<p>All they have to do is look at the original manuscript, right? Also, Megan McCafferty, author of Sloppy Firsts, said that plot points and character outlines were lifted from her books. That's really suspicious.</p>
<p>Regarding the post above, you're asserting that Kaavya's publishers and editors plagiarized for her? Highly unlikely. In general, why would publishers and editors want to run the risk of damaging their reputations should the plagiarism come to public attention? No marketing for a single author is worth that risk. This girl knew what she was doing, and her publishers and editors were lax with standards of their own accord. </p>
<p>Kaavya is nineteen, not some clueless elementary school kid. She deserves any punishment that comes her way.</p>
<p>Seems Harvard can't stop with the bad publicity these days.</p>
<p>Lets not make this a Harvard thing. Sadly, there are dishonest students at every school - most just don't get this much publicity.</p>
<p>I can't believe she would lift things so similarly from the other series. I hate to be so frank... but how could a Harvard student be so stupid? Assuming she is the one at fault here. Tisk tisk, I wanted to read that book now but I'd feel like a jerk if I did.</p>
<p>Though I'm not interested in Harvard, I agree with what ICargirl says. I think it's rather Harvard's bad luck of having two cases of plagiarism (intentional or not) so highly publiczied.</p>
<p>I didn't say it was likely at all that her publishers plagiarized for her, I was just saying that all facts should be considered. In any case, we now know that it was indeed Kaavya herself who's responsible for the "unfortunate similarities."</p>
<p>has there been an official statement from her or her publisher?</p>
<p>thanks for the link</p>
<p>"'While the central stories of my book and hers are completely different, I wasn't aware of how much I may have internalised Ms McCafferty's words. I am a huge fan of her work and can honestly say that any phrasing similarities between her works and mine were completely unintentional and unconscious.'"</p>
<p>That's sort of what I was thinking as I read the Crimson article, too. I mean, sure, it doesn't look good, but the similarities are small and scattered. Perhaps I'm just na</p>
<p>Unfortunate turn of events, to say the least. This was not a school report or last-minute project. The girl got a $500,000 advance for her work, for gods sakes. How can one "forget" that they read about diet coke purchases at a fast-food store in another book? </p>
<p>An excuse like "unconcious plagarism" just isn't going to cut it, imho... and to top it all - with her official statement she has also invalidated any chance that the editing process may have slipped in some of the plagarized words.</p>
<p>For anyone saying this was accidental, are you delusional, or just plain dumb?</p>
<p>Here's the list of similarities; <a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=512965%5B/url%5D">http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=512965</a></p>
<p>Are you seriously going to tell me that this was accidental? From the same two sources, with books CONTAINING THE EXACT SAME PLOT, by the EXACT SAME AUTHOR? </p>
<p>Here's what the author said LAST WEEK about her novel; (from <a href="http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-6/1145943324186730.xml&coll=1%5B/url%5D">http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-6/1145943324186730.xml&coll=1</a>)</p>
<p>
<p>"Viswanathan could not be reached directly yesterday. But when asked in an interview with The Star-Ledger last week about what books may have helped inspire 'Opal Mehta,' Viswanathan said, 'Nothing I read gave me the inspiration.'"
</p>
<p>Guess that story changed between this week and last week, huh? From "nothing I read gave me the inspiration" to "I loved two books by the author and I internalized her works to the extent of copying word-for-word passages from her book"??</p>
<p>This IS MUCH WORSE THAN JAMES FREY.</p>
<p>At least Frey wrote an ORIGINAL WORK, even if it had nothing to do with his life. She copied the plot, syntax, characters, language, situations, and story from another author's work.</p>
<p>Two reasons this really infuriates me;</p>
<ol>
<li> There are dozens and dozens of talented authors in the world who never got to publish a book and died penniless and unappreciated. Just think of how many legendary writers this pertains to. (O'Toole's Pulitzer Prize-winning "The Confederacy of Dunces" is a recent example) Think of how many struggling writers there are today.</li>
</ol>
<p>She, on the other hand, got a $500,000 book deal at the age of 17, had the script for the book picked up by Dreamworks, got into Harvard, and God knows how many else perks for COPYING material that was lousy garbage TO BEGIN WITH. </p>
<ol>
<li> </li>
</ol>
<p>Where the hell are her publishers on this?? They are either incompetent morons who can't do their job properly, or else are a malicious group which has no problem in producing plagirized material. </p>
<p>And seriously, who the hell signs a 17 year old to a $500,000 book deal? Did you seriously think a 17 year old has an interesting and original story to tell? Like, how many cloistered, upper middle-class 17 year olds in the history of mankind have ever had an interesting story of their own??</p>
<p>I still can't believe some people have the audicity to defend her. That sickens me.</p>
<p>Gracie--Whoa, calm down! The answer to your first question is probably the latter. I saw neither of the two articles you referred to, I was just commenting based on the article linked to in the first post here, which contained just a couple of examples of similar wording. You obviously feel more strongly about this than I do, and could very well be right, I just wanted to put in what I saw.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, as a little addendum;</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I challenge anyone believing this to be accidental to read two books once, and then, after two years have passed, without consulting either of them, write your own book. </p>
<p>See how many passages are word-for-word the same, how many plot details are identical, how many precise numbers and metaphors are the same, how many characters are indistinguishable, etc.</p>
<p>Edit:</p>
<p>Guitarman, I didn't even see your response, man. I was just commenting in general to everyone that still believes this is an accident after viewing all the relevant evidence. </p>
<p>It's one thing to believe this is an accident without the evidence. But from reading her denial last week about nothing influencing her, to the incredibly precise and exact numbers that are the same between her and McAfferty's works, to the fact that EVERYTHING else is the same, from characters to plot to story to action, there's just no way anyone can intelligently defend her. </p>
<p>You don't "internalize" a book to the point of copying it verbatim like that after two years.</p>
<p>I have a near-photographic memory myself and write very frequently, and I've never even come close to copying a single passage that closely, let alone forty. </p>
<p>Yes, I feel very strongly about this. It's absolutely sickening and despicable.</p>
<p>haha, it's cool :) Hmm, you're probably right.</p>
<p>GuitarMan--I think that GracieLegend is probably correct. This is a really unfortunate story of a girl who was probably not much of a writer to begin with (if you read all the news articles, you will notice that she shares the copyright with a book packaging company who apparently shaped the story and made it marketable). I think that she got in over her head and was trying to write a book that she probably really didn't have in her at the same time she was studying for finals last year and used language that she remembered from books she had read previously. It is not very credible to me that she "internalized" the language of the McCafferty books because they were so important to her but didn't remember where she got it from. It is more likely that she and her lawyers concluded that it had to be "unconscious" borrowing as a legal matter, because to admit to out and out plagiarism would cause a problem in any subsequent lawsuit.</p>
<p>I also agree with Gracie that it is quite despicable behavior and I do hope that she does not benefit monetarily from her acts (although the cynical side of me thinks that this story will probably lead to more books being sold and that she'll make millions on the movie).</p>
<p>What I want to know is why anyone in their right mind would advance a 17 year old girl $500,000 to write a novel.</p>
<p>Probably because they calculated they'd make big money on the deal.</p>
<p>We all have to study for finals; I'm afraid I can't see this as an excuse for shameless commercial plagarism. Gracie is right: it's sad that a 17-year old girl with minimal (if any) talent can score a six-figure advance for a plagarized manuscript while tons of genuinely gifted writers struggle to achieve recognition. Her initial lying to the Crimson as well as the sheer volume of evidence convinces me that her crime was not only conscious, but calculated. This was far too crafty and elaborate to be the result of someone who has innocently overwhelmed.</p>
<p>the irony here is that she will probably sell more books</p>