Eye 1359, page 13
Full story in the magazine, but here's the last part:
"Still investigating". Well, they've had a couple of months so far, given that it was reported to them some time before Xmas, which depending on how you look at it is either a lot (it shouldn't take fifteen minutes to establish plagiarism) or a little (the Times and Spectator have taken more than six months to pass no comment at all).
Assuming any investigating is actually taking place I confess myself intrigued to find out what they'll come up with, given how much there is for Ray to explain away:
- how all the plagiarism is in fact perfectly all right (there's more than we've so far reported, by the way);
- how he neglected to say in the book that lots of the material had been previously published elsewhere;
- how the copyright notice comes to claim that all the material is copyright Ray when so much of it is actually copyright other parties;
- how he apparently failed to bring any of this to the attention of his publisher.
Even by Ray's standards, that's an awful lot of explaining away.
[Thanks to Richard James]
[Dirty Little Secrets I]
[Dirty Little Secrets II]
[Dirty Little Secrets in the Eye]
[Ray Keene plagiarism index]
[Ray Keene index]