Plagiarism has become an issue of great concern. Gladwell in his article “Something Borrowed” discusses this issue through multiple facets of a inquiry so as to show a clear apprehension of the rational belongings. Gladwell’s narrative follows after his work is plagiarized in a Broadway drama. “Frozen” written by Lavery. The drama had the chief character based on Lewis’s life who had been featured by Gladwell in a magazine profile “Damaged” . Dorothy Lewis was a head-shrinker. and she had been angered by Lavery’s move to utilize her life in order to make the play’s.
Through the multiple facets. Gladwell advocates against inordinate rational belongings since it’s a hinderance to creativeness. However. he besides makes it clear that people need to be cognizant of plagiarism. The thoughts related to the issue of plagiarism are presented to the reader through the rhetorical scheme of multiple places. The readers are encouraged to reconsider the rational belongings. Gladwell employs different position points based on Lewis. Lavery. every bit good as his ain sentiment about plagiarism. Gladwell recognizes how indiscriminate plagiarism can be. and discusses the deductions that may emanate from it.
For case. his remarks. “I was sitting at place reading the drama and I realized that it was. I felt robbed and violated in some curious manner. It was as if person had stolen? I don’t believe in the psyche. but if there was such a thing. it was as if person had stolen my essence” ( Gladwell 314 ) . Lewis seems to be affected by Lavery’s drama usage of her life to make a chief character. . Gladwell exposes a positive attitude towards this instance of plagiarism when he says that he saw his work as a beginning of inspiration for Lavery’s work.
In this paper. the rhetorical scheme used by Gladwell to show the multiple facets of a inquiry in understanding the issue of plagiarism efficaciously will be discussed. A review will be given on the article by seting into consideration Gladwell’s manner and organisation in the article. Discussion To get down with. I would wish to state that Malcolm Gladwell’s rhetorical scheme to show multiple facets of a inquiry in order to guarantee to advance an apprehension on the issue of plagiarism in the article “Something Borrowed” is effectual.
The scheme makes it possible for Gladwell to show his ain sentiment and thoughts to the readers. while at the same clip triping the reader’s ideas about the issue. For case. after he discovers that Lavery had used his work without acknowledging him. he ha a positive attitude towards the instance despite feeling violated. He writes a mail to Lavery stating. “I am happy to be the beginning of inspiration for the other authors. and had you asked for my permission to quote-even liberally-from my piece. I would hold been delighted to compel.
But to raise stuff without my blessing. is theft” ( Gladwell 316 ) . Gladwell presents his position that though Lavery had copied his work ; he recognized that it had acted as a beginning of inspiration for her work. He presents a negative sentiment towards plagiarism when he states that he felt profaned and robbed after detecting that Lavery drama had copied his work. Lewis’s letdown is used as a good illustration of the negative effects of plagiarism in a person’s life. and her negative feelings and her actions are discussed by Gladwell to assist the readers to admit how detrimental plagiarism can be.
Lewis feels that her life has been ruined which motivated her to engage a attorney who would oppugn the drama. Gladwell’s manner and organisation in the article allows him to discourse the positive facet of Lavery copying his work. He says that though he had felt violated and robbed. he felt privileged that Lavery had used his work as the base of her drama. I think that Gladwell was right in his logical thinking and grasp. Sometimes other authors borrow from us because they are inspired by our work. For illustration. he says in the article.
“On some degree. I considered Lavery’s borrowing to be a compliment” . He asks. “But how would I have been better off if Lavery had disguised the beginning of her inspiration? ” Gladwell uses the article to show different positions about rational belongings. While he understands Lewis’s choler about the drama. he besides finds it strange that Lewis would bespeak to be assigned the right of first publication to Gladwell’s article to help her in the jurisprudence suit. When he goes through a transcript of “Frozen” . Gladwell comes to appreciate that his words had been used for a good cause.
Gladwell uses illustrations from the music industry as an affectional manner of converting people that they should reconsider their sentiment about rational belongings. The life’s experiences are really instrumental in giving us a clear apprehension about an issue. Therefore. I support Gladwell’s determination to make this One illustration is a controversial instance between the Beastie Boys and Newton. The case’s result was a prove that copying another person’s work can be allowed to a certain degree. A New York music professor comments supports this position. “It’s no more than a mordent. a bend.
It’s been done 1000s upon 1000s of times. No 1 can state they ain that” . Newton’s accusals against the Beastie Boys that they had copied another individuals work is said to keep no H2O since it was fiddling. By concentrating on the rational belongings philosophy. Gladwell gives us an penetration into copying of work. He states that. the rational belongings philosophy does non supply an accurate state of affairs of the ethical rule that one should non steal. Stealing is allowed by the philosophy based on how much work a individual transcripts. The protection of right of first publications is clip limited. a impression that I to the full agree with.
Gladwell asks. “So is it true that words belong to the individual who wrote them. merely as other sorts of belongings belong to their proprietors? Actually. no” . He uses the sentiment of a Stanford Law Professor to that mentioning to a right of first publication as belongings is misdirecting. Intellectual-property extremism may besides be experienced in literature. harmonizing to Gladwell. He compares this to the extremism that has been seen in the concern universe. where proprietors on patents use them for their ain private involvements. The ethical regulations in literature advocator against any copying. non even that of a few words.
An experience that Gladwell has with his friend who is in the music field supports the position that copying can be accepted merely up to certain degrees. Gladwell uses this experience explicate two facets in which we can look at copying. Though copying demands to be condemned. it should be seen as a originative procedure. While true copying should non be allowed because it inhibits creativeness. over watchfulness in originative look policing is non necessary. Gladwell experience with Lavery assists us to understanding how adoption can be done in the right manner.
Acknowledging the difference between borrowing that is simply derivative. and the 1 that is transformative is critical when it comes to understanding plagiarism. It is people’s deficiency of cognition about this difference that made them look at in Lavery’s work as an offense. The people did non seek to cognize why and what Lavery had copied. every bit good as the intent of copying. In add-on. Gladwell’s conversation with Lavery provides the readers with some of the grounds why copying may be done. For illustration. Lavery explains her actions by stating that she had wanted to be accurate.
That was why she used Gladwell’s work in her work. Despite the justification. Gladwell seems to inquire why Lavery did non recognition him and Lewis for their work. Creativity is used by Gladwell to explicate how copying can be used suitably. He approves Lavery’s usage of his work as the edifice block for her work. He asks. “Isn’t that the manner creativeness is supposed to work? ” . To him. it’s non a job when old words are used to make new thoughts. The job comes in when new words are used to stand for old thoughts. Gladwell explains that Lewis’s choler did non emanate from Lavery’s plagiarism.
Alternatively. she had been angered by the changing of her narrative and art since the usage of old words for a new thought is as unsettling and hurtful merely like plagiarism. Gladwell finalizes his article by utilizing sarcasm. He is surprised that the journalists in knocking Lavery’s work copied her work. They copied from Lavery the same words that Lavery had copied from him. “The difference between a offense of immorality and a offense of unwellness is the difference between a wickedness and a symptom” . Conclusion Plagiarism in literature is considered incorrect and unacceptable.
The authors hold the sentiment that any authors work should be wholly new. However. this is stated in the article to be the dishonesty of those who can be considered as plagiarism fundamentalists. There is demand to acknowledge that create belongings goes in a rhythm. and the ironss of influence every bit good as development in literature exists. This provides authors with an chance to borrow from others and utilize it for a good intent. Works Cited Gladwell. Malcolm. Something Borrowed. 2004 hypertext transfer protocol: //www. gladwell. com/2004/2004_11_25_a_borrowed. hypertext markup language Accessed on September 23. 2008