|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
No loss for words..., July 14, 2004
Neal Bowers made an interesting discovery one day - one of his poems was published under someone else's name.With this minor irritation (one never gets rich from poetry, one's own or others), Bowers began the trek down a bizarre path to try to find out who was plagiarising his work, and why. Bowers discovered a man going by the name of David Sumner, aka David Jones, who had a habit of copying the poetry from others (not only Bowers), changing the title and a first line or two, and submitting these to poetry journals, magazines and other media outlets as his own. Exactly why was unclear - any pieces of note would undoubtedly be discovered, and few publishing successes came with any kind of monetary compensation attached. Bowers never intended to become a detective, but the trail just kept on going. Bowers actually made contact with the person, threatened legal action, abandoned because, after all, there was no money in it beyond Sumner/Jones sent to Bowers (some $600 or so that he managed to make from the poems), copies of journals from which he'd lifted poems, a marked book that showed his submission patterns - each step of the way, Sumner/Jones claimed to be operating in good faith, but there was inevitably more to be found. What was going on? The more Bowers dug, the more surreal the situation became. Sumner/Jones had been a teacher in Illinois and Oregon, dismissed under terrible circumstances (molestation of children from his second-grade classrooms), jailed for the actions, and strangely, focussed his plagiarism on poetry that dealt with family issues and loss. Bowers was not the only poet plagiarised - as it turned out, Sumner/Jones was successful enough to have many publishing successes, and even had poetry readings arranged. Perhaps the most interesting part of this is near the end, the attitudes of various persons towards Bowers and his quest for some sort of justice. Journalists by and large were sympathetic, not liking the idea of someone stealing the words (the stock-in-trade of their profession) and getting away with it. But there were those in the media, including poetry journal editors, who seemed to think that Bowers was the 'bad guy' for making such a fuss. Because of the attentions of journalists, others who felt they'd been wronged (not only in plagiarism, but in other realms, too) assumed Bowers would be a kindred spirit and naturally willing to help them - Bowers' mail quadrupled, with all manner of bizarre requests. Bowers even discovered plagiarism from his friends - one friend, a calligrapher, set some of Bowers' poems in her art, and even produced her own hand-drawn book of his poems (offered at a very high price) without permission, and perhaps more surprisingly, without any recognition that what she was doing was in any way wrong - words were hers for the taking. In the end, the story ends the way it began - Jones/Sumner still sending out plagiarised work, now having 'graduated' to short stories. But one assumes that Bowers will let others continue the pursuit. Sumner/Jones, in finding Bowers to be a reasonable, even nice, person generally, may have focussed upon him more directly because of this. No good deed goes unpunished! A fascinating and unexpected tale.
|