Schenectady Synecdoche

Good job on your continued coverage of Nate's little Internet phenomenon. As you've seen, reactions to Nate's posts have covered the whole spectrum. Your comments are definitely some of the more intelligent ones on the matter.

I just got done talking to Nate and he's working on the next post, which should be up some time this morning or afternoon.

As for Nate's reasoning behind altering the name, he's fully aware of Google caching and the links all over the Internet. Nate knows he's not in any sort of trouble, but I think it's mostly just a way to extend the olive branch to Laura. He'll have more to say later today.

Thanks, Chris. Like everybody else, I'll be following with interest!

As a college professor, the reason I'm not engaging in problem-solving over this particular issue is that I've *already* thought through the issues surrounding plagiarism--at great length. I have a fair bit of experience dealing with it. FWIW, the preexisting opinions that those of us in the classroom, at least, hold, are in fact the result of a great deal of thought about the issue.

Sorry; I don't intend the problem-solving remark as a criticism of individuals but as analysis of discourse, and yours is a blog that links to the source and whose comments are extensive.

Cool; no harm, no foul. Just making the point that what people say on blogs doesn't always demonstrate the full depth of their thinking.

Why not do the analysis you're looking for, since no one else is? I'm sure it would be interesting.

Bitchphd is right; it would be nice to see a little bit more analysis on this.

Most of the reactions I've seen, judging by the sites sending Nate trackback pings goes something like, "ha ha she got screwed, good for her." And that's all well and good, but at the same time it doesn't say much.

A colleague at SU is contemplating the possibilities for an extensive analysis of the Event; and thanks to online journals, I'm hoping her piece will be in circulation without too much delay.

Am I seeing a 4Cs presentation in your future? I'm betting there will be some next year.

I tried not to editorialize too much in my KNews post, but I share your sentiment about the lack of reflection evidenced by most of the comments. None of them suggested ways of using it as a productive teaching moment in the way that John Lovas thoughtfully describes, and get -- to use Margaret Price's formulation, which I know you're familiar with -- "Beyond 'Gotcha!'"

Bitch makes a good point: that people's blogs and especially blog comments don't reflect all their thinking. I've been thinking about that today, thinking "well, of course," and also thinking that's in the nature of blogging. A few people like Tim Burke post blog essays; a few post sound bites; and the rest are somewhere in between, pointing at ideas rather than playing them out. So it stands to reason that one shouldn't expect a lot of thoughtful reflection in blog discourse on this (or any other) topic.

Yet I'm impressed with what one does see in the discourse surrounding the Event: the rage and emotion attached to opinions about plagiarism; and the issues of gender and sexuality that associate with it. If I'd had the Event when I was writing the piece "Sexuality, Textuality" for College English, my argument would've been a slam dunk. As it was, the political Right got hold of it and had a field day: I was a wild-eyed feminist. (And of course they were right; was and am.)

So while I won't be one of the ones talking Officially about this at next year's conferences, it will undoubtedly make its way into my various Official arguments on the topic of plagiarism. The Event is a gold mine for someone whose scholarship focuses on the cultural work performed by the figure of the plagiarist. I just wish that my successes at getting inside the discourse, prying it open, airing it out, and inviting others to join me in marveling at it were more globalized, less localized. But Nels, I guess you're right: because of its notoriety, the Event may be a tool for accomplishing just that. Where's Margaret Price now, Mike? Is she still at Amherst? And is she plugged into the Event?

Margaret's at Spelman, Rebecca, and these days much more focused on disability issues, but I'll drop her a heads-up about it. But yeah: to me, the most interesting stuff about these little hurricanes of comments, their heated spasms of assertion, are the intersections of issues of property and affect with gender politics. I'm sure Clancy will likely have some interesting things to say about it, as well; for me, it's taking me back through Jenny Edbauer's notions of the generalized equivalency/exchangeability of paper assignments towards a politics of capital-p Personal (and affectual) writing.

I'm from Schenectady, and I am offended.

Lo siento.