tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13628961.post115147667515130061..comments2024-03-17T12:21:38.902+05:30Comments on ki-jaana-main-kaun: I read the verbatim copiesHow do we knowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10997565750098001380noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13628961.post-1151908311633326562006-07-03T12:01:00.000+05:302006-07-03T12:01:00.000+05:30hi Chiya: We think alike on this one! Hi Wriju: Th...hi Chiya: We think alike on this one! <BR/>Hi Wriju: The problem is that the concept of a girl having to be original or pretty is age old.. even Jane Austen said it. And before her our great great great... grandmothers. So, who is the original source here: Jane Austen or my ancestor of a grandmother. The same is true of all other chicklit stuff copied. <BR/><BR/>I perfectly agree with you that credit, where its due, must be given. My objection is against demanding credit on generic contexts and passages.All sources must be identified where applicable, because the Western thought, which is the current thought, requires it. <BR/><BR/>To me personally, no one person is the source. Because nothing, really, is that original. <BR/><BR/><BR/>Hi Tell me no more: We never are the only ones doing anything :-) <BR/><BR/><BR/>Hi Rajesh: Which ones are not working please?? And thanks for poiting it out.How do we knowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01763488475931737293noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13628961.post-1151780440749204602006-07-02T00:30:00.000+05:302006-07-02T00:30:00.000+05:30hiii..check out the links at other blogs its not w...hiii..<BR/><BR/>check out the links at other blogs its not working...Rajeshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01738390092315686719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13628961.post-1151653384061536022006-06-30T13:13:00.000+05:302006-06-30T13:13:00.000+05:30hmmm..guess i'm not the only one then..hmmm..guess i'm not the only one then..A Arorahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08323202581830007371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13628961.post-1151484152065388122006-06-28T14:12:00.000+05:302006-06-28T14:12:00.000+05:30McCafferty writes on page 6 of her first novel: “S...McCafferty writes on page 6 of her first novel: “Sabrina was the brainy Angel. Yet another example of how every girl had to be one or the other: Pretty or smart. Guess which one I got. You’ll see where it’s gotten me.” <BR/><BR/>Viswanathan writes on page 39 of her novel: “Moneypenny was the brainy female character. Yet another example of how every girl had to be one or the other: smart or pretty. I had long resigned myself to category one, and as long as it got me to Harvard, I was happy. Except, it hadn’t gotten me to Harvard. Clearly, it was time to switch to category two.” <BR/><BR/>There are obvious changes to the original passage. But the copy is unmistakeable. It may even be a silly, harmless piece of writing to copy. But what's wrong in admitting your sources.<BR/><BR/>Let me give you an example.<BR/><BR/>TS Eliot's Wasteland has hundreds of references to Dante, Shakespeare etc. The allusions to these texts are just subliminal - his work is very original. Words such as "April is the cruelest month of the year" or "the sky is spread like an etherised patient on a table" overturn centuries of poetic convention that consistently depict April and Sky very romantically.<BR/>And guess what TS Eliot admits every one of his sources in his lengthy notes. Yes even insignificant ones. It is protocol to do so, no matter how original your work :-)Wrijuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10794890487028738174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13628961.post-1151481968900886702006-06-28T13:36:00.000+05:302006-06-28T13:36:00.000+05:30well... my point again..There isnt anything in the...well... my point again..<BR/><BR/>There isnt anything in the writing which can actually provoke so much of controversy.<BR/>It is just the kind of money involve.<BR/><BR/>Or may be, we are on a different platform.Aradhnahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00129720487833848587noreply@blogger.com