Kaavya V

Young and Distressed

She's Innocent!

How can Kaavya accused of plagiarism when all she was doing was satisfying her audience. The books she wrote were chick-lit, a series of novels meant for woman aka chicks. In chick-lit, there are certain requirements that they need in order for it to be chick-lit. So how can Kaavya be accused of plagiarism, when all chick-lit has a specific requirement? Just because she wasn't original, doesn't mean it was plagiarism, its called satisfying the audience and the readers, aka the chicks reading the chick-lit. But it would be a mistake as well to scapegoat Alloy, or to share Otto's confidence in labeling Viswanathan a "faux writer" who produced a "faux novel." For better or worse, the publishing industry is geared at every level toward replicating formulas with proven appeal rather than encouraging genuinely original work. That's why formula fiction dominates bestseller lists, commercially successful novelists tend to stick to what they do well, and authors of offbeat novels that succeed are plied with contracts for books that can be marketed as the latest output from the same reliable brand name. Nor should publishers be blamed for this behavior when most readers of most fiction have clearly given their hearts to comfort food--novels without novelty--rather than risk an encounter with something confusingly or disappointingly new. Readers who retreat into outrage when formula fiction becomes all too formulaic are just as disingenuous as their latest scapegoat.

Kaavya's Idol

Kavyya was a young Harvard student and she was young and claimed that she liked the books that she so called copied. She admitted to reading them multiple times and but claimed they were not copied. She idolized the author and the books but that’s it, she says it was a complete mistake. She ran to Africa after the charges were put up.

Kaavya’s unintentional mistake

Kaavya plagiarised, But it was unintentional and she was still very young. It was a simple mistake. She admitted she copied, this should have been excused. Mrs V included many passages in her book. But she stated “any phrasing between [the author’s] work and [Kaavya’s] were completely unintentional and unconscious” (Newsweek). This shows us that she didn’t mean to plagiarize.

work cited

Leith, Thomas. "Scapegoating Kaavya." Kirkus Reviews 1 June 2006: n. pag.
General OneFile. Web. 26 Nov. 2013. Currency:
No was form 2006 which was 7 years ago

Padmanabhan, Anil. "How Kaavya Lost It." India Today: n. pag. General OneFile.
Web. 26 Nov. 2013

. Wordle.net. wordle, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. <http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/


Aspden, Rachel. "Plagiarism: Ivy League Redemption." New Statesman (1996) 135.4818 (2006): 19. Academic OneFile. Web. 26 Nov. 2013.