NF McPherson, McDonough, Smith: Plagiarizers?

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

There really is something about the subject of the Civil War that brings out the ranting nut job in some people.

I think it's the personal stakes.

Most people with a strong interest in the American Civil War have ancestors who fought and/or feel very strongly about modern political issues related to states rights and racial issues which are also issues deeply related to the war. Thus they are driven not simply to explore and learn, but to prove some point.

From the novelist himself (requires a login to jstor, registration free):

Nowadays it's possible to get a free JSTOR that limits you to a mere 100 articles per month.

 

[Rhea Cole]

I think it's the personal stakes.

Most people with a strong interest in the American Civil War have ancestors who fought and/or feel very strongly about modern political issues related to states rights and racial issues which are also issues deeply related to the war. Thus they are driven not simply to explore and learn, but to prove some point.



Nowadays it's possible to get a free JSTOR that limits you to a mere 100 articles per month.

Many amateurs are only interested in a single individual or battle with family significance. I have never met a professional historian with that kind of hang up. Unless you have a broad knowledge of the history there is no way to comprehend the context of a particular event.

As National Park Living History Volunteers we are taught not to argue with visitors. Present the facts, but there is no point in confrontation. In my experience, which is considerable, the more improbable the "theory" the greater the need to defend it against all evidence to the contrary. An awful lot of bandwidth is wasted dealing with self published books & online posts that in reality have little if any relevance to the historical facts.

Not long ago I was alerted to the fact that a reference I have used for at least 25 years is, in fact, apocryphal. For me, however exasperating, that is what makes studying history so very intriguing. The security of the inductive defense of an imagined conclusion is, I suppose gratifying. The blaze of deductive insight & connecting of dots that comes finding out you've had it wrong all along is priceless.

 

[midnitelamp]

I would like to read Ambrose's Halleck (my homeboy) and his Custer/Crazy Horse, two of the most fascinating Americans. Did he just use Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee on that last one?

The craziest history liar story is Joseph J. Ellis saying he was a hardcore Vietnam vet and antiwar protester when he really nowhere close to the country. I have only skimmed his works and now question if he made up stuff in there.

As much as I enjoy Shelby Foote the man and his work, he plagiarizes Catton some in the final volume with the "began by one mad man...ended by another", which was in Never Call Retreat. Did they get it from something else?

read Custer/Crazy horse years ago. well footnoted fwiw. good look at Plains Indians anyway.

 

[R. Alex Raines]

Just for comparison, Foote spent approximately 20 years to write three narrative Civil war volumes (though admittedly almost 3k pages).

Mr. Ambrose published all told something like 35 books. Of these I have personally only read Band of Brothers and Pegasus Bridge. I read a few chapters of Upton and the Army in a college class...

By way of clarification, Ambrose failed to source some of his material, Foote sourced none of his material.

 

[Bentonville]

I wonder if in some, but not all, cases of plagiarism, if it isn't unconscious? You have the 26 letters in English and it's how you arrange them that make a book interesting and good enough to be picked up by a publisher.

If you belong to a certain school of writing on the subject, I find Foote entertaining as well as inormative and Catton informative but I'd rather find a cliff to jump off than read him again, if that informs writers. Colors the writing with the basis of who you've read.

 

[RedRover]

By way of clarification, Ambrose failed to source some of his material, Foote sourced none of his material.

Indeed. My comparison regarded the workload more than of the works themselves. Foote was far less prolific than Ambrose.

Foote did not have to use footnotes, because he was producing "a narrative" rather than a documentary history And by most accounts it's a distinct narrative, whatever one thinks of it. James Panabaker, in "Shelby Foote and the Art of History" (2004) likened his work to a Homeric epic:

Homer didn't use footnotes either.

I wonder if in some, but not all, cases of plagiarism, if it isn't unconscious? You have the 26 letters in English and it's how you arrange them that make a book interesting and good enough to be picked up by a publisher.

If you belong to a certain school of writing on the subject, I find Foote entertaining as well as inormative and Catton informative but I'd rather find a cliff to jump off than read him again, if that informs writers. Colors the writing with the basis of who you've read.

Anything is possible, but the game academics play has practically one rule, and that is don't "plagiarize."

It's a big deal otherwise because it is illegal under American copyright laws.

Ambrose produced lots of books in a short period of time. He had a "team," including some of his kids, that aided in that process to some extent; research assistants, writing, etc., and sometimes co-authors. But at the end of the day his name was on the book in question, so he was the one who necessarily apologized about it.

Evidently, some of his works were more careful about fact-checking than others...

Review: Ambrose, "Nothing Like it in the World..."


Five big Plagiarism cases in the book world, CS monitor...

 

[Zella]

I wonder if in some, but not all, cases of plagiarism, if it isn't unconscious? You have the 26 letters in English and it's how you arrange them that make a book interesting and good enough to be picked up by a publisher.

When you're a trained historian, it's not inadvertent. Ambrose does things I was taught not to do in a sophomore-level historical research class. He knew better.

 

[Bentonville]

When you're a trained historian, it's not inadvertent. Ambrose does things I was taught not to do in a sophomore-level historical research class. He knew better.

I'll take it. But you can be a Formula One racer and still blaze through stop signs.

 

[Zella]

I'll take it. But you can be a Formula One racer and still blaze through stop signs.

And that's intentional too.

I'm also an editor. I don't have any sympathy for plagiarists. It's not that hard to do citation and attribution correctly.

 

[Bentonville]

And that's intentional too.

I'm also an editor. I don't have any sympathy for plagiarists. It's not that hard to do citation and attribution correctly.

I agree that plagiarism stinks. Fortunately I don't write historical fact. Fiction I get a n idea and run with it.

 

[TallTallMan]

The world of self published history is one of near unlimited variety. I once received 35 unanswered emails with very elaborate content. A man had concocted a version of the Nashville Campaign & Gen. Hood's behavior that was very much at odds with the accepted history. When I pointed out that his statements were impossible because of the calendar, he cast aspersions on my sexual orientation. Because of the way my name is spelled he assumed I am a woman.

There really is something about the subject of the Civil War that brings out the ranting nut job in some people. I stopped opening his emails after that. A review of one of his titles stated that the references were mostly from his own books. Thankfully, his mania died with him.

I hope that guy didn't publish his book! Was it Winston Groom