Author, Author!
By Florence King
Fighting Words
In this space in our last issue, subscribers will recall, Florence King reviewed the life and books of fellow Southern writer Molly Ivins. In the course of so doing, King discovered in an Ivins collection several samples of her own writing that had been lifted without attribution. In another case, King had been credited, but the quote had been heavily rewritten within the quotation marks. King charged plagiarism, and told reporters that “if we had the right kind of laws in this country I’d challenge her to duel over this.” The original article in The American Enterprise and the sharp exchanges that followed were covered by newspapers and magazines from across the country. The two letters below represent the final fallout in the war of wits.
August 16, 1995
Dear Ms. King,
You are quite right. There are three sentences in my article “Magnolias and Moonshine” —one of them a really good political line—that should have been attributed directly to you and are not.
On the third matter you raise in your Author Author! column in The American Enterprise, I have no idea how I managed to attribute to you more than you actually said—perhaps a recollection of something somewhere else in one of your books on the South. But I do not think a mistake of excessive attribution can be considered plagiarism.
I owe you an apology and I hereby tender it. I am deeply ashamed. I regret not giving you credit, and devoutly wish the matter had been brought to my attention earlier so it might have been corrected in subsequent editions and the paperback edition of the book.
I hope this does not sound too defensive to you, but there was no intention on my part to deceive anyone into thinking I had not read the many funny things you have said about the South. I hope my good faith is evidenced by the fact that I did cite you directly six times in the piece and praise one of your books as “definitive” on the peculiarities of Southerners as well.
I was inexcusably sloppy about the three sentences in question, with emphasis on the inexcusably.
Over the years, I have not only quoted many of your wonderful lines about the South in speeches—always, I believe, giving you credit—but also recommended your books to hundreds of people. I realize this does not excuse my lifting lines of yours without credit, but I did want you to know.
As for the rest of your observations about me and my work in your Author Author! column, boy you really are a mean b——, aren’t you?
Sincerely,
Molly Ivins, plagiarist
August 24, 1995
Dear Miss Ivins:
Rather than rehash what I call plagiarism and you call careless attribution, I will speak in general terms.
First, the Washington Post, in breaking this story, referred to your “side” and my “side.” How can there be a “side” in this when everyone involved is either a writer or an editor? All of us, by definition, are on the same side—the word side. Every word I write is a piece of my heart, and I presume you feel the same way.
Second, I’m wondering how you managed to recycle me unchanged from the 1988 Mother Jones article into the 1991 book. When I compiled The Florence King Reader, I reread everything I’ve published over the last 20 years. I polished, revised, even rewrote some of the early selections to bring them up to my present standards, and I also prepared a fresh manuscript. This is how you catch mistakes. Anthologies are harder than they look, so please look next time.
Third, your publisher contends that I am seeking publicity by “attempting to hang onto the cape of Molly’s notoriety.” (You may want to take issue with him over his choice of words.) I have no need or wish for “notoriety”; celebrity is bad enough. I already have the only thing I want: the admiration and respect of people who know good writing and love the English language as I do.
Finally, it’s a shame this had to happen because you and I are such a pair of old rips that we probably would have gotten along like gangbusters. Please don’t spoil any more potential friendships.
Sincerely,
Florence King
