plagiarized. Repeatedly. And if Candy or Sarah didn't read her books just to giggle at the badness then the plagiarism would never have been discovered.

[coneycat.livejournal.com]

I think you're exactly right about Crusie's concern, and although I'm sure she means well and everything she needs to remember that readers can read a book for any reason they want to--including because it strikes them as side-splittingly, hilariously awful. It's not kind, but it's allowed. I belong to an informal movie group that goes out of its way to find ohmygawd bad movies so we can eat snacks and mock them. If SBTB has that reaction to Edwards, well, that's their reaction, isn't it!

(*I say this as someone who has never been published. Hold me to my opinion when it's my book being ridiculed!)

[queenofattolia.livejournal.com]

Crusie's defense is ludicrous. The woman stole whole passages from other people's copyrighted works. That's all that matters here. The gleeful snark and Schadenfreude is just gravy.

[zombiequeen.livejournal.com]

Comment from anarchicq on F_W: "Note to self: Avoid published authors named Cassie."

Ouch! Oh, and also: Ha hah hah!

[foresthouse.livejournal.com]

OT: I love your icon.

On topic - heeee!

[zombiequeen.livejournal.com]

Thanks! I made it, so feel free to steal it. :)

[falco-conlon.livejournal.com]

Someone in the comments on the SB site said "Edward's middle name doesn't happen to be...claire...does it?"

I lawled.

[nohara-megami.livejournal.com]

Wow....just, wow.

And to think I had no idea this was going on.

[emilytarot.livejournal.com]

Oh, fantastic fun!

Thank you for posting the links.

[life-on-queen.livejournal.com]

I'd caught the original posts on SB but missed the comments wank. Many thanks for the heads up. I'm way disappointed in Crusie though. I thought she was smarter/classier/savier/pick your adjective than that.

[eleigh.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I cannot understand how she thought pulling the "zomg you guys are so mean!" card was a good idea in this case.

[life-on-queen.livejournal.com]

Srsly.

When they called her the literary equivalent of maggot-infested cheese, she might have a point. But when they've discovered that part of the suck is systematic plagiarism? Not so much.

[--kali--.livejournal.com]

Oh my word, this could explode!

[missnanna.livejournal.com]

Oh hurrah! I've a final tomorrow that's partly about plagiarism, so this is totally like studying, right?

[spectralbovine.livejournal.com]

You should definitely find some way to work it into your answers.

[missnanna.livejournal.com]

Multiple choice, unfortunately. I did email the link to Smart Bitches to my professor.

[spectralbovine.livejournal.com]

Extra credit!

[grnarmadillo.livejournal.com]

I wonder how many more of these incidents we're going to have to have before the publishers come up with some sort of close database to check submitted manuscripts against. It really wouldn't be that technically difficult to setup, and you'd think it would be worth their while not to get hit with these scandals.

Then again, most of the woman's fans will probably never hear of this, or care if they did. Guess that explains it. :(

[delle.livejournal.com]

in fairness to the publisher, both Nora Roberts and Jennifer Cruisie have pointed out that it's in the writer/publisher contract that the writer assures the publisher that this is all original.

and Cassie's fans are all over the comments at SB, I guess (didn't read that far back into the comments, myself); saying (is anyone surprised?) basically the same thing every online plagiarist's friends have said: y'all need to get a life/it's not a big thing. I always wonder if they'd say the same thing to their "friend" or "favorite author" if the friend/fav author was the one being stolen from.

[grnarmadillo.livejournal.com]

That's exactly my point - these decisions don't get made by accident. The publishers believe that checking (and terminating contracts if they catch people) will cost them more than the bad publicity when plagiarism is caught. My guess is that these scandals, for all the press they get, don't actually cost publishers all that much. Very few people are actually going to get their stuff together to demand a refund, and, by the time word gets out, very few sales are going to be lost because people who were going to buy the books already did. If the cost of these things actually was high, publishers would not pass the buck to the authors like they do now.

[falco-conlon.livejournal.com]

I've read the whole epic already and it is ALL good. The comments are fantastic.

[thansunshine.livejournal.com]

Fantastic.

[missratbat.livejournal.com]

I wasn't so swayed by the first batch of examples, but the later ones seem to show some matches, oh yes.

I'll have to add, though, that curious as I am about the whole incident (and when similar things happen), I don't really know anything about the authors and works beyond this case, so I can't really rate quality either way.

[duncanatrix.livejournal.com]

The updates, if you're not following it religiously:

Publishers' Weekly has picked up the story. (http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6518522.html)

The gals get a reply from Signet denying that Cassie Edwards has done anything wrong. (http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/finally_heard_back_from_signet) Nora Roberts comments on this update, saying:

"I think the word ‘wrong’ in the Signet statement is a poor choice. I would have accepted the word ‘illegal’.

I think it’s a very bad message to send to readers, to writers.

And it confuses me as my publisher demands (and I agree with that demand) that I attribute the quotes (always fair use) that I habitually use in the front of my books."

This is FASCINATING!

[particle-person.livejournal.com]

Nora Roberts has turned up on a couple of these online publishing kerfuffles, and every time she demonstrates what a class act she is. Her comments always nail the central issue, too. I think I'm going to have to start reading her.

[cleolinda.livejournal.com]

She really, truly is. There was a fantastically horrifying debacle at the RWA awards a year or two back--I'll have to find you the link at Smart Bitches, because it was truly amazing (it involved a really, really ill-advised montage about current, mostly tragic events, including 9/11, that had NOTHING TO DO WITH ROMANCE AT ALL), and--it was amazing, that's all I can say. She was MCing the show, I think, and how she managed not to bitchslap some of those people, I don't know.

Also, she's the only romance novelist I've ever seen who has commercials on TV, in which she is also awesome.

[particle-person.livejournal.com]

I think I remember that happening, although I don't recall her comments on it. By the way, I know you don't usually go in for mysteries, but Elizabeth Peters did a side-splittingly funny novel set at the RWA shindig called Die for Love (http://www.amazon.com/Die-Love-Elizabeth-Peters/dp/0380731169) that you ought to read some day. The main baddie is a scam agent.

[cleolinda.livejournal.com]

Before my connection goes out again: A Smart Bitches linkspam mid-kerfluffle. (http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/youre_shittin_me_please_tell_me_youre_shittin_me/) The LJ account is highly worth reading, IIRC.

[duncanatrix.livejournal.com]

My mom adores Nora Roberts. She loves trashy romances, but Nora Roberts is one of only two that she ever recommends to people. Even though I'm not a fan of romance as a genre, she seems to be a super classy lady and I've developed some respect for her because of her responses to these types of affairs.

[krazycat.livejournal.com]

Hey cleo, I searched for "in ten minutes" on amazon.co.uk looking for a book series, and came upon your book. I clicked into the entry to rate it (as I did buy it ages ago), and saw this in the profile:

(http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v217/demonus/journal/?action=view&current=sensemakingfromamazon.jpg)

"You should totally buy it TWICE!"

[cleolinda.livejournal.com]

I hate that they keep doing that, because people keep asking me if I've written a second book. I'm so afraid someone's going to buy them both and get really mad when they realize what's happened.

[particle-person.livejournal.com]

You know, I think Amazon allows authors to comment on their books. You might be able to add a warning for people.