Famous Plagiarists.com © WarOnPlagiarism.org-- Pop-Fiction/Non-Fiction Profiles

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Timothy Barrus, AKA Nasdijj

Profile:

POPF/NF-2006-TB

Name:

Timothy Barrus, AKA Nasdijj

War on
Plagiarism
Threat Level:

Red: Severe Risk

Occupation:

Formerly a struggling writer of gay erotica; Most recently hailed as a Navajo memoirist with the publication of the books The Blood Runs Like a River Through My Dreams (2000), The Boy and the Dog Are Sleeping (2003); Geronimo's Bones: A Memoir of My Brother and Me (2004); Nasdijj quickly became "one of the most celebrated multicultural writers in American literature" (Fleischer, M. "Navahoax")

Allegations:

Complete fabrication of a Navajo identity under the bogus name Nasdijj; Plagiarism, parroting, and mimicking of Native American authors such as N. Scott Momaday, Leslie Silko, Michael Dorris, Sherman Alexie

Results:

Initially, Barrus' work "met with nearly universal critical praise"(Fleischer, M. "Navahoax"); then, doubts about the authenticity of Nasdijj and exposure of fabrications led to subsequent public outrage

Known for:

Limited success as an author of gay erotica and sadomasochistic literature

Overview:

On January 26, 2006, LA Weekly's Matthew Fleischer broke the story about "a struggling white writer of gay erotica becom[ing] one of multicultural literature's most celebrated memoirists--by passing himself off as Native American" ("Navahoax").

Suspicions had already been aroused by certain inconsistencies and factual innacuracies in the work of Nasdijj, the pen-name of Timothy Barrus, a native of Lansing, Michigan who came from a middle-class background with a family tree reaching back to the American Revolution and including ancestors such as Cyrus McCormick--not at all the Navajo identity fabricated in three 'memoirs' penned by Timothy "Nasdijj" Barrus:

The Blood Runs Like a River Through My Dreams (2000, Houghton Mifflin)

The Boy and the Dog Are Sleeping (2003, Ballantine)

Geronimo's Bones: A Memoir of My Brother and Me (2004, Ballantine)

Despite early suspicions of some reviewers and genuine Native American authors, the (supposed) memoirs of Nasdiij "met with nearly universal critical praise" writes Fleischer. Sherman Alexie was among the first reviewers to notice the queer way that Nasdiij seemed to be borrowing from his (Alexie's) and other works by Native Americans: "The whole time I was reading I was thinking, this doesn't just sound like me, this is me . . . At first I was flattered but as I kept reading I noticed he was borrowing from other Native writers too [N. Scott Momaday, Leslie Silko, Michael Dorris]. After reviewing The Blood Runs Like a River Through My Dreams, Alexie "determined the book was fraudulent . . . refused to blurb the book . . . accused Nasdijj of both manufacturing his identity and plagiarism at a private lunch with Nasdijj's editor Anton Mueller" but the book was published anyway, potential fraud notwithstanding.

As Fleischer continues in his LA Weekly scoop on this 'Navahoax', with regard to Timothy 'Nasdijj' Barrus' appropriations, "there was never more than a similar phrase here and there, [but] Alexie was convinced that the work was fabricated." The inconsistencies and inaccuracies were growing. Not only did Nasdiij inaccurately describe the symptoms of Fetal Alcohol Syndrom in his first 'memoir', but he also was mistaken about the matriarchal societal structure of the Navajo.

Nasdiij claimed he did not belong to a clan since his father had been a white cowboy, his mother a Navajo drunk. As Professor Irvin Morris of Dine College explains, "Our [Navajo] lineage is passed on through our mother. If his mother had a clan, he has a clan." Morris also points out that the name Nasdiij itself doesn't exist in Navajo, "It's gibberish." It was errors and inconsistencies such as these which led Morris to suspect from the very first of the Nasdiij memoirs that the author was a fake (Fleischer, M. "Navahoax"; Donovan, B. "Michigan man fakes memoirs of growing up Navajo" from NavajoTimes.com).

The fabrications and plagiaries being discovered on a regular basis among memoirists and other claimants to Native American ancestry would seem to be part of a trend, part of the "book-hyping" phenomenon at the expense of truth and authenticity. As David Ray observes in response to the Frey memoir scandal involving A Million Little Pieces:

The real responsibility for the Frey affair lies with the entire industry of book-hyping--dependent on well-financed promotion, the link between advertising and reviewing, and media that seem obliged to maintain hysteria-level gushing over this book or that. . . . They are there for the phonies with absurd pseudo-memoirs claiming to be fugitives from Nazis or bona fide Navajos or Cherokees. They are there for white men whose manuscripts are rejected, then published and hyped when they change their names to give them tribal heritage . . . Unfortunately the priority is not truth or authenticity [emphasis added] . . . those of us (including Oprah) who have shared the painful truths of our pasts, often life-threatening and shared only after years of secrecy and the shame of victimhood, therapy, and stigma, can only be insulted by the preference in "memoirs" for tall tales over accounts of what we wish had never been true in our lives. A culture of inauthenticity assures that lies will always trump truth. . . . we must conclude that they live in a pathological culture, one where pride and profit can be taken while paying lip service to truth. (Ray, D. "A Million Little Pieces of Shame")

Timothy 'Nasdijj' Barrus has a clan and a tribe all right, but it's not Navajo or Dine as the Navajo call themselves. He's in the same tribe as University of Colorado Professor Ward Churchill, the "quintessential professor run amok . . . ." (John Gravois in "Colorado Governor Proposes Standardizing the Tenure Process, a Possible Response to the Ward Churchill Controversy", Chronicle of Higher Education). And this tribe is neither Navajo nor Cherokee, the latter being the American Indian ancestry claimed by Churchill as a seeming ploy to improve his status within academia.

Barrus, Churchill and many others belong to what has been called the "Cheating Culture" (D. Callahan, A Cheating Culture), what might be called the Tribe of Many Cheats comprising a diverse array of individuals uncertain of--and unsatisfied with--their own identities, abilities, and backgrounds. Professors, memoirists, politicians, business shysters, scientists, entertainers and many other members of this large tribe vie continually for the title of Chief Big Cheat.

The Nasdiij "Navahoax" represents yet another downright detestable appropriation of Native American identity and culture from a people (Dine) who are struggling to maintain their separate language and culture in the face of American mainstream "pop-culture" dominance.

References

End Profile POPF/NF-2006-TB

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Dan Brown

Profile:

POPF/NF-2003-DB

Name:

Dan Brown

War on Plagiarism Threat Level:

Blue: Guarded Risk

Occupation:

Thriller Fiction Author

Allegations:

Plagiarism in bestselling book The Da Vinci Code

Results:

Still under review by Forensic Linguistics Institute and other specialists; legal wrangling likely to follow

Known for:

Bestselling works of thriller fiction including Digital Fortress, Deception Point, and Angels and Demons

Overview:

Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code allegedly has infringed on the rights of the authors of a similar bestseller The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail which dates back twenty years from Brown's bestselling thriller which draws on extant religious conspiracy theory.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh are the authors seeking damages from Brown and Random House for lifting "the whole architecture" of their Holy Blood and the Holy Grail work. They allege that The Da Vinci Code has plagiarized the years of research spent in the development of their hypothesis involving the marriage of Jesus to Mary Magdalene and the establishment of a royal bloodline and secret societies such as the Knights Templar.

In another allegation, Brown has also infringed/plagiarized the works of author Lewis Purdue, including Daughter of God and The Da Vinci Legacy. The Forensic Linguistics Institute analysis as reported at http://www.davincilegacy.com concludes that "evidence of infringement is overwhelming" after a lengthy list of alleged similarities between the works.

Thrillers in what might be called the "Religious Conspiracy" genre have been labeled as "Read-alikes" for their similarities--secret societies, mysterious murders, documents supposedly supporting a religious conspiracy theory.

Is there more substance to the charges than a mere "read-alike" labeling would suggest? The identical plot lines and features of The Da Vinci Code and the works of Lewis Purdue suggest at face value that there might be a basis to at least some of the allegations. For now, readers must await the legal outcome, although as other cases have demonstrated (i.e. Florence Deeks vs. H.G. Wells), such legal pronouncements are not always the final verdict.

Update: As of August 2005, Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown was cleared in a New York court of plagiarism allegations by Lewis Perdue (Read decision by United States District Judge George B. Daniels). Perdue has vowed to appeal, so despite this initial victory by Dan Brown, this may not be the last word on the plagiarism allegations (by Perdue as well as other authors).

Update: Dan Brown's latest legal skirmish involves lawsuit filed in the UK by Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent who allege that Brown and Random House lifted "the whole architecture" of their research for the book "The Holy Blood, and the Holy Grail" ('Da Vinci' author 'stole plot').

London lawsuit outcome: As reported in The Independent, Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown has prevailed in court against Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, authors of The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, which they claimed Brown had plagiarized in developing his own book in this genre of religious conspiracy theory. Forced to pay court costs by their loss, Baigent and Leigh are now stuck with a hefty legal bill of £2 million pounds! (Milmo, C. "Brown wins 'Da Vinci Code' plagiarism battle"). "War on Plagiarism" Threat level downgraded to green, "Low risk of further plagiarism activities/discoveries/related incidents. Denotes a low-level, minor occurrence of plagiarism and/or un-substantiated charges with discovery of further incidents un-likely."

References

End Profile POPF/NF-2003-DB

Yellow: Elevated Risk

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Barbara Chase-Riboud

Profile:

POPF/NF-1986-BCR

Name:

Barbara Chase-Riboud

War on Plagiarism Threat Level:

Occupation:

African-American Writer

Allegations:

Plagiarism of a non-fiction book in her book Valide: A Novel of the Harem

Results:

Mostly inconsequential, although critics have noted the irony in such allegations given Ms. Chase-Riboud's accusations that Dreamworks and Steven Spielberg (see Spielberg entry on Entertainment page of Famous Plagiarists) had plagiarized her book in making the movie Amistad

Known for:

Works of art and African-American works of historical fiction; received the Kafka Award (for Sally Hemings), the Carl Sandberg Prize; also known for pursuing allegations of plagiarism against Steven Spielberg/Dreamworks over the movie Amistad

Overview:

Suspected of being a "gold-digger" for relentlessly pursuing Dreamworks and Steven Spielberg for allegedly plagiarizing her historical novel Echo of Lions in producing the film Amistad, Barbara Chase-Ribaud's career as an African-American writer has had moments of intense controversy.

After accusing Dreamworks/Steven Spielberg of plagiarism, she herself has come under fire for plagiarizing the work of another author. Chase-Ribaud's Valide: A Novel of the Harem, a work of historical fiction, contains passages taken verbatim from N.M. Pentzer's The Harem.

In response, Chase-Ribaud claimed in a New York Times interview, "I have a technique of sort of weaving real documents and real reference materials into my novel and making a seamless narrative using both documents and fiction".

References

End Profile POPF/NF-1986-BCR

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Chris Elliott

Profile:

POPF/NF-2005-CE

Name:

Chris Elliott

War on
Plagiarism
Threat Level:

Blue: Guarded Risk

Occupation:

Comedian, Actor, recently new Novelist

Allegations:

Kidnapping Boilerplate, the robot creation of Paul Guinan as "a postmodern, post-dated parody of a hoax" (E. Wyatt); possibly plagiarism, but more likely a rehearsed instance of copyright infringement designed to generate sales for the recently released books The Shroud of the Thwacker and Heartbreakers Meet Boilerplate

Results:

Out of court financial settlement; increase in sales rank for both books at Amazon.com

Known for:

Acting and comedy roles in Get a Life ; Cabin Boy; Groundhog Day; Late Night with David Letterman

Overview:

In "The Strange Case of the Spoofer Captured by a Spoof" (E. Wyatt, New York Times), it at first seems that actor and author Chris Elliott has fallen for an online joke, infringing on the copyright owner of Boilerplate. Boilerplate is a 19th century robot who never really existed in the first place--except in the imaginative creations of Paul Guinan, and in the minds of others who, like Elliott, have been taken in by the digitally altered photographs at bigredhair.com.

This case, discussed since the New York Times article on CNBC TV and other media outlets, might be labeled "The Case of the Kidnapped Robot that Never Was".

(Professor J.P. Lesko discussing "The Case of the Kidnapped Robot that Never Was" on CNBC TV. November 1, 2005)

The fictitious robot appears in Elliott's just released (October 2005) parody-murder-mystery-sci-fi novel The Shroud of the Thwacker, a work of *historical* crime fiction intended to be a spoof of figures such as Teddy Roosevelt, Yoko Ono . . . and Boilerplate.

Slight problem here. Boilerplate isn't historical. He was never invented by Professor Archibald Campion for exhibit at the 1893 World's Fair in Chicago (see digitally altered photo above). Rather, Boilerplate is an invention of the postmodern imagination, "a postmodern, post-dated parody of a hoax" (E. Wyatt) who features first in Guinan's comic/graphic novel Heartbreakers Meet Boilerplate and at the website bigredhair.com.

Plagiarism? The word has been mentioned. But this case of the kidnapped robot that never was seems more like a relatively minor instance of copyright infringement (already settled out of court before the scandal even broke) with a possible whiff of gimmickry and sales-mongering.

One can almost envision an excited 3-way cell phone conversation between Elliott, Guinan and a publishing rep: "Great idea! Here's your cut, this'll be mine . . . good publicity for our new books . . . "

Both authors, Elliott and Guinan, are set to profit off of this "scandal" which has suspiciously broken right about the time that any new book could use a good sales boost--Heartbreakers Meet Boilerplate was released in July 2005, The Shroud of the Thwacker in October of 2005. The 'plagiarism' and/or copyright infringement story *broke* on November 1st 2005 in the New York Times. Hmmmmmmm . . . coincidence? Or rehearsed 'scandal'? Gasp! Boilerplate kidnapped by Elliott! Fell for an Internet spoof? NO WAY!

References

End Profile POPF/NF-2005-CE

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Guo Jingming

Profile:

POPF/NF-2004-GJ

Name:

Guo Jingming

War on
Plagiarism
Threat Level:

Orange: High Risk

Occupation:

Author, university student

Allegations:

Plagiarism of another book in Guo's popular (over 1 million sold) novel Never Flowers In Never Dream

Results:

Court decision mandated that Guo and his publisher pay 200,000 yuan (US$24,000) to Zhuang Yu for copyright infringement of her work; Guo and the publisher were also required to publish an apology in China Youth Daily; Beijing Books Building required to cease sales of Never Flowers In Never Dream

Known for:

Best-selling work of fiction, Never Flowers In Never Dream, was a big hit with young people in China, selling over a million copies; "arguably the most famous young commercial writer in China" (China Daily, December 8, 2004).

Overview:

Perhaps "the most famous young commercial writer in China", university student-author Guo Jingming was found by a court of law to have plagiarized and infringed on the copyright of another author. The work in question was Guo's novel Never Flowers in Never Dreams, an immensely popular book among China's youth selling well over a million copies ("Popular young writer loses plagiarism lawsuit." China Daily, December 8, 2004).

The author from whom Guo plagiarized, Zhuang Yu, sued for damages in the amount of 500,000 yuan, around US$60,000. Although Zhuang did not get this full amount, an intermediate court in Beijing ruled in her favor, awarding Zhuang 200,000 yuan, around US$24,000. Also included in the ruling was an order for Guo and his publisher Chunfing Press to submit an apology for publication in China Youth Daily.

Because Zhuang had published her book first, the Beijing intermediate court agreed that Guo had infringed on her copyright to Zhuang's work. However, it the court did not agree with Zhuang's contention that the idea, langauge, and character creation had been violated: "There is no regulation over protection of conception in the Copyright Law . . . language should not be monopolized by a certain person."

The idea that "language should not be monopolized" by individuals seems rather puzzling, for it seems to recognize at the same time that author's copyright should be respected while also suggesting that an author cannot reserve to himself the linguistic-templates which might be chosen to convey unique ideas and concepts.

Although imitation is a feature of most if not all rhetorical traditions, there are perhaps specific patterns of imitation identifiable from one tradition to another. There are specific ways of imitating in rhetorical traditions, such as the Chinese tradition of using a "plug-in" framework or model. The use of a model piece of writing as a template or as a framework for the construction of a "new" text has been recognized as a Chinese traditional rhetorical practice which might be seen as conflicting somewhat with Western views on writing.

Further study of the Guo case is needed to determine if there might have been a sort of linguistic template appropriation from Zhuang. This sort of appropriation has been observed in previous cases of plagiarism/derivation involving second language writers, for example the case of the Peking University scientists who plagiarized the language of a previously published article to report their own research results.

And the comment by the Beijing intermediate court that "language should not be monopolized" would seem to be a reference to a long-existing cultural tradition which allowed writers to make use of other author's linguistic utterances. It is quite possible that the Guo case is just another "run-of-the-mill" incident of plagiarism, but then again, further study might reveal some interesting cultural background to how derivation and plagiarism are viewed today in modern China.

From her teaching experience in China, Matalene (1985) introduced some of the traditional differences between Western and Chinese views on writing:

Western readers want the information that enables them to continue their own inquiries. And Western writers want careful credit for their own ideas, for their own unique inventions.

Since words are used for presenting ideas, the appropriation of words in the West is generally considered to be a violation of convention. Referencing is a convention used to avoid charges of plagiarism, resulting in part from the desire of Western writers to receive due credit for inventions and ideas which are expressed by word compositions.

In Chinese tradition, however--at least in times past--imitation is(was) perfectly acceptable, even if it means using the exact wording of another author. Imitation is encouraged, especially for beginning or developing writers, whereas the Western world would condemn the same imitation as plagiarism or academic dishonesty (Matalene 1985).

Consider the following paragraph entitled "Cultural Block" written by one of Matalene's students in explaining perceptions of imitation strategies:

After our teacher's explanation, we understand that in her country or some others plagiarism is forbidden. Whenever you want to quote a passage from an essay or article, you must be permitted by its author, or else you will be accused as a criminal. This is clearly made by their laws. However in our country, things are a little different. We may perhaps call what our teacher calls "plagiarism" as "imitation," which is sometimes encouraged, especially for a beginner. Imitation is usually considered to be one of the secrets for a greenhand in writing. So there are many printed books which consist of many kind of good models to follow for learners. I remember when I was in middle school, I wrote a Chinese composition by imitating several model writings which were suitable for my topic. I also employed some of the same words and phrases in them. I was praised by the teacher for this writing (803)

Imitation and memorisation of entire passages in Chinese literacy instruction is (was) encouraged and praised, and there seem to be specific patterns of imitation. This student has commented on the imitation of model writings suitable for a given topic.

Carson (1992) discusses the Chinese use of "plug-in templates" or frameworks which students may use in imitating a model piece of writing. Carson explains that "memorisation of texts is a good way for students to develop their writing abilities" and that traditional Chinese composition strategies included memorising model frameworks and text structures which other writers have used successfully. After adopting the appropriate model text's framework, the writer would substitute or "plug in" his/her own phrases and words to complete the composition.

Again, caution is needed before definitively stating that traditional Chinese rhetorical strategies might be a factor in the Guo plagiarism case, yet as suggested by the court, there seems to be a certain degree of latitude in an author's being able to make use of the language crafted by others, and this recognition of longstanding cultural tradition seems to be reflected in the Beijing court's statement that "language should not be monopolized by a certain person." And with Guo's being a university student-author, he might have been considered to be still a "greenhand", a beginning writer whose imitation might be viewed as being part of the developmental process. The court did side with the offended author Zhuang, so for whatever reason Guo decided to plagiarize, this case definitely represents a victory for authorship.

References

End Profile POPF/NF-2004-GJ

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Stephen King

Profile:

POPF/NF-1996-SK

Name:

Stephen King

War on Plagiarism Threat Level:

Green: Low Risk

Occupation:

Author of Horror Novels

Allegations:

Plagiarism in King's novel Desparation and stealing of ideas from Christine Starobin's unpublished book manuscript entitled "Blood Eternal"

Results:

King was acquitted by US District Judge David Hurd; public critique of King's work by the judge concluded the case, the astute literary criticism from a jurist's point of view not necessarily flattering the well known novel/screenplay author

Known for:

Horror novels and screenplays based on such novels

Overview:

When an adjunct professor at Ulster Community College took Stephen King to court for allegedly plagiarizing her manuscript "Blood Eternal", a somewhat humorous scene unfolded.

The judge didn't think that either King's novel Desperation or the plaintiff's book manuscript was a "particularly good read", but neither did he agree with the plaintiff's view that King had committed "literary rape".

Christina Starobin was subjected to scathing criticism from US District Judge David Hurd who found her allegations lacking the evidence needed to support her case, and he admonished her for "engag[ing] in a recurring and vitriolic attack upon the character and abilities of King."

King's literary reputation as a horror novelist has apparently survived both an accusation of literary rape in the form of plagiarism as well as a bit of jurisprudential literary criticism.

References

End Profile POPF/NF-1996-SK