Tintin Forums

Compelling as what? I'm not sure where this discussion can go, really; I've tried to show that re-using elements, incidents and even whole plots is not uncommon, and in no way is a bench-mark by which it's possible to categorize the qualities of an author.

There is a distinct difference to me between an author or artist taking and reusing someone else's work verbatim and passing it off as their own, and (as would seem to be the case here) taking themes and ideas, and working with them again.

Take Shakespeare; virtually none, if any, of his his plays have stories which he himself thought up - he borrowed from stories, the subject of other plays, and historical sources. Even Hamlet, as I've mentioned before, is just his re-write of Amleth, an earlier work. Does that in way reflect on what we get from Shakespeare's work? Is he in anyway, shape or form diminished in talent because of that? Probably not.

Jules Verne didn't invent spectroscopy, radiation, or space-borne rocks and their impact on the earth and life here, they were the hot topics of the scientific community - notable figures such as Lord Kelvin were keenly interested in how meteor impacts affected life on Earth, and it was more than likely from these sources by way of learned journals and books of the day the Verne sourced his material, just as Hergé did in his day.
The idea that cosmic rays and radiation had strange effects on growth, and that science (rather than magic of legend) held strange powers, is a staple of fiction - Verne himself used it more than once, and it is the basis of everything from Godzilla to Titano the Super-Ape, by way of super-sized mutant ants, moths, women,Hulks and who-knows-what else, so that Hergé being interested in the same topic, inspired by Verne or not, is not surprising.

So, no, not by any definition that I can subscribe to could I say that there is a compelling case to be made that Hergé systematically or otherwise plagiarized, or even borrowed heavily from, the works of Jules Verne, nor can I see that the issues raised in the article diminish in any way the story-telling power of his books or the position of him as a figure of note in the comics world, any more than I think the reputation of Verne as a writer is dented by knowing that he may have re-written someone else's manuscript.

Then by all means you are free to stay out of it. You chose to participate, so don't try to stifle others by such redundant remarks as "I'm not sure where this discussion can go". It goes wherever it goes on an open discussion forum ;)


You "tried" indeed, but that doesn't make you the bearer of ultimate truth or give your words a special intellectual value. This attitude and acting impatient with opposing views is not a valid or reasoned argument technique despite what you think.

As for the subject, your view of plagiarism having to be a "verbatim" lifting of some's work is quite simplistic. There is a spectrum, and along that spectrum lay varied degrees of usage of previously existing material, characters, storylines, events, etc. Near the middle of the spectrum it's a highly subjective matter to decide if the scales tip towards plagiarism or not, but in Herge's case I see that things are definitely past that gray range and well into the area where most reasonable people won't have a hard time making a decision.

Of course this is not to say that what I'm saying is the end all. This is what I believe and it's important for the elements to be laid out, such as my link, for everyone to make their own minds without anyone huffing and buffing on their necks. Being a mod there is a good chance you won't publish this or will edit it, but this won't be intellectually courageous or the moral victory you think it is. It's sad that these forums couldn't prove to be the welcoming places they're supposed to be with quality conversations, but ultimately I don't regret my short stop.

And I am the one "stifling" conversation?
Telling me that I shouldn't comment because I disagree with you is closing down conversation, debate and comment - I've not asked anyone, including you not to contribute.


I'm quite happy to let it all stand, Roby. Nobody has made any attempt to stop you, so to suggest otherwise is disingenuous, or whipping up a problem where none exists. We aren't a democracy, we aren't a collective - this is a privately owned site that Irene lets us use, and on which I spend a good deal of time helping to keep things going.
Telling me to go away and not comment because I'm disagreeing with your proposition is not affording me the same courtesy I and the team have afforded you.

Rather that stifling the conversation as you characterize it, I have done my best to provide responses to the article to which you linked, with examples and context and expansion of the discussion.

It would appear that they have not been to your satisfaction, nor have you chosen to provide any rebuttal of my arguments, or further points to strengthen yours, which is obviously disappointing (as that is what makes for debate), but about which I can do nothing. It also is why, as it stands, that the thread won't go anywhere - there is no discussion, if it just stays treading water. You haven't developed the proposition, and I can't keep remaking my points.