Column: Plagiarism, as common as it is these days, remains reprehensible

I appreciate the splendor of words.

A writer since high school, I’ve long possessed a fascination with language. Words cause me to think. They change me.

For a brief time in college I was a theatre arts major. Later, I broadened that to the field of communications.

I landed quite a number of roles in college theatrical productions. I enjoyed acting but never became inordinately attached to it. It was a delightful distraction.

I learned from personal experience that immediately following auditions and casting for a show an actor delves deeply into his or her character. For the most part, I knew little, if anything, about characters I auditioned for.

Quite frequently a friend would say to me, “Hey Jim, you should audition for (such-and-such a character). You’re perfect for that role.” And so I would.

After casting, I’d work to uncover what the character was about.

It was important for me to get those pesky lines memorized so that I could be “in the moment” during rehearsals. Once I was completely “off book” (free from reliance upon the script), I had the freedom to explore and grow.

Still, I had to be true to a playwright’s intentions. As a writer, I felt obligated to respect the lines as written. Writers select particular words for a reason. Mozart chose notes; a writer chooses words — it’s called artistic license.

I had actor friends who, when they memorized lines, elected to paraphrase, as though the lines were mere prompts or guidelines. Some directors are OK with that. Dissembling lines is all too common in theater.

As much as you desire to breathe life into a role, how much leeway should an actor be granted in molding a character, and how much sway should a character have in a production? Ultimately, an author’s point of view must be honored.

An author uses words to define a character. The actor should faithfully deliver those words.

It’s somewhat like that with life.

“Nightly do all souls dream,” writes Christian author Michael O’Brien in his book, “Theophilos.” “The little theaters in our minds enact plays, and most of them are not written by a genius.”

Do our words and actions belie another? We like to think we speak for ourselves, but do we? Maybe we’re pawns for some hack writer who’s clearly no genius.

With all kinds of software available today for the purpose of detecting plagiarism, is it any wonder writers frequently are accused of stealing from one another? The stealing of intellectual property is endemic.

And it’s reprehensible.

Recently it was reported that Hillary Clinton’s pastor plagiarized the words of another cleric for a passage in his recently published book, “Strong For a Moment Like This: The Daily Devotions of Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

The offending pastor conveniently lifted the words from the blog of another.

I went to the contested verbiage to see if he’d captured thoughts or lifted actual words and phrases.

It was verbatim, word-for-word pilferage. Clearly no accident. Did he think he would get away with it? Could he not have said essentially the same thing using different language?

I once was accused of plagiarism, and it cut me deeply. A writer who plagiarizes is no writer.

I hadn’t been writing this column for more than a few months when I submitted a column and an editor returned it to me the next day saying it couldn’t be published because it contained plagiarized material.

I was stunned. What?

I then realized what had happened. Before my retirement a couple of years earlier, I wrote a weekly online column for my employer. I lifted a portion of one of my columns and inserted it in the Daily Pilot piece without attribution.

Why not? They were my words. I was their author. I assumed I could employ them as I pleased.

To this day, that column is the only one I’ve submitted that’s been handed back to me.

Modern technology has taught me an important lesson: don’t plagiarize anyone, least of all yourself!

JIM CARNETT, who lives in Costa Mesa, worked for Orange Coast College for 37 years.