The Fine Art of Avoiding Being Caught Plagiarizing Your Major Work

            Plagiarism – what a concept! Plato never gave it even one moment’s thought (and he copied his mentor Socrates’ words and beliefs a lot!). Josephus carefully explained to his readers all of his people’s religious stories, never giving “credit where credit’s due.” But – and we are amazingly precise about this – modern-day academics insist on footnoting every jot and tittle of any group of words they “borrow” from another’s works. Well...until they get caught not doing this!

            The quest for precise, back-scratching, virtue-signaling “clarification” has risen to new heights over the last decade. I remember having a heated exchange with some of my former students when Melania Trump used a catchy political phrase in defense of “children’s welfare”—a phrase that seemed to copy a central idea from a political speech made a decade ago by Michelle Obama. The media, followed by many “academics,” scolded the then-First Lady for her “plagiarism” in the speech – as if copying words in a political setting from an opponent is a serious mortal sin, and worthy of all sorts of condemnation and shame.

            Except it wasn’t plagiarism in the academic sense. Which politician since the dawn of our country has ever stopped to give “chapter and verse” for anything contained in a public speech? In former days, when people actually read books and newspapers, and/or listened to radio and television pronouncements, it was understood that the audience would immediately connect what was being spoken with its original thinker (if that person did not happen to be the speaker himself). I doubt very much that those people listening to Abraham Lincoln at the dedication of the Gettysburg cemetery would have been tempted to stop the president when he stated, “Four score and seven years ago…” – as if Lincoln was required to prove that his mention of the years of our country’s existence was authorized by a mathematical genius. They would not have required any subsequent speaker to “cite his sources” for the ending of Lincoln’s speech: “government of the people by the people for the people”! The idea of “plagiarism in speech” is a twisted idea, deliberately made to stop all intelligent debate about the ideas espoused.

            It’s a different matter when the plagiarism is secretive, and deliberately engineered by supposedly-educated individuals. Martin Luther King, Jr., purportedly wrote his doctoral dissertation in an atmosphere of rigorous and virtuous theological exploration, “free” from stealing other people’s words to make his point. And yet, an innocent researcher, attempting to archive this same dissertation, discovered – to his horror – that entire paragraphs had been lifted from the work of a known theologian.[i]  Now, since this was several decades after the civil rights leader had been assassinated – and not wishing to incite race riots – the university responsible for awarding the degree in the first place (and after neglecting to pursue due diligence in the matter) decided that “nothing could be done,” because the affected individual could not be asked for a response. Hmm…is that akin to “sweeping things under the rug”?

            Another concerning example of unquestioningly covert plagiarism that gave rise to serious questions of scholarship was the situation that Alex Haley found himself in after the publication of his earth-shattering novel, Roots. Two different authors accused the Pulitzer-Prize-winning Haley of unauthorized copying of substantial portions of their own works; however, only one author, Harold Courlander, successfully took Haley to court and “settled amicably.” ^[ii]It was a serious problem for Haley, his publisher, and the television network which aired Roots. But, apart from the undisclosed amount of the settlement between Courlander and Haley, no other censure or punitive action came about. Some historians speak disparagingly of Haley and the supposed hardship of his in-person research (even denying that he personally made a fact-discovering visit to the supposed village from where his ancestor Kunte Kinte was kidnapped). But nothing happened to the author beyond an embarrassing acknowledgement of his faux pas.

            And now we come to the case of Dr. Claudine Gay, the current president of Harvard. Subsequent to a disheartening and embarrassing “testimony” in front of a Congressional committee (to be covered soon in my other blog), certain researchers decided to investigate her doctoral dissertation. With present-day software, it is a simple matter to submit any text to scrutiny as to whether or not it contains passages from other sources. Such passages are not necessarily problematic – unless the passage is not properly cited. (However, even the citation process is strict and complex, and theses and dissertations that seem to run afoul of those rules have been known to have been rejected.) Evidently, the proof is readily apparent: She plagiarized passages from other authors (Dr. Carol Swain – one of my favorite authors – being among them[iii]).

            And it is here that Dr. Gay is apparently being given a significant “pass” with respect to her all-important dissertation. Although I have cited two glaring examples of King and Haley being granted “forgiveness” for their egregiously inappropriate actions, many, many institutions of higher learning have taken drastic, career-ending action when plagiarism has been uncovered – in other words, the candidate usually is not only denied his or her diploma (for which the thesis or dissertation was written), but he or she is forbidden to continue their studies. In some cases, diplomas have been revoked months, or even years, later, where the evidence of plagiarism is irrefutable. Any number of examples of this type of punishment can be found online, so I will not continue to push the point of this problem.

            However, as my readers no doubt already know, Dr. Gay has been given a chance to “revise” her dissertation (and other, unspecified, documents) in certain sections – although I confess I cannot find the exact conditions under which she must submit her “corrections.” The question immediately arises: exactly why is she being afforded this “do-over”? How does her “scholarship” merit a “fresh start”? Is it the severe embarrassment that resulted from her Congressional testimony, compounded by her exalted position? Who did she have to negotiate with in order to arrive at  this “solution”?

            I have my own stories of encountering plagiarism in academia, and someday I may talk about them in a later blog. Suffice it to say that today, I am left puzzled – even a little outraged – by an action that seems to run counter to every spirit of fairness that I have invested myself and my writing in. I would find it interesting if anyone could explain the justification (besides privilege and power) behind this distasteful action.

---

[i] “Boston University Finds Plagiarism by Dr. King.” Associated Press, New York Times, Oct. 11, 1992, Section A, Page 15.

 

[ii] Lubasch, Arnold H. “’Roots’ Plagiarism Suit Is Settled.” The New York Times, Dec. 15,1978, Section A, Page 1.

 

[iii] Palin, Megan. “Prominent Professor Whom Claudine Gay Allegedly Copied Calls for Her to Be Fired, Says Harvard Needs to Get ‘Back Towards Sanity.’” The New York Post, Dec.21, 2023, online.