Re: On plagiarism and source for plots
Palaka, Rao X - EWW EXO (Palaka.Rao@emeryworld.com)
Fri, 12 Dec 1997 14:46:19 -0800
Dear Sirs/Madams:
Sometime yesterday, I was driving by your club and couldn't help
overhearing the interesting conversation you all were having. I parked
my car right next to the window and have been listening in. And now
excuse my audacity in barging in and lecturing you:
First, a couple of not so well known cases of "plagiarism":
Remember that movie "indruDu-candruDu" (kamala haasan *er directed by
singeetam srinivasarao) you all enjoyed? That's a true-copy of an
eighties film, "Moon over Parador" (Richard Dreyfus *er).
How can you ever forget that beautiful song "zumbaahE AzumbahE..."(may
not be the beginning) from "kshaNa kshaNam" with brilliant drums?
That's an M-ki-M of a song by "Miami ...".
In both instances, I saw/heard the telugu version first and discovered
the originals much later and only by chance. Both times my initial
reaction was a feeling of being cheated by the telugu directors. I felt
I had over-estimated their genius. But, after some thought, I've come
to understand (even appreciate!) their dishonesty eventhough I've
permanently downgraded their creativity. My explanation to myself is
the following: If they hadn't watched and listened to scores of foreign
movies/songs to copy the gems into telugu, I --and crores of telugus--
wouldn't have known the clever plot/beat of the movie/song. Now, would
they have used the plot/song it if they had to pay a large amount in
royalties? Of course, not! There is no way telugu movies can generate
that kind of revenue. And, what a loss would it have been! So, even
though, it may be somewhat unfair to the original artist (who I am sure
is sufficiently rewarded by the market s/he is serving), it's an
efficient way of increasing the "human welfare". Everytime, I listen to
some bright new idea (or work of art) from other countries, I think it's
a pity that there are so many people out there who can benefit from the
idea but don't even know it exists.
So, why don't our artists acknowledge when they "copy" or "adapt" an
idea? I remember reading Poranki Dakshina Murthy's Ph.D. thesis on
telugu short story where he lists many instances where telugu writers
copied. He mentions the fear of law suits /cost of royalties as the
main reason why writers don't acknowledge their sources even when it's
public knowledge that they copied. (Interestingly, Dakshina Murthy
mentions several telugu stories that are copies of other telugu
stories.)
I am also against looking down upon stories that are taken from real
life. Newspapers can only provide factual information and there may be
many people who want to see an artist's impression of what the
emotions/feelings behind the facts might be. So, the artist is using
his/her creativity even when using real events. Besides, how do we know
that all those stories that are "not based on real-life" are really
such? It may just be that the people involved didn't make it to the
newspapers! I've read several famous writers describe which real-life
event provided the theme or punch-line for their stories without ever
being called a poor writer. (I've a cousin who wrote a series of
stories when he was a teenager --all with his father as the villain ;-)
Finally, isn't originality all about successfully hiding your sources? I
heard this story about a Greek mathematician who was very successful in
publishing until they found out that he was simply translating from
Russian :-)
Regards,
- Rao