Plagiarism and Literary Property in the Romantic PeriodUniversity of Pennsylvania Press, 2013 M04 23 - 256 pages In a series of articles published in Tait's Magazine in 1834, Thomas DeQuincey catalogued four potential instances of plagiarism in the work of his friend and literary competitor Samuel Taylor Coleridge. DeQuincey's charges and the controversy they ignited have shaped readers' responses to the work of such writers as Coleridge, Lord Byron, William Wordsworth, and John Clare ever since. But what did plagiarism mean some two hundred years ago in Britain? What was at stake when early nineteenth-century authors levied such charges against each other? How would matters change if we were to evaluate these writers by the standards of their own national moment? And what does our moral investment in plagiarism tell us about ourselves and about our relationship to the Romantic myth of authorship? |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 34
... defined their own relationship to either authorship or appropriation. This history of Romantic-period plagiarism and the aesthetic contests that were central to the contemporary debate are the topics of the chapters that follow. Chapter ...
... defined plagiarism in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries in Britain is another way of asking what defined Romanticism. The central claim of this study is that the relationship was constitutive. The stakes in Romantic ...
... defined as borrowings that were simultaneously unacknowledged, unimproved, unfamiliar, and conscious. In the absence of any one of these elements, culpable plagiarism could not be said to have occurred. In contrast, a writer could be ...
... definition of the term is inferred rather than explicit. However, as Stuart Green argues in “Plagiarism, Norms, and the Limits of Theft Law,” plagiarism can be defined as the failure to acknowledge the “source of facts, ideas, or ...
... defines our engagement with the past in a particularly narrow manner, but his outrage is a sign of how important the ... definition of the “Romantic” is particularly unsatisfying because it bears so little historical relation to the ...
Contents
1 | |
17 | |
3 Property and the Margins of Literary Print Culture | 49 |
Byron Originality and Aesthetic Plagiarism | 86 |
Travel Writing and the Defense of Modern Poetry | 122 |
Class Improvement and Enclosure | 144 |
Afterword | 182 |
Notes | 189 |
Bibliography | 211 |
Index | 227 |
Acknowledgments | 235 |