So these are the notes that I made while I was reading this book- I was going to craft it into a review, but then realised the fractured nature of it might actually be fun to piece together yourself a la [SIC]- please tell me if I was wrong!
1. I didn’t expect to have so much to say about this experiment, but I sure do ☺
2. funny references in initial 99 notes
3. this guy is off his nut
4. This is one of the classiest toilet books available!
5. Favourite reference was Zero Wing from Sega Mega Drive
6. Plagiarises the definition of plagiarism!
7. [a:Alasdair Gray|14870|Alasdair Gray|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/authors/1306622519p2/14870.jpg] did a funny thing at the end of [b:Lanark|161037|Lanark|Alasdair Gray|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1327948704s/161037.jpg|958496] where all of his references were exposed, and he categorised them into three groups of plagiarism (find out what these were - WIki). So perhaps [SIC] is the natural extension of this. Perhaps this has a message about not constantly beating yourself up about re-invention, because it could not be said that [SIC] is not re-invention, but perhaps re-invention for re-invention’s sake is anomalous.
8. I also dislike that Martin Amis quote about Nabokov (WTF does it mean?!)
9. Says you don’t necessarily need to read it- true, a lot in Latin, some parts I didn’t read because they were appropriated from sources I had yet to read and didn’t want to spoil. In any case it didn’t take long.
10. images are funny- starts to become apparent that Schneiderman is the ghost re-visiting important literary locations through time and space, in images as in writing. At least that’s what it first looked like, but then he just seemed to start scaring children.
11. How does a man make a mark on literary history? When does a reference cross over into plagiarism? What is a fun nod to a literary giant and what is a tiresome rehash? What has literary merit and what doesn’t?
12. The fact that I was not asking myself these questions, but that I am now, is testament enough to the value of this bizarre experiment. And sometimes the writers in his appropriations reference other writers… then my head started to hurt.
13. And asking someone to buy this book is part of the fun- it’s part of how its message extents beyond the pages to its transaction and takes dada-ism and postmodernism to a new level. So to honour what I think this book represents, and in drawing attention to the reader, I ask you: should you buy it?
14. Well, when Schneiderman eventually does put hypothetical pen to non-existent paper, I’ll read it. As for this experiment in copy-paste throughout time, here’s my own plagiarism for you: “You had my curiosity, but now you have my attention”
16. obviously clever
17. interesting to see the multitude of sources of great literature that you can now claim as your own, that statement I at least understood.
Hm, on second thought I don’t want these notes to speak entirely for themselves. I had a lot of fun browsing these clippings, and they were not without purpose. Schneiderman is not only one to watch, he is one of the literary greats of our time! For where would we be today without The Canterbury Tales? The Confidence Man? Hamlet, the greatest play ever written? He’s also the abhorrent author of Mein Kampf, but then he actually wrote the number π, then mathematicians started using it, he gave us Ulysses, the Jabberwocky, and how can you say someone has plagiarised when they themselves presented you with the definition of the word plagiarism as you understand it today? Anyone would be hard put not to be overwhelmed by the literary offerings that Davis Schneiderman has given us throughout time. As D. Schneiderman once said, ‘I take my hat off to you”!