memories are made of this
This is the kind of thing that writers are terrified of. Judith Kelly, 61, wrote Rock Me Gently as an actual account of a real childhood in a disgustingly real Catholic orphanage which tortured people in ways which are all too plausible.
The book is a bestseller. Unfortunately, paragraphs full of evocative and unusual imagery can be traced back to several works by Hilary Mantel, Graham Greene and – most strange – Charlotte Bronte, though here she kept the metaphors but updated the prose. So how did it happen? Here is The Independent:
“In a letter to Mantel, Bloomsbury’s senior editor, Alexandra Pringle, said Kelly, a graduate from Chelsea School of Art and a former television producer for Reuters and BSkyB, had inadvertently included the sentences because of her photographic memory.”
Perhaps the strangest fact of all, is that Mantel wrote her most plagiarised book, Fludd, as “darkly comical” and what Hilary calls “comic grotesques”. Kelly, on the other hand, is aiming for accuracy in a style driven by the truth.
So what is real and what is not? How much of Kelly’s distorted ‘reality’ was created by her childhood experiences? Said Mantel:
“”I think every author fears accidental plagiarism – when a phrase comes too easily, you fear you√≠ve heard it somewhere – and I would never want to make a fuss about that. But this is not one of those cases,” she says. “When you√≠ve written a memoir yourself, you√≠re very sensitive to the issues surrounding memory and authenticity.”
Ironically, this remark comes from The Telegraph, which quotes slabs of Mantel’s list of plagiarisms which are therefore identical to bits of the Independent. That is fine, of course, since the statement is available for use and the casing of ideas is different.
The Telegraph adds that Kelly is rewriting passages of the book.
“Is that enough? Hilary and her agent, Bill Hamilton, don’t think so. Mr Hamilton has since written direct to Nigel Newton, the head of Bloomsbury, to argue that if something presented as one writer’s personal memories turns out to echo other writers’ fictional work, the integrity of the whole project – and the good faith of its publisher – is called into question. He doesn’t think Bloomsbury should republish the book in any form. Antonia White’s publisher, Virago, meanwhile, is looking into the possibilities of a legal case.”
To Sam Leith at the right wing Telegraph, the whole genre is about “victimhood” and makes a lot of money with its “own moral authority”.
“But this genre has an uneasy relationship with authenticity. Their curiously pornographic appeal to the reader depends on the idea of their being authentic, but their emotional effect is an entirely literary one. They could as well be made up from whole cloth. Sometimes they are..”
I truly don’t agree. The emotional effect is not literary at all – in fact the books themselves are often not very good, and their power is exactly in their claim to authenticity. We are seeing real human experience, sometimes artlessly told. And that is why the offence here is particularly serious, and why the role of unconscious memory can be both complex and confusing.
But we should condemn a true story that isn’t true. You don’t write a memoir without taking on the mantle of historian, and checking your own recollections. Otherwise you are just printing raw therapy, the dressing of the self to face its own internal accusers.
Mind you, as this message board shows, getting the records is a cruel game of its own.
I too go in horror of accidentally using someone else’s work. Fortunately my memory is too poor for outright lifting of sentences, but where do my ideas come from? How much is truly me, how much is zeitgeist, how much is a conversation transformed?
At least in documentary most ideas are in the zeitgeist, floating in our contemporary society, and the originality is in the approach, in the connections and story.
Ultimately from Robot Wisdom, with a trip through Tingle.
Now, by the way, the Nazareth House in Bexhill where this story occurred has been sold.
“Prestigious residential development comprising conversion of convent buildings to luxury apartments and new build of town houses in grounds. Our landscape concept and detailed landscape design focused on √´de-institutionalising√≠ the building and its setting ..”
August 18th, 2005 at 10:08 am
In fact, Kelly plagiarised even her excuse for plagiarism. Isn’t a “photographic memory”, and the inadvertant use thereof, exactly the excuse that Helen “Demidenko” Darville used?
August 18th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Frankly, any vehicle that brings out the horrors of those mediaeval torture chambers is worth the sacrifice in personal integrity.
That courtyard drill photo is a ripper. This was institutionalised sadism. And to think that the RC’s made a capital gain out of the exercise – should have been appropriated to pay compensation for the victims.
August 18th, 2005 at 6:22 pm
Johnny – that is a lovely twist. I don’t condone the kids home stuff at all, but there are plenty of little barnardos kids and anglicans with the strange twitches and a solitary nature.
Institutions + authoritarian societies + untramelled power + the right to beat + the notion of “charity” = soul destroying sadism.
The most distinctive things about the Cathollics are (I reckon) the use of institutionalised and sexually repressed adults, and the fact that the organisation still exists.
August 18th, 2005 at 7:29 pm
David – I agree with you about authoritarianism but I’m not sure about your comment about Catholics.
I was raised by liberal Presbyterian parents and spent a lot of time as a teenager being taught by fundamentalist protestants. I certainly wasn’t raised to feel sympathetic to Roman Catholics.
But as an adult I feel ambivalent. Many of the Catholics I know are champions of social justice. They’re out there doing what the Jesus of the gospels did — working with people respectable society despises and trying to drive the money changers out of the temple.
I used to identify the church with the institution — the hierarchy, the dogma, the schools and the charities. Now I’m not so sure. Maybe the church is really the body of people who think of themselves as Catholics.
It seems to me that there’s a struggle between those of us who want to see an end to institutionalised sadism and those who don’t. Some of us are inside the churches and some of us aren’t (I’m not).
I don’t want to alienate Christians — even fundamentalist Christians — who believe in so many of the things I believe in. For example, I don’t think we can win the battle against poverty and inequality without their help.
August 18th, 2005 at 8:40 pm
Sorry, sloppy language. Don is right, and I am not trying to make statements about a religion, but about a certain social institution. There’s a lot of factors that made the childrearing and educating parts of the official Catholic church prone to violence and cruelty, but my own Anglican school had a lot to answer for as well.
I think the trick with Christianity in all its forms is to recognise that it possesses all the human frailties and strengths. It is always both its institutions and its people – the Catholics who continue to commit to the Church are committing to the institution. There’s plenty of choice after all.
September 18th, 2005 at 1:38 am
As the old saying goes: don’t believe everything you hear or read in the media. Before anyone truly judges my book, Rock Me Gently, please read it first and then give me your opinion. This is not a ploy to get you to buy my book (I will send anyone who contacts me a free copy) all I ask for is for a fair hearing.
October 17th, 2005 at 1:21 am
Mmmmm, I see everyone here has become silent since my posting. Have you all returned to your comfortable little boxes in the world? By the way, Johnny Mnemonic, I did not plagiarise my excuse for my alleged plagiarism by saying that I had a photographic memory – that was something dreamed up by the media. By the way, who is Helen Darville? I’ve never heard of her.
Will you reply? I doubt it.
October 17th, 2005 at 1:48 am
The fact that you haven’t heard of Helen Darville, who wrote as Helen Demidenko, is a salutary reminder to us that we are not the centre of the world. She created a celebrated plagiarism case here.
I think you have put us in a quandary. How do we work out what is going on without trusting the media? It is not just about reading your book – we have to do the comparisons with everything else as well.
For me, this is reportable but not resolvable. All I can really say is that the basic story is important and should be told and I hope some compromise can be reached so the book is published in a new form.
August 7th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
Icould not believe, what i was reading ,when i read the book,
i gave up reading the book
due to the fact, that what i did read was, what i had said in court.
it was like someone had taken what had happend to me
and made it there own.
September 13th, 2006 at 4:27 am
In reference to all of the above, my view is that Judith Kelly is guilty of being an inexperienced writer who foolishly used expressions to describe particular ‘objects’ or ’surroundings’ etc by re-wording several snippets that she had read elsewhere. I can understand that as an inexperienced writer this is easy to do. I could understand people’s outrage if this book was a novel of some kind and Judith had copied ’story line’ so to speak and tried to pass this as her own, but I don’t think this is the case. I beleive the tragic experiences told here are not fabricated at all and cannot understand why people are looking past all this and focusing on slating the poor woman for her mistake (unintelligence and sadly human nature).
I only have pure sympathy for Judith Kelly and all of the other poor children who’s lives have had to suffer greatly because of the evilness of those who were in authority and supposed to care.
So all you ‘plagiarised’ junkies – cut the c**p and wake up!! I won’t even start on religion!
Well done to Judith on her bravery in sharing her horrific ordeal and speaking up!
September 18th, 2006 at 12:15 pm
TO ABOVE
I WAS THE PERSON WHO STARTED THE WHOLE THING OFF.
I WAS THE FIRST PERSON TO GO TO THE POLICE.
IT WAS ME WHO TOOK ALPHNSO TO COURT.
SHE WAS FOUND GUILTY OF HER CRIME’S REGARDING ME.
IT WAS ME WHO WAS ON THE STAND FOR 3 DAY’S, BEING RIPPED APART.WHERE WAS J. KELLY THEN.
AS I SAID WHEN I SAW THE BOOK, IT WAS JUST MY WORD’S JUMPING OUT OF IT, BUT THEN AGAIN – WHAT WAS SAID IN COURT WAS IN ALL THE PAPER’S -TV -ETC, YOU CAN MAKE WHAT YOU LIKE OUT OF THAT.
I WAS IN 2 OF THE NAZARETH HOME’S ALONG WITH 4 MEMBER’S OF MY FAMILY.
IV HAD NO MONEY -NOR DO I WANT ANY.
ONE THING I WILL DO THOUGH, IS WRITE A BOOK . THE TRUE BOOK.
I HAVE HAD OFFER’S OF HELP TO DO THIS, AND NOW IS THE TIME.
NOBODY I KNOW HAS EVER HEARD OF J. KELLY- WE FIND THAT STRANG.
SO NIKI UNLESS YOU WHERE THERE,
HOW CAN YOU KNOW.
September 18th, 2006 at 1:03 pm
More about Helen Cusiter’s story .
September 19th, 2006 at 9:25 am
Well done Helen
At last we here from someone like yourslf.
I will look out for your book, please do it.
October 11th, 2006 at 10:57 am
Helen, please post more. I have read Judith kelly’s book but it does not tally with what a witness who was there has told me about what happened. Maybe it is just poetic license? I don’t know. But I am worried. Details about eg. the conditions at the convent match, but not other things, not events. Were you at the same convent as Kelly? Are you in touch with people who were? I need to talk to some of them. I cannot really say much here,but I am VERY worried that MAYBE more than prose has been borrowed….. PLEASE POST BACK
October 12th, 2006 at 12:24 am
hi susan
your right in what you say – as you can see from my posting im really upset by j. kelly who ever she is. no one i know has ever heard of her.
i went to the police, with no idea how much it would snowball, j. kelly was never here for the trial-ODD-
IF YOU GO INTO GOOGLE PUT IN HELEN CUSITER NAZARET HOUSE ABERDEEN. IT WILL COME UP.
SOMETIMES I WISH I HAD JUST LEFT IT.
A LOT OF HER BOOK IS AS YOU SAY.
IS THERE ANYWAY I CAN GET IN TOUCH WITH YOU ?
October 12th, 2006 at 12:41 am
HI SUSAN
HAVING SOME PROBLEMS WITH PC.
YES YOUR RIGHT IN WHAT YOU SAY.
NEVER HEARD OF J KELLY ,AND NO ONE I KNOW HAS HEARD OF HER,
IF YOU GO INTO GOOGLE PUT IN HELEN CUSITER NAZARETH HOUSE ABERDEEN, YOU WILL SEE FOR YOURSELF WERE IT CAME FROM ???
IS THERE ANYWAY I CAN GET IN TOUCH.
October 12th, 2006 at 5:42 am
I will go and try to find your email. I can’t put mine up here. From what I’ve seen J Kelly keeps a close look at blogs and websites that mention her book and jumps in. So I cannot put my email here.
She was at bexhill Nazareth House, not Aberdeen, and in the 1950s. But even so, I know someone who was there and this book has really unnerved her.
October 12th, 2006 at 5:58 am
Sorry, couldn’t find your email,but did read about your case.
The events in JKelly’s book are real enough, i.e., the drowning of the two girls on the beach. As are the tales of cruelty. However, I do not know if these things actually happened to her. In the book she is the two girls’ best friend. But I know someone who says that their best friend was someone else, another girl, who isn’t mentioned in the book. Maybe it is THIS girl’s story that is really being told???
October 20th, 2006 at 12:52 pm
THERE WAS ONLY EVER ONE DROWNING OF A GIRL WHO WAS IN ABERDEEN, THEY GOT THE DATES WRONG, I KNOW THIS BECAUSE SHE WAS IN THE SAME GROUP AS ME, AND THE SAME AGE.
THE DROWNING NEVER TOOK PLACE HERE, SHE WAS MOVED, TO ANOTHER HOUSE.
I FIND IT STRANGE THAT THE BOOK HAS SO MANY OTHER PARTS OF OTHERS LIVES IN IT ?
STRANG TO THE BOOK CAME OUT AFTER THE TRIAL.
I WONDER WHY SHE HAS PUT ALPHNSO INTO HER SECOND BOOK, SAYING ABOUT THE COURT CASE- THEY ARE THE SAME AGE !!!!!!!
IF SHE WAS TREATED SO BAD, THEN WHY WAIT FOR AFTER THE TRIAL TO WRITE HER BOOK, IF IT WAS SO BAD FOR HER WHY DID SHE LEAVE IT SO LONG.
I STILL FEEL CHEATED IN SOME WAY ( NOT MONEY WISE ) JUST SAD.
IF I HAD NEVER SAID ANYTHING , THEN THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO BOOK.
October 21st, 2006 at 6:24 am
Helen
I was in Care for 13 years in a Convent.
You state, that if you had not said anything there would never have been a book.
This statement is utter rubbish, for there is a book in all of us and the majority of words and stories are identical.
I am 20 years your senior and I have been talking about my care days for years and long before you went in to care.
Did you steal my memories? I doubt it and why should you. Abuse stories are by and large the same, whether raised by the Nuns or any care home.
Bullies when allowed, are bullies and we need to share and expose our memories so that it may never happen again.
With regard to you Susan, my guess is that you were never raised in care, otherwise you would not have made the statements J.Kelly in your message of Oct 12.
I am ashamed of you both and it looks like nothing but sour grapes because the book is a best seller.
Best of luck J. Kelly, there are many of us wanting your book to be successful, for the common good.
October 21st, 2006 at 7:59 pm
Helen
I happened across this thread and was somewhat dismayed at what I was reading.
How can you possibly consider that your story is unique, to the point of attempting to persecute J Kelly?
One of my interests is making a study of experiences in Children’s Care Homes since the early 1900’s and over the years the stories that I have uncovered are so like J Kelly’s it hurts.
Shame is, that it is only in recent times that people have had the courage to speak out, let alone publish their story, for fear of ridicule and scorn by society at large.
So be proud of what J Kelly has achieved and before it’s to late why don’t you attempt to write down your experiences. Your book will no doubt replicate the tales of woe of thousands, if not millions before you, but it at least will have the twist of your time in court.
I look forward to adding your book to my records in due course.
Kind regards
Andy
October 23rd, 2006 at 1:57 pm
But Helen, J Kelly isn’t talking about Aberdeen, she was in Bexhill, where 2 girls drowned in August 1953. I know because my mum was in the same class as them and Judith. In fact mum was there from 1942 as a babe in arms. The two girls who drowned, Janet and Frances, were my mum’s best friends.
She isn’t talking about Aberdeen, where you were.
Unfortunately the abuse in Nazareth Homes was pretty much worldwode. I’ve heard of abuse in Australia and NZ too.
My family are unhappy about SOME of the details in Kelly’s book. For example, a nice teacher isn’t in it, as she didn’t mention any of the teachers (all lay staff) as she wanted the emphasis of the book to be on the nuns. -It isn’t a long book and she didn’t want to complicate the story.
On the other hand, I wish people would take it as a personal account only, and not the be all and end all of what happened there.
For example, my mum -and her sister- aren’t in the book. Is this because mum couldn’t be traced, or was it another decision to leave out someone for the good of the plot? -Because in the book, it is Kelly and the two girls who are close. No mention of Janet, Frances and my mother being a threesome for years before she even arrived.
I understand a writer can’t talk about people by name if you can’t reach them- but what about including them with a notice, “This person’s name has been changed…” We feel that mum has been written out of her friend’s lives and it is very upsetting, as their deaths had a terrible affect on her, and all the family- as she was still having breakdowns well into her 30s.
BUT on the other hand, we have grown up hearing so many of the same tales of abuse that are in the book, it is a relief that this is “out there” at last. So many have refused to believe it happened.
There ARE faults in the book. But at least people know about Bexhill now. My mum can live with that so I have to.
So there are faults with the book, Helen, yes, but the drowning of 2 girls in Bexhill in 1953 is true. She isn’t talking about Aberdeen or stealing the idea of it.
October 27th, 2006 at 9:47 am
I can see that nobody know’s what im trying to get across,
to Patrica – sour grapes you say, why do you think that, you could not be more wrong.
i only want to know why the book came out after the court case, if j. kelly had all this to say, then why leave writing her book for the best part of 40 year’s.
also nazareth house in aberdeen was not the only house i was in.
i am not going to leave anymore COMMENT’S on here, going over old groud – BEEN THERE DONE THAT-
PEACE OF MIND WILL DO ME.
October 27th, 2006 at 5:19 pm
Helen & H Sullivan good morning.
There is no ‘right’ time to write a book, it’s when you have the courage to unload all the emotional hurt. A book does not just appear and especially when you have no experience of writing. Also, having written the draft of the book, you then have the uphill struggle of getting a publisher to read it, let alone to consider it for publication.
Finally, the book was written about Judith’s memories, not anyone else’s. If it had been written to include other people’s feelings during the period, then where do you stop? For sure the book would have an appendix of names volumes thick and still someone would be missed off the list.
The opportunity is there for all of us to write our own stories, why don’t the two of you get together and publish yours. I will be first in line to buy it!!
So, lets be kind to each other and feel pleased that the book was ever written.
October 27th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
I have been doing some research and this is what I have been told.
200,000 books are published in the UK every year and only a very few see the daylight and that doesn’t count the thousands of writers who try to get their manuscripts published. Literary agents are overwhelmed by applications from would-be authors.
Good luck to you both. Patricia
October 28th, 2006 at 7:35 am
Helen, please would you contact me on judith.kelly@talk21.com
January 5th, 2007 at 11:41 am
I can’t undestand your problem Helen. I appreciate that what you have suffered at the hands of Marie Docherty must have been awful but why do you feel this anger towards Judith Kelly-a woman who has no part in your life? Whether or not the phrases she used were purposefully copied or accidently remembered, the point is that the events she describes actually did happen and there are people that support her recollections. I found one small article in which Marjorie Mitchell confirms Judiths’ story, claiming that she remembered the children trying to form a human chain to save the drowning girls while the nuns knelt on the beach and prayed. As a few people on this site have noted, stories of abuse – no matter how much the locations or people differ – are intrinsically all the same.
January 29th, 2007 at 5:27 am
There is no right or wrong way to discuss abuse. Whether you write, talk or sing about it, it is wrong. By writing Rock Me Gently, Judith Kelly has made sure Janet and Frances didn’t die in vain. The bravery and courage it must have taken to write Rock Me Gently shouldn’t be overlooked- we should be grateful to Judith for sharing her story.