SHAKESPEARE UNDER SIEGE

BISWADEEP GHOSH

I am not someone who loves quoting others for the heck of it; simply because I believe that we shouldn’t say what we cannot because of someone else. Such an indulgence is not a great thing, is it? But, as a writer who has been struggling to transcend prosaic mediocrity for a while – occasionally succeeding, but mostly not – there are times when the thought of a great writer needs to be borrowed. Hence, a quote becomes necessary. Can the situation be evaded? Certainly yes, if one were to plagiarise the essence of the thought, rephrase it with badly used words, and make it sound like one’s own. Does that happen? It does, which is why the average muggle googles away, searching for extraordinary phrases of extraordinary mortals.

Lately, however, a couple of aspiring writers have touched new lows. (You want names? That’s easy. Read everything published everywhere every day). They have been whacking lines – from one of the countless quotable quote sites – and using them in their articles shamelessly, stupidly. The obvious assumption is that they are addressing millions of morons who don’t own a single book with broken spines. So, Chesterton enters the article; Bernard Shaw intrudes after a few more; and suddenly, out of nowhere, a phrase from Freud leaps towards the unsuspecting reader, says a quick ‘hello’ and pretends to be a part of the article a second thereafter. Not a single word is changed and the sentence sparkles, sticking out as an oddity. For some inexplicable reason, such guys seem secure in the knowledge that no one will catch them. Besides, as long as they are lifting from writers who are no longer alive, the act doesn’t bother them. After all, dead people do not sue.

The situation is reminiscent of the era when a book reviews page was mandatory in every newspaper. People used to read then. Today, they watch the TV. That is why. However, some small regional newspapers sought to emulate their bigger counterparts by keeping non-specialist books editors for handling books pages. The result: the pages got manhandled. Just about anyone wrote reviews, and murder the writers without understanding a word of what the latter said.

With writers who cut and paste because they are incapable of piloting an article with their own phrases and thoughts, things are very, very similar. How one wishes someone told them not to look like fools on a regular basis? On second thoughts, even if someone actually did, will they understand and change? Unlikely. Only, they might stop whacking from Shakespeare because of whom they might have been caught, and lift from Ogden Nash instead. Which writer they maul doesn’t matter, as long they live to see another day, and write another article!