Many of you have already picked up on the story broken by the Harvard Crimson on Sunday. It appears VERY likely that young author Kaavya Viswanathan is a cheat. Her newly released novel, part of a lucrative two-book deal, has several passages that are almost identical to a 2001 novel that examined similar adolescent themes:
A recently-published novel by Harvard undergraduate Kaavya Viswanathan ’08, “How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life,” contains several passages that are strikingly similar to two books by Megan F. McCafferty–the 2001 novel “Sloppy Firsts” and the 2003 novel “Second Helpings.”
At one point, “Opal Mehta” contains a 14-word passage that appears verbatim in McCafferty’s book “Sloppy Firsts.”
Reached on her cell phone Saturday night, Viswanathan said, “No comment. I have no idea what you are talking about.”
McCafferty, the author of three novels and a former editor at the magazine Cosmopolitan, wrote in an e-mail to The Crimson Saturday night: “I’m already aware of this situation, and so is my publisher…” [Link]
Normally I would be skeptical until I heard more about this, but the Crimson has just broken it down to the point where you know how this is all going to end. Her literary career is over. If I were her I would think about falling back on medical school or something real quick. I was thrilled to see a teenage girl that could still write and didn’t use “u” instead of “you,” or “r” instead of “are.” My hopes for the next generation are now completely dashed. Here are just two of the numerous examples of apparent plagiarism cited by the Crimson:
From page 217 of McCafferty’s first novel: “But then he tapped me on the shoulder, and said something so random that I was afraid he was back on the junk.”
From page 142 of Viswanathan’s novel: “…he tapped me on the shoulder and said something so random I worried that he needed more expert counseling than I could provide…”From page 237 of McCafferty’s first novel: “Finally, four major department stores and 170 specialty shops later, we were done.”
From page 51 of Viswanathan’s novel: “Five department stores, and 170 specialty shops later, I was sick of listening to her hum along to Alicia Keys……” [Link]
<
p>
Reading the Crimson article inspired me to do some investigative blogging of my own and has led me to a fantastic discovery which I would like to reveal first to SM readers (an then later to the world press). Aided by SM staff I have found striking similarities between the novel “How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and Got a Life,” and the 1982 book Holy Blood, Holy Grail by authors Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh. For example, if you take the name of the main character, “Opal Mehta,” and you rearrange the letters, it gives you the following phrase:
<
p>I think somewhere in Holy Blood, Holy Grail they mention that “a pale moth” is one of the symbols associated with the female divinity, a symbol that was suppressed in the 6th century by the papacy. On a previous post we all wondered why the title character would be named “Opal Mehta” of all things. It makes sense to me now.
Furthermore, I have reason to believe that Kaavya Viswanathan may not even be her real name. Rearranging the letters in her name gives you:
Roughly translated this seems to mean that Satan stays away from wherever the Ankh is displayed (the ankh being an ancient symbol that some believe is the precursor to the Christian cross). This again is a theme that Baigent and Leigh discuss in their non-fiction book. Before the Harvard Crimson article I would have just thought that “maybe this is all a coincidence,” and this really is just a book about a teenage girl that she created from her imagination. I am sure that you all agree in light of the evidence that I have just laid out that this is highly unlikely. This girl simply has no conscience.
See related posts: How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild, and…, The narcissist principle
if she was that exhausted, it only reinforces my contention that she did the borrowing unintentionally. being in college AND writing a book, even a fluffy one? tough. something has to give and usually, that’s sleep. sleepy people make very serious mistakes.
also? that handle her instructor chose? sucks tampons.
you shouldn’t shudder! No shame in those comparisons at all. I’ve read quite a bit of chick-lit, and the best writers of the genre such as Fielding (the first Bridget Jones. The second sucked) and Marianne Keyes rank among the most amusing writers out there. While chick-lit, almost by definition, cannot aspire to be literature in the grand canonical sense, it CAN be sharp, witty, and chock-full of acute social observations. If your emails. (blog?), and letters are like this, JoaT, I’d love to correspond with you all the time 😉
er.. just want to add that I’m in no way a literature snob and I’m quite the fan of ‘mid-list’ books. ‘Chick-lit’ that does aspire to more than escapism isn’t classified as such, is what I meant.
If you haven’t read her book, on what basis do you consider her a gifted writer?
ME.
the article in the morning’s new york times makes it seem even more egregious. there are similarities in phrasings and devices between the two books that seem too contrived to be coincidental. interesting case unfolding here. i’m with cicatrix here, looks like there’s been some straight-up plagiarizing though how much by whom, and how much from malice and how much from incompetence, remains to be discovered.
Anna, if you contend that she should be forgiven and she will be/is being punished enough, I can concede that angelicAnna makes a fair argument. Unintentional though? No way. The examples that the Crimson laid out are too numerous and the NYTimes (I think?) reported that there are more examples coming. The only way this is unintentional is if the girl has a photographic memory able to reproduce entire passages from her subconscious almost verbatim. I can picture her reading Sloppy Second on her lap while typing her “own” novel into her laptop. It is the obvious intention and the subsequent denial/spin-doctoring that causes me and others to now call for blood.
Exactly, sid – unless she has some of that capote “94% recall” talent.
Nonetheless, a really good lawyer can probably easily make it seem coincidental. If it ever gets to that point.
Ditto
WORD. I wouldn’t trust anything that person says.
When you are handed such a deal, what a stupid thing to do! Why on earth plagiarize!
Dude, invoking color for everything suck like ass. WTF? If we really hate racism, why do we bring it in every conversation so gratuitously? Somehow this kind of a language smells strongly of latent racism, which we Indians are famous for. No, please dont give that fake political consciousness BS, because there is none. Thank you.
Which “human evolution” class deals with “personal space” ? Must be some intelligent discussion on the intelligent design theory. That example clearly looks more like a copy, paste and replace-keyword job than any subconscious internalization.
JK’s point about the similarity of phrases quoted in Crimson and the road slogans in Rushdie’s Haroun and the sea of stories is very interesting. I noticed that in her book, Kaavya used acronyms like HOWGIH (How Opal will get into Harvard) and HOWGAL (How Opal will get a life). I vaguely remember recurring phrases being referred to by acronyms in Haroun as well. I wonder if there are other “internalized influences” of Haroun in her book.
Janak: Nice call on the thrill / will quote. And now … Announcing two new literary prizes!
The MehtaMorphosis Award $75.00 goes to the individual who submits the best idea for the moral of the Kaavya Viswanathan story. Clearly, there is a lesson to be drawn from these tragic events — a fundamental ethical principle of which we all need reminding. But precisely what is it??? Something about specialness, or entitlement, or grandiosity, perhaps. One thing is certain: whatever it is, rarely has this philosophical truth been so dramatically illustrated. Whoever sends us the most eloquent formulation of the moral of the Viswanathan story by 5:00 p.m. Wednesday will receive a check for $75 plus a certificate honoring them for their wisdom and perspicacity. In addition, every truly original entry will be acknowledged with an Honorable Mention and a listing (with full publication credit!) at http://www.stalcommpol.org/raksasa.html
And … A $150.00 Stalcommpol Whistleblower Award goes to the individual who first gave The Crimson the idea for the Viswanathan plagiarism story! Please send us appropriate documentation (such as a copy of the e-mail with your original news tip) and instructions as to whether you would like to be credited.
E-mail jherms@stalcommpol.org or fax (617) 547-0858 James Herms Partner Student-Alumni Committee on Institutional Security Policy, Inc. Cambridge, Mass. http://www.stalcommpol.org
By all accounts she plagiarized. The fact that she is young, going to college, under pressure does not excuse this cheating. Perhaps part of the book was ghost written as alluded to in some of the comments above, but the book has her as the author, dammit. So the buck (pun unintended) stops with her. She should just suck it up, take it on the chin as a woman, apologize and get on with her life. Why is this so hard???? Like Abhi (#93) said “In America nobody accepts blame for anything anymore”. (Its true for the desh too). Let’s leave the spin to discos and the cricket pitch.
james:
are you kidding me? those awards are for real? i mean.. damn.. this is getting out of control…
There was a little rich girl called Kaavya whose novel made here a celebrity, In her hurry to be richer and famous she forgot something called integrity,
She wrote “How Opal Got Kissed, Got Wild and Got a Life’ Will probably turn out as ” How Kaavya Got Licked, Got Hauled (Over the Coals!) and Ruined her Life…..”
Abhi, Cicatrix,
More about book packagers.
“As the Boston Globe reported in February, Jennifer Rudolph Walsh, Viswanathan’s agent, found the budding novelist’s original story idea, which was “darker” than Opal Mehta, not “commercially viable.” To better cater to mainstream tastes, Walsh and Viswanathan turned to 17th Street Productions.”
“Book packaging is a part of the publishing industry that is little known by people outside the industry,” she says. “In some cases the packagers come up with series ideas on their own. In the case of Sweet Valley, the book packager, 17th Street Productions, contracts with the creator of the series, Francine Pascal, to come up with ideas for the many Sweet Valley books.” That’s right: the same firm that “packaged” Opal Mehta also churns out the well-known Sweet Valley series, which is written by a host of anonymous, work-for-hire scriveners, including Plummer. “Writers for hire are commissioned to write a specific piece of work and are paid for that work without receiving any rights to [it],” Plummer explains. “As a writer for hire, I’m pretty much told what the book packager wants me to do. In other words, I’m given a plot outline, and the characters and setting are already developed.”
“For 17th Street’s business model to work, wannabe writers must be willing to forgo bylines in exchange for money and experience. The name on the cover still gets the credit — and perhaps, if things go awry, the blame.”
“So how much “packaging” did 17th Street do for Opal Metha? Was it, like a Sweet Valley novel, brought to life by an anonymous writer for hire on the basis of an outline by Viswanathan? Or was Viswanathan more deeply involved? If someone plagiarized Megan McCafferty’s books, was it Viswanathan herself — or was it one of 17th Street’s unnamed freelancers, cracking under the pressure of six-week deadlines and reaching into the work of a successful competitor for a paragraph here and there?”
“So far, it’s impossible to say.”
Lucky for her, she attends Harvard–where plagiarism is accepted. (Doris Kearns Goodwin & Lawrence Tribe).
How hard it is to re-phrase sentences? Looks like our prodigy is sloppy copier 🙂
Thanks Pooja for the galleycat link. Re: #64, and the galleycat post… as a creative type, my major concern isn’t with the plagiarism (but don’t get me wrong, I think that’s stinky and unethical and worthy of hurling rotten vegetables). My major issue is that she had a piece of work that may or may not have been any good, but she totally compromised her vision, at the direction of the packaging agent, to make it more saleable. I think that’s sad; at such a young age to throw out your creative direction and go in the direction of dollars… She’s at least on the right track going into IB…
no schadenfreude for me, I find the whole thing desperate and sad.
and the saddest part is that despite “reshaping” being at their recommendation, I’d bet her agents at William Morris dump her like yesterday’s leftovers. And all KV may actually be guilty of is following instructions and wanting to publish a book so badly she could taste it.
sad. sad sad sad sad sad.
DesiDancer — thank you for bringing this insight out from the background. It’s a unfortunate echo of what too many of us find ourselves doing in all kinds of ways. And you’re right that it’s particularly sad to see in someone her age.
Y’know, I’m not sure of that. I think the controversy will sell books, and this will mean the movie deal stays, as well as the second book. And when she starts to write the second book, there will be umpteen media interviews with her about her ordeal and how she is taking care not to borrow from other books this time around, which in turn will drive up interest and sales for the second book.
All she has to do is sit tight. The statement she gave is perfect in that she admits the similarity without it being her conscious fault, nor does she compromise the appearance of her sole authorship by highlighting the packaging company’s involvement in any way, and she says she’ll change the offending passages, end of story.
yes and no, Deepa. William Morris is known to pride themselves on the “oldest and biggest representation agency” blah blah blah. Scandal they do not like, and it’s always easier to grovel and re-sign a client than to hold their hand through a PR nightmare.
Not to mention the made-for-TV movie deal (deals?) about the controversy itself.
So the thought occurred to me — if it’s plagiarism, is Kaavya the chick-lit equivalent of Milli Vanilli? Or if it’s the hand of the evil managers and spin doctors at work here, is she the chick-lit equivalent of pick-your-producer-created-pop-band-of-the-1990s — maybe S Club 7? Or neither?….
however, if the sequel is called “How Opal Mehta got drunk, crunk, and nearly flunked”… well then I might buy it 😉
Re: #117 · Pooja
Thanks for the link.
She either plagiarized (however “unknowingly”) or she got somebody else to re-write the book for her.
As the article says, either way she may be SOL.
DD,
well put, and so true.
This is a sweet, very likeable girl-$30000 application “brush-ups” (and the elitism inherent in all that) notwithstanding. I agree with Deepa@123: She won’t fry. Just sit tight little sister, keep your mouth shut, and the world will forgive.
Kaavya got $500,000 to GENERATE PUBLICITY FOR THE UPCOMING MOVIE! The publishers know that she doesn’t really “deserve” $500,000 for that book, but they believe that $490,000 investment ($490,000 extra over the typical $10,000 for the first time writer) is well worth it to generate publicity for the upcoming movie, since the publishers own rights to the movie and would get a huge chunk of the movie profits.
Looks like its time to write some software which can compare any new work with already published work for similarities 😀
Yes I shall remain desi till i die 😀 ( beep beep similar to 18 till I die …)
This is the best bit of snark yet:
I had forgotten how much I missed Highlights!
Looks like its time to write some software which can compare any new work with already published work for similarities 😀
There are lots of them already. One example – copyscape.
Do our suspicions become more concrete as the number of similar passages increase? From 10 -> 20 -> 29 -> now 40?
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6327824.html?display=breaking
“While McCafferty publisher Crown is expected to issue more details about the issue later today, Random House spokesperson Stuart Applebaum called Viswanathan’s explanation about how she came to use passages from McCafferty “at best disingenuous and at worst literary identity theft.” He noted that there are approximately 40 cases where Opal mirrors passages from McCafferty’s works.”
Since there has been softwares available for such a thing for a while now, I said … “How hard it is to re-phrase a paragraph ??” You just have to run your work against the source and see if the software catches it. If it catches it then you “fix” the issue. How hard is it?? anyways, I am not encouraging cheating/plagiarism … just pointing out that if someone wants to do it, it is a lot easier now, then say 25 years back.
Goofus and Gallant 🙂 Funny, last week in a dentist’s office I picked up an issue for the first time in 20 years…I liked the old black-and-white G&G better than the huge, lush-colored format they run now.
I’m surprised that RH would be making such a strong statement at this early stage.
How ballsy was it for her (and/or her “handlers”) to think they could pull this off? And to crib from a popular work, to boot. Only tangentially related, check out “J.T. Leroy”‘s site. In J.T.’s case tho’ you always got the feeling that the writer couldn’t wait for the bubble to burst. He/She always seemed to enjoy the cat/mouse game with the press.
apologies if this was mentioned before, but found this in a Harvard Independent article: “Wonderful or not, Viswanathan has faced some fierce online invective. On a South Asian–themed blog entitled Sepia Mutiny, one writer declared, “It appears VERY likely that…Viswanathan is a cheat…Her literary career is over…My hopes for the next generation are now completely dashed.”
http://harvardindependent.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleID=9906
Holy crap! They took my snark out of context! They didn’t even cite the fact that I also claim she plagiarized from Holy Blood, Holy Grail. I am a victim in this now as well.
From the same article:
I’m glad that people are talking about the responsibility of the packaging co. I bet the author was inspired by some of the insights here, since he obviously read this posting. Now the question is will KV risk the cash & out the company, or will she continue to insist that she was inspired & keep the cash… if she can keep anything at all after potential lawsuits.
My response:
damn this story is hard to follow. too many cooks …
How would KV be required to give up the cash if she outted the packaging house? I would think she knew the terms & conditions of the agreement, and accepted ghost-writers, etc. with it. It’s common practice (ala Sweet Valley High), so if she came out with the truth, how would that require her to return her honorarium/guarantee advance? Other than a little shame all around, she hardly stole the money– the packaging group gave her the money, with all parties understanding whatever packaging arrangements and smoke-and-mirrors may have existed.
Advice to Kaavya: 1. Hire the best lawyer money can buy.(Dont skimp on that in true desi fashion) 2. Sue the original author. 3. Never admit your guilt. You know all that crap about “if the glove dont fit ……..” 4. If all else fails, get a boob job and release an ameteur sex tape on the Internet. America loves nothing like a lousy sex tape.
She may be bound by contract to not out the company, or/and to accept the input of ghost writers as her own. If she breaks any part of the contract, she may be legally bound to return part of her earnings. It depends on the terms of the contract.
….. and don’t forget there’s other cash at risk, too – cash from the movie, future books, and sequels. Not just the original $500K.
Exploited Abhi —
Maybe you can hire NASABA Abhi to sue ’em.
Pooja, thanks so much for the link in comment #117. Little,Brown’s looks more involved in this than I initially thought. Why the hell did they throw half a mil at an untested author who couldn’t even write the damn thing without a packaging company?
There are TONS of YA books that are written exclusively by the authors, every single word, that still do well… From Daniel Handler to J.K.Rowling. Clearly they were aiming this at the “Mean Girls” market, but still seems foolish to me.
Speaking of YA, I wonder how much Marina Buddhos got 😉
Anyone? Anyone?
Oh my gawwd! DesiDancer I’d love to read this too!! You should totally write it – built in audience right here!
(just change the name, so you don’t, you know…plagiarize..)
Gawker weighs in.
Err..Before the outrage kicks in, I don’t like this line from Gawker either:
But it did make me laugh. Gawker runs on schadenfreude, dumps on everyone, and is a pretty funny mediawatchdog (in a drunken sort of way) so this is only expected.
Why oh why hasn’t anyone done anything really, really funny with the fact that Kaavya’s publisher’s name is…