John Green and plagiarism

Who's John Green? What is most disturbing is that a whole bunch of his 'followers', without any recourse to the truth, waded in and attacked the girl whose quote he'd ripped off. Has he issued a statement, telling them all to apologise immediately? A Tee-shirt with 'John Green uses my quotes' should be a best-seller, right now... What an ar*e....
 
I guess we're back to the issue of authors controlling their followers. John Green generally tries to get his to behave. To be fair to him, he probably gets a lot of mail and post and all that stuff, and the messages from the girl pointing out he was using her quote could well have vanished in that (and if they didn't -- some fans can be pretty demented).

It's not like he took the quote and told everyone else he'd said it, he just didn't check when he was told it was something he said.

I don't know if it's fair to cast this as a gender thing. I think it's more likely to be a world famous author vs random 12 year old thing.

And ultimately, if he hadn't gone and searched through his book for the quote, not found it and admitted that publicly, would anyone have listened to the girl or checked? So he made this story into news by doing something decent.

Dunno. The article calling him out for being evil seemed a bit one sided.
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised he didn't know his own book well enough to know whether that line was in it, though. Especially a line of that type.

Also surprised he needed to illegally download his own novel to check it. Did he not have the file he sent to the publishers?

Also, there was no explanation of how the quote got from the girl's tumblr to be attributed to him in the first place.

Too many puzzlements for a Sunday morning. I might go back to bed.
 
He wrote The Fault in Our Stars, BM. I think he's getting a fair bit of flak for something he's tried to fix. He's written a lot of novels - I'd struggle, if pushed, to remember every line I've written...
 
Yep. It looks like the kids didn't actually try to contact him. He found someone's post on tumblr complaining about it, and sorted it all out there. The link from the original article about fan abuse seems to link to that tumblr post where the girl says her friend is upset (and also says "Obviously we can't just email them and tell them to take down the poster" -- which agrees with what he says, very gently, that they could have contacted him or the shop and told them that way, not through Tumblr). There isn't an abuse anywhere I can see (maybe because the post has been taken down -- but it would have been nice for the person who wrote the article to either link to something that was an example of abuse, or suggest why there wasn't any) -- only the usual Twitter commentators blaming him for being a man, because if he'd been a woman, he'd never have got away with it (which seems a bit weird and unfounded -- also example free).

The girl did John Green fan art -- used a lot of his quotes in her art -- and it happened that that one wasn't from him, it was from her. You can see how the mix up may have occurred.

I didn't read all the comments and the original stuff has vanished but the available evidence suggests it's a story of a decent guy behaving well after someone else made a mistake (and I haven't read any of his books, including TFIOS, because I can't face it). And why would he steal her quote? It would be a very stupid thing to do, and there's no evidence he's stupid. Most of his merchandise sells because of his books. He has quotations of his own.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like a storm in a teacup to me. The first article was abrasive and seemed to carry its own agenda, the second a little milder. I haven't read John Green, but one of my daughters reads his stuff and follows his Vlogbrothers channel. She speaks highly of him and isn't easily impressed (she certainly isn't impressed by anything I write, anyway!).

As to remembering a quote from your own book, written seven years ago? I'm not sure I'd remember one from the chapter I'd just finished or from two pages back in the current short story. Having said that, I have memory issues due to an illness, but still.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hex
I'll bet there was abuse, though. There are plenty of readers who get abusive if they feel their favorite writers are being attacked in some way. Teenagers especially get abusive on social media. Not that that would be the fault of the man himself. If the abuse was there, and is no longer there, it may be because social media sites have policies that may require them to make such things disappear once brought to their attention. I think there is too little information, and both articles are bound to be slanted, though in opposite ways. That's how articles on the internet are; the old standards of journalism seem to no longer apply.

One thing bothers me, because it's not clear in either of the articles. It says he is giving her royalties, but how was that decision reached? Was she represented? Did they agree what her royalties would be? Was she asked if he could keep using the quote? Or did he just magnanimously say, "Here, little girl, I am giving you what I think is fair."

Since he was using it without her permission ... well, obviously receiving royalties is of more advantage to her than if he were to stop producing the merchandise. But she should have had the choice, at least as a negotiating point. Maybe she did. We don't know exactly what happened. If he was a really good guy, and since he can apparently afford it, he'd give her all the profits he'd received on it so far and negotiate some sort of royalties for the future. Maybe he did, but I rather think that if he had his PR people would have said so.
 
I had been pondering the point Teresa raised. Is he giving her a share of the royalties he is receiving from now on?
 
One thing bothers me, because it's not clear in either of the articles. It says he is giving her royalties, but how was that decision reached? Was she represented? Did they agree what her royalties would be? Was she asked if he could keep using the quote? Or did he just magnanimously say, "Here, little girl, I am giving you what I think is fair."

I had been pondering the point Teresa raised. Is he giving her a share of the royalties he is receiving from now on?

A friend of the original artist made a post on Reddit calling John Green out, asking if anything can be done about it.

John Green responded, suggesting a solution (splitting the royalties -- not just from now, but retroactively -- with the poster maker, the way writers and artists usually do), and giving an e-mail address that he could be reached on to sort it out.
 
The second article linked to is quite short (and short on anything that would allow us to make an independent judgement as to did what and how culpable they were). The much longer article was written by someone riding a hobbyhorse -- one which may not even have anything to do with the situation** -- so that it's easy to imagine that it wouldn't be complete in terms of the facts, and in a "particular way", even if it contained many.

So I'm none the wiser how this first came about or if the solution is a good one.


** - Though I'm pretty sure that plagiarism isn't a gender-based activity, in that people of both (and more?) genders can and have been victims and perpetrators.
 
The royalties are to be split between the girl and the artist whose work is on the poster -- John Green himself isn't getting anything, I don't think. And yes, he did offer to stop selling the poster and just take it down if that was what she wanted.

I expect there was abuse -- it's that there's none visible now, so the writer of the first article was being a bit disingenuous by having a big link to "harassment" that didn't lead to anything relevant.

Here's the Tumblr article (John Green's response is the first comment)
 
I'd tend to agree with Hex here. From everything I've gathered, while John Green is by no means easy to contact (he gets such a massive amount of mail that he has long since made it known he simply doesn't have the time to read, let alone answer, it), it is possible to do so through various venues -- all of which are provided on his webpage. And he has long been known as someone who values his readers highly and treats them well, and tends to be quite supportive of them; also one who is very good at reaching solutions which work for all parties. In other words, someone who is quite conscientious about such matters. So, until I see something a good bit more substantive than I see here, I'm inclined to be highly skeptical about any wrongdoing on his part. The only fault I see is his not remembering where the line came from... and that sort of thing I've seen with any number of writers over the years, particularly ones who have done a fair amount of work.* (Moorcock, for instance, has frequently been nonplussed when someone quotes something of his until the source is cited; even then he doesn't recall it, but accepts that it is indeed in that work. Lovecraft, for all his intense involvement with his work, did not always recall something from a particular piece, either. And so on.) I'd say this was simply a case of such a lapse, combined with the sensitiveness of youth, and quite likely a fair amount of abuse from fans who simply don't like seeing their idol as having any flaws... even if he himself has always been up front about no few of those he is aware of....

*While he has not written a huge number of novels, he has been involved in an enormous number of projects dealing with education in literature and other subjects, as well as being closely involved in the adaptation of his work to other media; all of which can blur memory of any particular work rather quickly.
 
The royalties are to be split between the girl and the artist whose work is on the poster -- John Green himself isn't getting anything, I don't think. And yes, he did offer to stop selling the poster and just take it down if that was what she wanted.

Then that sounds like everything was handled as well as it could be ... and since he has responded publicly that should put an end to the abuse.
 
Not really that naive. I said should, not will. But since he treated the situation with a certain amount of humor (which actually got on my nerves, but was probably the right approach), it will be hard for any of his fans to portray him as persecuted in this.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top