Plagiarism in The Evil Within - Trevor Marriott (moved discussion)

[mklhawley]

Hi Lynn,

There's just not an 'on the other hand'. Ally's dead on. I just see folks loyal to Trevor on the other site.

Mike

[Ally]

Yes but students don't receive monetary advances for the work they are putting out to be their own. They aren't professionals, they are students and you have authority over them. Therefore, there are conduct rules in how to handle student plagiarism that are completely different than professional plagiarism. If a professor were caught plagiarizing his works, you can bet that would not be handled, IN PRIVATE. Oh his University might try to keep it hushed up (Blake Publishing) but no one else in the world has an obligation to do so. Indeed, I would say that the obligation is exactly the opposite - to make it clear to all concerned what was done so that no other person might fall victim to this practice. And no other university would hire a professor with such shoddy practices. And from what I gather by Mark's article, Trevor was approached, IN PRIVATE, and shrugged it off.

[Phil H]

I think there is a lot of inconsistency and many different levels of understanding both on these boards and in the world.

I (and others better qualified than I) have had long wrangles with Trevor (among others) about the use of historical evidence. This is no difficult thing to understand. In britain in the 60s it was taught in schools as part of the learning process. yet we find plenty of examples where people want to just forget evidence that doesn't suit them, or dismiss/disparage inconvenient material such as the marginalia or the Dutfield's Yard photo when they appear and even now.

When I argue for higher standards, of the need to raise the bar of "Ripperology" I find myself abused and rubbished. But do the threads on van Gogh or Sickert (et al) really add anything to our subject? Yet they are excused as fun by people who cannot see (germane to this thread) that they abuse evidence, logic and any kind of standards. Sure, let's have fun, but if we do not make it very clear that such threads are not good in quality, the infection will spread.

I am told these days that you can download essays from the internet for school, or college work. I am sure many students cut and past from Wikipedia to do their homework or projacts - so where is the understanding of plagiarism or personal thought?

In Ripper studies I think one of the reasons that poor standards have been seen as acceptable by some, stems from the 50s (even the 20s as Leonard Matters was a journalist as well as an MP) when JTR was a matter for journalists and people made up quotes and confused sources. Things have improved since then - for a while, with people like Rumbelow, Begg, Evans, Whittington-Egan, Fido, Sinner, Sugden and others, it looked like we had turned a corner. Now this....

The Ripper world, as I have observed before, remains competitive and commercial. People see books as money-spinners. I have contrasted that in the past with the Richard III field where the RIII Society has funded pure academic research, published key sources and raised plaques and monuments. They are taken seriously. They come together - not fly apart as we seem to do.

I really don't think Trevor understands what he has done. I think, like some sort of psychological alchemist he transmutes all views into "I am in the right".
But I think his publishers, or future ones, may take heed. we shall see. I don't expect to see his secret Files book out anytime soon.

Phil

[Ally]

Just out of curiosity Phil (and going off-topic), what would your opinion be on a private board, visible and accessible only to serious researchers where ideas could be shared out of the public view, debated and expanded upon until all parties were satisfied and then those threads locked and published?

It seems to me that there are two problems inherent in the boards, censorship vs being bogged down in stupidity. I don't think anyone has found the magic bullet.

How do you raise the level of debate without employing censorship of free thought? I mean yes, the Van Gogh tripe is patent idiocy, but where does the line get drawn. I mean I find all the black magic stuff idiocy (where's the goat!) but should that be censored because I find it rubbish? Hard line to draw I think.

[lynn cates]

On the other hand--five fingers.

Hello Mike. Thanks.

"There's just not an 'on the other hand'."

Are you seriously suggesting that an instructor should violate norms and FERPA rules by publicly browbeating students who improperly footnote?

Cheers.
LC

[Mike Covell]

(where's the goat!).

You called?

[lynn cates]

"It's all academic."

Hello Ally. Thanks.

"Yes but students don't receive monetary advances for the work they are putting out to be their own."

That's true enough. Of course, if they stick with it, they will receive a piece of paper allowing them--under certain circumstances--to enhance their incomes.

You are also right that, in academia, plagiarism can be handled in an unforgiving manner--rightly so. But never--so far as I recall--in a trade journal.

In fairness, I have seen:

1. Book reviews which include lines like: "Professor X's book on "Ontological Anomalies in the Ionian Pre-Socratics" is largely a rehash of Professor Y's work--he brings little new to the table. One is better advised to buy Professor Y's book and not spend money on this latest offering."

and

2. Critical essays in which one's views were critiqued, analysed and otherwise taken to task--but always with a view to promoting knowledge of the subject, not just as an expose of the person.

Cheers.
LC

[Ally]

You called?

The world needs to hear it. NEEDS to.

[Ally]

Hello Ally. Thanks.

You are also right that, in academia, plagiarism can be handled in an unforgiving manner--rightly so. But never--so far as I recall--in a trade journal.

In fairness, I have seen:

1. Book reviews which include lines like: "Professor X's book on "Ontological Anomalies in the Ionian Pre-Socratics" is largely a rehash of Professor Y's work--he brings little new to the table. One is better advised to buy Professor Y's book and not spend money on this latest offering."

and

2. Critical essays in which one's views were critiqued, analysed and otherwise taken to task--but always with a view to promoting knowledge of the subject, not just as an expose of the person.

Cheers.
LC

In a trade journal is your issue? What about exposure on national TV and in the international media? Have you heard of Jayson Blair? Stephen Ambrose was called to task in national newspapers. A rabbi whose name I can't remember has resigned after being accused of plagiarism in the national press just recently. Fareed Zakaria was vilified in print and television across the globe last year for accidentally plagiarizing a single paragraph in an article.

All of these scandals came out as a result of investigative journalism and a published piece like Mark's. And to a much wider audience and consequence.

And there was no one standing up going, oh the works they stole weren't really being used, so who cares. Poor dears and their public shaming. The fact that in this field, people are sympathizing with the person who committed the act and questioning the motives of the person who exposed it, says something really nasty about the field. It's a black eye.

[chrisjd]

Plagiarism has been a big issue until recently in Germany. Quite a few politicians and other high ranked people had their PhDs withdrawn and had to step down from office.

[lynn cates]

Raising Kane.

Hello Ally. Thanks.

Must confess ignorance to all those. I find little relish in public scandals--there but for the grace of God goes Jeremy Taylor.

But to describe my thinking about scandals in general, I ask you to recall "Citizen Kane." Just before election day, Charles Foster Kane was found in "a love triangle" with Susan Alexander. (Hope that's right--working with an old chap's memory.) At any rate, was he wrong to be seeing her? Certainly. He was a married man and with a child.

So Geddes (sp?) was interested in promoting marriage and family values? Well, I certainly hope so. That would be a noble sentiment indeed.

Cheers.
LC

[Ally]

Hello Ally. Thanks.

Must confess ignorance to all those. I find little relish in public scandals--there but for the grace of God goes Jeremy Taylor.

But to describe my thinking about scandals in general, I ask you to recall "Citizen Kane." Just before election day, Charles Foster Kane was found in "a love triangle" with Susan Alexander. (Hope that's right--working with an old chap's memory.) At any rate, was he wrong to be seeing her? Certainly. He was a married man and with a child.

So Geddes (sp?) was interested in promoting marriage and family values? Well, I certainly hope so. That would be a noble sentiment indeed.

Cheers.
LC

It would depend on the context. In general who someone sleeps with is, in my opinion, entirely their business. Unless they are promoting public policy to the contrary. For instance a man who had his mistress have an abortion while he claims to be pro-life. A man who is found to be having sex with another man while proclaiming gays are evil. Relevancy is key.

If this were a piece talking about what a horndog Trevor is and how he cheated on his wife (I have no idea if he is or was ever married so I am simply using the example provided by Lynn of an affair) that frankly would be entirely improper and I would rightly say Mark had no business running it or Ripperologist publishing it. That's between him and his imaginary wife. But this is not about some bit of private integrity. It's about the integrity of his work. Therefore, it has journalistic relevance.

I have actually sat down and thought about the possible consequences to Trevor. I have looked at the possible loss of income, imagined the speaking engagements drying up and based on a purely personal strand of mercy that I have not yet stomped out of my almost entirely charred and blackened soul, have felt a slight twinge of sympathy for him. But then I think about the fact of how he has responded and I ruthlessly crushed that twinge down. If you look at my first post, I attempted to be measured (though I admit I generally fail miserably at measured). It was not until after I read his responses that I lost my cool.

He chose his path. And he doesn't seem to regret it at all, and rather than owning his mistakes, he has attempted to character assassinate Mark and everyone who has ever spoken to him, drudging up this cabal nonsense as if this imaginary cabal plagiarized his book for him. So he's not worth that twinge of sympathy and I am fool for having felt it, however briefly I did.

[lynn cates]

Biden his time.

Hello Chris. Yes, indeed.

I think the current American Vice President once withdrew from seeking office on that account.

Cheers.
LC

[mklhawley]

Hello Mike. Thanks.

"There's just not an 'on the other hand'."

Are you seriously suggesting that an instructor should violate norms and FERPA rules by publicly browbeating students who improperly footnote?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

Not at all. I just get the feeling this argument is having a 'red herring' effect on the fact that Trevor did a no-no.

Sincerely,

Mike

[lynn cates]

law, etc.

Hello Ally. Thanks.

I think you are wise to distinguish ethics from law. They are two quite different normative disciplines.

Legally, so far as I can tell (given the codes to which I have access), no one has broken any laws.

Morally/ethically, I struggle hard NOT to see laziness on one hand and vindictiveness on the other. And since I am prone to both . . .

Cheers.
LC