Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Here’s a fun little exercise for you: imagine that every single detail of this story is exactly the same, except Dorland is a person of color. How do you feel about Larson now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

Using (not "quoting", that implies attribution) the FB letter is plagiarism. Sorry, I'm a writer and I understand appropriating found prose for your own work. But it's a fuzzy line and Sonja still stepped over it. I would feel differently if she had transformed it in any way, but she didn't. She literally wrote a story about a character named Dawn (later changed the name but that's surface) who wrote a letter that she stole from the real Dawn. That's not art, it's plagiarism. Reading the texts from Sonja and her writing group on the subject are actually pretty cringey to me, especially after reading the story. It's not that good! It might have been, but she didn't really go all the way. It's a somewhat amateurish piece of borderline auto fiction. The underlying theme is fascinating and the choices the protagonist makes are really interesting, which I think is why it was selected by OCOS and what had Sonja and her group excited about it. But the execution is weak and when you know the backstory to it's genesis, only looks weaker.

I can't evaluate DD as a writer because I've never read her writing (other than the letter I guess) and since I don't know her personally, whether she's annoying or seeking validation via organ donation is irrelevant to me. Why would I care? Why would Sonja? Just walk away. But what Sonja did is something that directly implicates Dawn. And she did it with so little art or grace. I've met Dawns and Sonjas in my time as a writer and the Sonjas are infinitely more irritating. The Dawns are pretty easy to politely ignore.

FYI - Her name is SonYa, not Sonja. Though calling her Sonya does make your posts recognizable and no less valid!

I don’t give a f*ck if you want to humblebrag a little bit on FB — a platform in which literally everybody who uses it humblebrags — about giving up your kidney. THIS WOMAN SAVED A LIFE and people are more concerned that she’s cringe.

I am not exaggerating, this is incredibly damaging for anyone and everyone who has or will ever need a kidney. There are 100,000 people in this country waiting for a kidney donation — but no, making fun of the awkward cringe person is more important. These people have blood on their hands. I hope the National Kidney Foundation issues a statement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

Using (not "quoting", that implies attribution) the FB letter is plagiarism. Sorry, I'm a writer and I understand appropriating found prose for your own work. But it's a fuzzy line and Sonja still stepped over it. I would feel differently if she had transformed it in any way, but she didn't. She literally wrote a story about a character named Dawn (later changed the name but that's surface) who wrote a letter that she stole from the real Dawn. That's not art, it's plagiarism. Reading the texts from Sonja and her writing group on the subject are actually pretty cringey to me, especially after reading the story. It's not that good! It might have been, but she didn't really go all the way. It's a somewhat amateurish piece of borderline auto fiction. The underlying theme is fascinating and the choices the protagonist makes are really interesting, which I think is why it was selected by OCOS and what had Sonja and her group excited about it. But the execution is weak and when you know the backstory to it's genesis, only looks weaker.

I can't evaluate DD as a writer because I've never read her writing (other than the letter I guess) and since I don't know her personally, whether she's annoying or seeking validation via organ donation is irrelevant to me. Why would I care? Why would Sonja? Just walk away. But what Sonja did is something that directly implicates Dawn. And she did it with so little art or grace. I've met Dawns and Sonjas in my time as a writer and the Sonjas are infinitely more irritating. The Dawns are pretty easy to politely ignore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

I don’t think you get to decided that. The court did not dismiss that claim and is in the process of litigation. But based on commentary from a number of lawyers on Reddit, it appears Dawn has a valid claim. A number of writers that are not associated with Grubstreet agree.

It’s odd that you are pushing the “it’s not plagiarism” angle this late in the game.

Also stop with the “donated a kidney for not perfect reasons” shit. It makes you sound like a terrible person. Really, grow up.

Anonymous wrote:This is where I really turned against Larson:
“I think I’m DONE with the kidney story but I feel nervous about sending it out b/c it literally has sentences that I verbatim grabbed from Dawn’s letter on FB. I’ve tried to change it but I can’t seem to — that letter was just too damn good. I’m not sure what to do … feeling morally compromised/like a good artist but a shitty person.”

A real jerk. Self centered like many creative people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

I don’t think you get to decided that. The court did not dismiss that claim and is in the process of litigation. But based on commentary from a number of lawyers on Reddit, it appears Dawn has a valid claim. A number of writers that are not associated with Grubstreet agree.

It’s odd that you are pushing the “it’s not plagiarism” angle this late in the game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

LOL honey quotes have attribution.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

I teach at a university and do research for a living and let me assure you that in any academic environment, what SL did by incorporating text written by another person verbatim and without attribution would absolutely be considered plagiarism. The fact that so many people - including published authors - don't appreciate this really worries me. I actually thought people are more attuned to this with the proliferation of software that catches plagiarism in academic settings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

Can you please elaborate what you think plagiarism is if it's not lifting a verbatim FB letter?

Here's a thread for you:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

She wasn’t a Karen.

To be a good person or a decent artist requires more than having an identity in a purportedly oppressed group of people.

I’m on your side, but let’s not veer into (potentially) racist rhetoric. There can be critiques made about whether or not Sonya wielded narratives around race in good faith, but let’s not downplay the fact that people of color, including Asians, have certain disadvantages in this society.

It isn’t racist rhetoric. Without the “Karen” framework, people attacking Dorland have nothing. Allison Murphy (white) advised Sonya Larson (mixed) Ro weaponize Grub Street’s Writers of Color group to “draaaag” Dorland on exactly the basis you think you’re decrying! That’s phucked, it’s incredibly dishonest, and NONE OF THIS ACTUAL ISSUE has to do with the actual prejudice and racist treatment of Asians in the US.

I think the PP you're replying to was specifically talking about the use of "purportedly oppressed" to reference Asian Americans.

Got it - I used purportedly in the wrong manner. It seems entirely inapplicable to Larson’s experience at Grub and with Dorland.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

Then you don’t know the meaning of “plagiarism” or “Karen”.

I mean, do I like Sonya and would I be friends with her? Probably not. But making DD a character in her story, even quoting the real FB letter, is NOT plagiarism. Don’t be friends or share stuff with writers if you don’t want to find yourself in one of their stories. And DD is cringey and clearly donated her kidney for validation.

Anonymous wrote:I think in real life dawn dorland was completely not self aware, needy AF and like the most annoying acquaintance in the world. None of that is a crime. Sonya Larson and friends twisted her into something she was not, and built that in their minds to be truth. I get dawns reaction to the story because the woman in that story was awful and I think in sonyas mind it was who dawn was because she was grating and annoying for like half a decade to her friend group. Sonya played nice with her for a long time but eventually was like whatever this woman doesn’t matter and I will skewer her in this story. Dawn then had a huge reaction and did things like tried to take her down relentlessly in a creepy stalker way. If you go to the kidney gate Twitter honestly dawns behavior is Trent less and unstable. Sonya was an a hole throughout and ruined her career and will probably be fired from Grub Street, which Sonya had requested in a creepy but justified letter in 2018. Dawn seems totally nuts. Sonya seems like a powerful jerk. Neither wins.

I don't necessarily disagree with this but my problem with it is that Sonja created this situation for herself by becoming friends with Dawn. She's trying to cover it up now by acting like they were just acquaintances but it's obvious from the reports of their friendship before the kidney donation that they were actual friends. As in spent time at one another's homes, exchanged gifts, showed up for each other in times of need -- friends. At some point Sonja decided she didn't want to be friends with Dawn, which is fine -- we've all been there. But then she wanted to pretend the friendship never existed and do something sneaky and cruel (write a take-down short story about Dawn and use Dawn's own words in the story). You can't do that and expect a former friend to be like "oh, okay, no big deal." Dawn might in fact be annoying AF but that move by Sonja is stupid AF. Because human beings have feelings and that's mean and of course Dawn was going to be hurt. So just... don't? I really don't understand why it was important to Sonja to do this when she could have just written a different story or hidden the fact that Dawn was her inspiration. She's a writer. That shouldn't have been hard.

I think one lesson to come out of this whole mess is that no matter how much you dislike someone, you can't just do cruel things to them and expect them to take it. That's not how people work, that's not how the world works. If you do sneaky mean things to people, get ready for them to do sneaky mean things back. I don't think what Dawn chose to do was great either, but she was responding to a something really hurtful and I tend to have empathy for that. It is hard to make good choices from a place of extreme hurt and humiliation. And it would take a very secure, emotionally strong person not to feel hurt by that. Dawn was not that, and Sonja knew it.

Sonja instigated this whole thing, and for no real reason. As the New Yorker review points out -- the story she produces isn't even that good and is specifically weakened by the fact that it was clearly written out of anger/annoyance with the Dawn/Rose character.

These women are both damaged and insecure. Dawn channeled that into donating a kidney to a stranger. Sonja channeled it into writing a mediocre short story as a take down of Dawn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

She wasn’t a Karen.

To be a good person or a decent artist requires more than having an identity in a purportedly oppressed group of people.

I’m on your side, but let’s not veer into (potentially) racist rhetoric. There can be critiques made about whether or not Sonya wielded narratives around race in good faith, but let’s not downplay the fact that people of color, including Asians, have certain disadvantages in this society.

It isn’t racist rhetoric. Without the “Karen” framework, people attacking Dorland have nothing. Allison Murphy (white) advised Sonya Larson (mixed) Ro weaponize Grub Street’s Writers of Color group to “draaaag” Dorland on exactly the basis you think you’re decrying! That’s phucked, it’s incredibly dishonest, and NONE OF THIS ACTUAL ISSUE has to do with the actual prejudice and racist treatment of Asians in the US.

I think the PP you're replying to was specifically talking about the use of "purportedly oppressed" to reference Asian Americans.

Yes exactly! You beat me to the chase.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DAWN DORLAND WINS THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!

I guess I’m in the minority and don’t agree that this was in any way plagiarism nor that DD comes out looking like anything other than the Karen she was being mocked for being.

She wasn’t a Karen.

To be a good person or a decent artist requires more than having an identity in a purportedly oppressed group of people.

I’m on your side, but let’s not veer into (potentially) racist rhetoric. There can be critiques made about whether or not Sonya wielded narratives around race in good faith, but let’s not downplay the fact that people of color, including Asians, have certain disadvantages in this society.

It isn’t racist rhetoric. Without the “Karen” framework, people attacking Dorland have nothing. Allison Murphy (white) advised Sonya Larson (mixed) Ro weaponize Grub Street’s Writers of Color group to “draaaag” Dorland on exactly the basis you think you’re decrying! That’s phucked, it’s incredibly dishonest, and NONE OF THIS ACTUAL ISSUE has to do with the actual prejudice and racist treatment of Asians in the US.

I agree! 100%. I just took issue with the phrasing “purportedly oppressed group of people.” Asian Americans have been through A LOT.

This is why Sonya invoking her race card is actually harmful to Asian Americans.