The irony of Sonya being known for writing characters with blind spots, and herself having her own glaring blind spot, is just **chef's kiss** Also, this just confirmed to me that we don't need another spinoff of Real Housewives. We need a reality series with writers and authors
Had Larson been a good artist, she would have subtexted the -kidney story- inspiration so that only a few hawk-eyed readers would have put the pieces together. The biggest problem here is not the inspiration but the plagiarism.
There's a couple of things that hit me about the article. Number one, Dawn is very much a struggling writer. She's been trying to get a book published for years. That Sonya launched her career on the back of Dawn's own freaking story in this way has got to be beyond terrible. Also, Sonya's gaslighting when Dawn called her out. She just deflected. The whole, "Of course it isn't you, the donor in the story is terrible and you wouldn't want to be that inspiration" when becomes clear that is EXACTLY how Sonya sees Dawn and she basically wrote what she saw. And apparently did it gleefully at first, to entertain Dawn's other detractors in the writing group; I'm sure that's why she didn't change the name until later. Otherwise, that's a no brainer. You change it before anyone sees the draft. And I find her "writer of color" defense pretty disgusting in these circumstances. Also there's the nasty element of continuing to pretend to be Dawn's friend for, given the chat comments and her own behavior, more material. That's kind of the worst.
So let me see if I got this right. 1) Dawn did something selfless that could save someone’s life. 2) Dawn decided to brag about this selfless act, but in a group with people she thought were her friends. 3) Seeing no reaction, Dawn decided to email directly for approval, to which Larson congratulated her for doing something ‘tremendous’ 4) Larson went behind her back to laugh at her with people Dawn thought were her friends. 5) Larson decided that instead of talking to Dawn about the problem of her seeking validation, she was going to write a story about her for profit. 6) Dawn found this out and recognized that her life (kidney donation, writing a letter to the recipient, looking for attention) was turned into a story by a ‘friend’. In this story she was basically mocked. 7) Larson denies this and gaslights Dawn by claiming it’s not about her and that Dawn is trying to use white privilege to take a story away from a POC 8) Dawn reacts further by calling everyone’s attention to the matter, sending Larson a bunch of emails, and basically doing everything she thinks she should in order to get Larson not to write a story about her/profit off a story about her/avoid mentioning her as the inspiration 9) a supporter backs off from helping Larson, seeing the potential legal problems her actions could cause. Larson decides to sue Dawn for defamation, to which Dawn countersues because well Larson did in fact take this part of her life and turn it into a story. 10) seeing as things weren’t really changing, Dawn requested the article to cover the whole thing so she can get the truth out there. Well, my take away is that Dawn might be a hard person to be around, but what she did was something that could save someone’s life. Her bragging wasn’t malicious and perhaps if one good friend had talked to her directly, she wouldn’t have continued looking for validation (in this instance). Where as Larson was intentionally malicious, from acting like she supported Dawn’s deed then going behind her back to laugh, to turning what she shared into a story for profit instead of talking to her, to gaslighting her and playing the white privilege vs POC card (when that wasn’t the issue). Perhaps I have this view because of the implied friendship between the 2, but even if they weren’t, it’s still unkind to mock someone this way especially when they haven’t done anything to you. Dawn might have reacted extremely and in some senses badly, but it was in defense of herself. Her negative traits in this case were not harming anybody, not until Larson did what she did.
I think Dawn is slightly more redeemable here, but I found excerpts of court docs online and apparently when she threatened to sue the festival if the story was released, Dawn ALSO suggested that Sonya's story be replaced with one that Dawn wrote! They're both so petty!
@@hardnewstakenharder this is where things start tumbling out of control and getting muddy. Because clearly Dawn is a flawed human as well, and now many of her other negative traits such as career jealousy are coming out and effecting people such as the anthology people, when everything could have been avoided if Sonya simply talked to her directly about her behaviour. And as for suggesting it use one of her own stories, I think part of that motive is coming from the thought of how Sonya would be profiting off of Dawn’s own life. Where as Dawn herself theoretically could have written a piece about kidney donation if she wanted to. So in her mind it would only be fair. Again: neither of these people make good decisions and certainly aren’t friends.
They weren't friends. Dawn just added a bunch of people (including other writers) into a private FB group so she could brag about her kidney donation. We've all been added to useless FB groups by acquaintances we haven't seen in ages. You don't need to be a friend for that. That said, I agree with everything else you said. The gaslighting and the playing of the POC card, which was just a pathetic ploy to get sympathy. Dawn is a weirdo but Larson is definitely way worse.
Turns out dawn wasn’t even seeking validation, she saw on Facebook that Larson had seen the posts but wasn’t interacting with them, which she noted was unusual. She began to suspect that Larson may not actually be her friend, and was in fact right!
In short, I find Larson to morally, be a shit “friend”, and legally, to be dumb. Yes writers take inspiration from everywhere, but to use information so personally given, information that is incredibly personal to Dawn ( I mean she mentioned her childhood trauma and abuse in the letter!) for her own personal gain, all while trying to appear as the sweet friend, is disgusting. If you’re going to be so obvious about it, then you might as well be upfront with it. How are you going to give your MC the same first name (couldn’t even change it to Skylar?), publish it with the same verbatim text, and then still attempt to deny, gaslight, and victimize yourself. The “Woe am I, the besieged WOC author” schtick is just as bad as Dorland’s martyr routine, but I guess the irony is lost on her (Not important, but I say this as a WOC) Again, I too think Dawn was too much with the kidney, but I also feel that it’s a wicked thing to take the exact letter she wrote, a likely emotional piece based on her trauma, pain, and life, and twist it the way Sonya did, making light of what, regardless of how outwardly silly it may seem, was someone’s personal feelings. Imagine printing someone’s diary and sharing pages of it to the whole school, or making fun of a bully because they don’t have a dad, even if they deserve it, it’s just in bad taste.
I couldn’t agree more! Larson is obviously the wrong one here. If Dawn wants to scream she donated a kidney does it make her slightly narcissistic? Maybe but it’s her experience. Sonya using her story to profit off of it and turn it into a race debate is gross
It wasn’t a private diary though. It was a public Facebook post on social media. Still wrong to use it the way she did but if you put something out there publicly on the Internet like that, you can’t control how other people may react to it or use it for inspiration. Sonya clearly should have not used it period or had her character do something similar... she didn’t even change the character name until later drafts. But Dawn acted just as poorly too by harassing and stalking Sonya. They were both wrong.
@@ameliesayshola8854 wasn't the letter's contents only revealed in Dawn's private Facebook group though? Not public? (Haven't read the full article, only watched the video, so might be wrong)
@@HopefullyHopeful that's correct, Dawn shared the letter in a private group she created and invited Sonya to. I don't think there's anything wrong with Sonya taking inspiration, but she should've taken bigger steps to distance her story from Dawn's story, especially since Dawn's story is unusual (donating a kidney is not -super- unusual, but donating a kidney to no one in particular is quite unusual).
Everyone is awful here, Sonya is cruel but also Dawn shouldn't be stalking her in zoom meetings. Also, when Dawn requested that Sonya's story be pulled from the festival, Dawn also suggested that it be replaced with HER OWN short fiction! Both are social strivers, and I hope my personal writing community isn't as awful.
This whole thing is such a wild ride and I think the portion about the group chat subpoena could serve as a powerful wake up call to people who regularly talk shit about people in their lives. There’s a difference between meaningfully venting about someone who is stressing you out and hate-watching everything someone posts online. Writers are no exception. To quote someone on Twitter: “The article describes [Dawn’s] upbringing as poor. Dawn describes her childhood as “marred by trauma and abuse,” her blurb talks about how she’s “always an outsider” but “sunnily earnest” and how she tries almost too-hard to make connections with everyone she meets. Sonya, in contrast, is described as “popular” in their spaces, with a middle-class upbringing, obviously talented, garnering success in ways Dawn never could. Her writing sounds complex and powerful, she’s well spoken, and she seems wildly smart even just in glimpses. I’m not saying that what Dawn did was correct or justified but I *am* saying that there’s a certain degree to which the response seems to be punishing her for being embarrassing…I think I’d rather have an annoying, obnoxious, embarrassing friend who emails me about why I haven’t mentioned their exalted kidney altruism than a friend who’s this casually cruel to people and then gaslights them about it.”
WAIT because I literally haven’t been able to stop thinking about this now I remember last year when I wrote an essay in an academic setting chronicling the social interactions of someone who I had DEFINITELY been shit talking in several group chats. Obviously names and locations were changed for privacy but now I’m like AAAAA am I Sonya?!? I had zero qualms about writing that essay. AM I THE BAD ART FRIEND?!? This article has thrown me for a LOOP. I need everyone to read it.
😂I think that’s a bit different, presuming you didn’t use excessively private info and you actually changed enough details. That quote you posted honestly really encapsulates everything that annoys me about Sonya. So Dawn likes attention? Honestly so what? She still a gave a kidney, she was only looking for some support from her “close friends” and maybe people who donate organs should be given a little extra special treatment. I don’t disagree that she clearly has a problem, but a friend should talk that out with her, should help her move past a need for attention, or decide they can’t deal with it and end the friendship cordially. Everyone has flaws, and Sonya’s ability to backstab and tease this women, tease her upbringing and trauma, which is what she did by publishing her letter, all while still claiming to be besties makes me want to vomit. If she is so horrible why continue speaking to her?
As a middle school educator, the whole article reeked of adolescent nonsense. The idea that a woman, desperate for positive attention and engagement during a tumultuous time in her life, is the subject of that kind of treatment is very juvenile. Yes, Dawn's behavior was embarrassing (going out of her way to keep track of who interacted and who had not was unnecessary and a bad look), but Sonya's behavior, as well as that of her friends, was cold and cruel in a way that could never be attributed as a proportional reaction to Dawn's perceived sins. Taking letters Dawn shared of her personal life, with the explicit intent to reproduce them in a negative light is just mean. It's not a kind thing to do. And to double down? To continually accuse Dawn of having some sort of ulterior motive, consciously or otherwise, that was an attack on Sonya as a woman of color, is ridiculous.
completely agree with you. Larson and so-called writer friends are too cruel, and the whole thing is not interesting at all. As an Asian, I feel so sorry about the all the characters in the story. The whole thing should be more about human weaknesses than race and color
Yeah she basically used her status as a woc to be her sword and shield. And tried to weaponize Dawn's whiteness against her. Not cool. And Alexa kept mentioning the sanctity of group chats but all the info and material Sonya stole was from Dawn's private FB group. It's not like she made it all public so anyone can see. Also, there is very little that goes untouched in discovery. Most of this happened online so what did they expect? This is similar in a way to the Omegaverse lawsuit. Don't push forward with lawsuits unless you're okay with everyone looking at your dirty laundry in that situation. People can be so dense. I would never sue someone if I know damn well I wrote emails or chat messages that prove the other side's allegations. Even if Sonya wins the legal battle, I hope this hurts her personally and professionally.
@@TreeDwellingShrimp I think Alexa does not realize that everything someone says can be used against them in court. It's a little surprising since she writes thrillers. That's not an insult btw, but someone who writes thrillers and detective books should know what is considered evidence by the law. Also, social media is very open about the fact that what you post on their platform is not protected by free speech or privacy laws.
As unpleasant and attention-seeking as Dawn may be, she did not deserve to have her story stolen or her letter plagiarized. Take all emotion out of the story and look at the facts: Sonia's actions are unethical and so is the rest of her writing group for not stopping her when they knew what she was doing.
I’m surprised that people are so shocked about group chats and private emails being subpoenaed. In family court and criminal court it happens all the time. Specifically having text messages subpoenaed is pretty common.
Nothing on the Internet is truly private or secure. And this would be a good reminder to all of us of that. The Internet literally is forever, and just because you delete things doesn’t mean they can’t be found. You don’t own your chats on third-party websites. That includes email. It’s a such a good reminder, hopefully something most of us will never after deal with.
I think people don't usually envision themselves being part of an issue that would require that privacy to be broken. Plus most people aren't aware of the legal system or its processes.
If all a person wants in exchange for giving a dying stranger a kidney is some validation, I think that’s a fair exchange. Whether what Sonya did was legally plagiarism or not is secondary to her pettiness. Also, private correspondence is often subpoenaed in legal battles, that’s hardly shocking.
Eh, Dawn's main crime was being a bit cringey. But Sonya comes across as a complete b word. Her two-facedness, her playing the 'taking ownership away from people of colour' card when she knew full well the piece was in fact about Dawn.
Was it about Dawn or how people who get some help feel about the people who feel they "Saved them"? I remember my sister helping me with something, and I remember feeling like I was a kid again, even though I was an adult. I was under her rules, her orders, her schedule. It rankled. I hated feeling that way. she didn't make me feel that way, but I can get way someone who gets a supposedly "anonymous" kidney would feel about having to genuflect to the person who donated. There's something a bit irritating about the letter, even if you want to credit it with good intentions. and I think that is a fair reading of the story, from Larson's perspective. And that is NOT me saying I don't get Dorland's pain at finding out people she thought were friends weren't, in the most horrifying way possible. That had to hurt so much.
Sonya turned a personal story that was important to another person into a story that was in effect, "Look at this white savior complex. She is a loser." I am mixed race and I think there are some people that have been straight up insulting in the same veins which they "try” to help. And it isn't a thing that I have seen that is strictly a problem with race. I see it in all sort of scenarios. And it is often through ignorance than actual malice. But one thing is the same among them all.... "making assumptions instead of directly talking". However, the way Sonya put it was taking Donland story, flandarizing her, put her in clown makeup and put her under a shameful light-- which again, "trying" to help... Which I think Sonya's solution to combat white savior complex through a personal story is just as useless (*i think she too is guilty of said savior complex*) and frankly, a dirty move. All Sonya did really was to just added more salt. At least someone can take that kidney.
I agree. Too much evidence that there was some "mean girl" conduct in this, and then Larson trying to play victim via race while blind to the privilege of her upbringing.
@@obobob1867 yeah the kidney meme is pretty amusing but people are maybe losing track of the actual good deed Dawn has done for a total stranger. How many people willing choose to undergo surgery and give up an organ like that? Who cares if she’s a bit cringe or needy or sensitive or not entirely self aware of how she comes across. What good has Sonya done in this situation? Just cruelty, mockery, plagiarism, backstabbing, initiating lawsuits…
@@barbarafolk1854 I think Sonya does admit in a group chat (or text) with other friends that the story was, indeed, about Dawn. An earlier version of the story, which was made into an audiobook, did contain sections of Dawn's letter directly. Verbatim. And that would, technically, be plagiarism. And Sonya even admits to knowingly using Dawn's letter--that was quoted in the article. I agree Sonya wrote an inspirational piece and didn't steal the story from Dawn (because Dawn didn't write a story; she simply shared her true life events), but it is clear that Sonya write the story based on Dawn, especially given what we know about that person. Really, the only thing she added in was the recipient. It's clear, based on her exchanges with friends, that the story's rich white lady is Dawn. That's still not plagiarism, but it is a violation in a way. If Sonya's story was a Creative Nonfiction (not a fictional short), then she'd be in a ton of trouble because it's just...wrong...to use a person's personal journey as part of your story without getting their permission. No way would it have been published w/o fact-checking. Or, in the least, speaking with them. I think she's morally (and perhaps ethically) in the wrong, but not necessarily legally.
Let's see: Team Dawn: She donated a kidney, but wasn't selfless about it. She was needy in wanting validation after the act. Team Sonya: (1) She used her literary work to shame a friend who donated a kidney in a way that wasn't entirely selfless. (2) She lied about having Dawn's name in the original version and copying near word for word parts of Dawn's story. (3) She gaslit Dawn into thinking defending herself meant she wanted to be that "white-savior" narcissist version in the story Sonya imagined. (4) She used her status as POC to make Dawn, a white woman, feel like no one would support her if she tried to fight this. Hmm...I don't know about you, but I see one woman saved someone's life and her only crime was not being ENTIRELY selfless about it. The other is ironically calling someone a narcissist while displaying many narcissistic traits herself. You don't have to be an armchair psychologist to know the word, "Projection." In the end, I side with Dawn Dorland.
Exactly. Donating a kidney is a massive act of altruism with potential health risks that actually saved a stranger's life. I'd at least want people I considered friends to care!
People don't realize that with live organ donation, the donor is more at risk than the recipient (though perhaps less so with kidney than liver). The recipient often feels better almost immediately, while the recovery for the donor can be tough. So, yeah, maybe Dawn should have let up on the bragging, but it was no small thing she did.
Tbh. The way people got fooled into thinking somebody giving up a part of their BODY is bad if they don't do it entirely out of the goodness of their heart is fucking weird, our culture is so obsessed with purity like that
I don’t see any reason to feel conflicted, honestly. Dorland may be needy, annoying, and clueless, but Larson seems to be a bully and a gaslighter . Based on the group chat and the texts, she appears to have been motivated by maliciousness and was fully aware that she was also ripping off Dorland’s words, only revising the story when it gained traction. I think the fact that the author group chat was subpoenaed is delicious. No, make that “tremendous.”
I agree. I'm only reading all this now, but I basically clicked the video due to the title and then was a little disturbed by the poster's opinion so I took a look at the comments. I don't think being annoying should EVER justify stealing someone else's writing or basically idk, author-bullying instead of cyber bullying? Larson's book directly affected Dorland's friend group with her fellow writers. It's commented in one of the portions before Dorland reads Larson's short story that she felt like people were treating her different. That sounds a LOT like cyber bullying to me- just with a published work which arguably makes it worse. I've been cyber bullied like that and it starts the same way. At first, you don't know what's going on but no one wants to sit next to you or talk to you. It takes time to find out someone was talking badly about you online in private chats or in social media sites you don't use. That's literally all I can think of right now after hearing about all that. As annoying as Dorland probably was, I feel pretty bad for her now. My heart hurts for her.
Bingo. Dawn is the annoying person that is superficially seen as "bad" but then you dig a little and find a lot of issues and go, "OH!" and just move on. OR if you are her friend, try to get her counseling. Sonya sounds incredibly calculating and malicious, like someone fully prepared to steal, lie, deceive, and invalidate an entire person's experience/existence (even her own, miss POC) just to make a name for herself in the writing world. She seems desperate.
Dawn may be a lot but people with character defects also have legal rights and Sonya is treading very close to the line of plagarism. I’ll add that she sued first for defamation. She had to know this would come up in discovery, or she had a very bad lawyer IMO
@@learnerlove6853 at the end of the article, Dawn is following around Sonya to different writing panels and sitting in; apparently she's doing "research." They both suck!
as a writer, so many writers being defensive of sonya is disgusting to me. she used the real name and letter originally. that says it all. how easy would it have been to do a story of a white saviour doing something seemingly altruistic without directly ripping her off? easy. so easy it hurts, that it would take less than a minute to do. but she didn't want to do a white saviour story. she wanted to be shitty towards dawn. plain and simple. dawn is cringey and annoying and that makes her an easy target to rip into. but she still donated a kidney that someone out there needed, so i really don't care if she was irritating and insufferable about it. versus some writers deciding to get high off tearing it apart for no other reason than it annoyed them. she has become catty in response and that makes me roll my eyes but honestly, i don't really blame her, either, when someone did this to her. maybe more writers should be honest about why they're 'conflicted' on this: they've been cruel to people in their lives through their writing and perhaps used more personal details than they should have and now they have to realise they were in fact shitty for doing so. you can be inspired. you can write about living people in your life. but you have a responsibility to realise it's just like gossiping in a group chat: there's a chance it will get back to the person you were talking about if you aren't careful and YOU have to deal with that. this is why my inspiration is in fact only that. inspiration i work into something else.
I just want to point out that as flawed as Dawn is, she posted a letter to private FB group of people she considered friends and in the opening line mentions being abused at an early age- and Sonya Larson thought this was appropriate to take verbatim and put in a public work of fiction. Dawn may be considered attention-seeking, but Sonya Larson appears to be at best insensitive, and at worst a bully using an abuse victim's struggles as a step up in her career.
I've had this quote as the background of my work laptop for years: Dance like no one is watching. Email like it may one day be read aloud at a deposition.
The writing drama eclipses the fact that she gave a KIDNEY, a KIDNEY. Am I the only one that is a bit sad that none of her friends thought that was a nice thing to do in the beginning? Regardless of wanting validation she gave a kidney.
Donating a kidney is an incredibly nice thing to do. I'm sure the person who received that kidney doesn't really care about how their doner talked about it afterwards or if their motives were entirely selfless and pure. But emailing your friend about not reply to a group chat message about your kidney donation is a bit much.
Right!! A lot of people are stuck on the fact she was disappointed no one had commented on it at the event she went to, but if it was any other life event (like say she got married or had a baby) it wouldn't be at all weird to expect acknowledgement about it
Dawn wasn’t getting enough attention to satisfy her. It sounds like she wanted everyone to stop what they were doing to constantly praise her, which isn’t okay. She literally went out of her way to confront people about not giving her enough attention, clearly without regard to how other people may have been too busy with their own lives to make her the center of their lives. I am that person who has been deathly ill, and I still don’t expect people to make me, even when I was literally expected to die, the center of their worlds. Yet Dawn was expecting that, to the point of getting confrontational.
If one of my friends did that I'd call her an idiot, but I'd be proud of her. What Sonya did is almost inhumane. I understand not wanting to praise Dawn (who was clearly looking for attention), but doing all of that behind the back of someone who sees you as her friend is disgusting. It reminds me of that Cyberbullying movie, where the culprit was the best friend all along
While Dawn sounds like she has some serious issues (a desperate need for attention being one of them), Sonya sounds not only cruel but not too bright either. At least change the protagonist's name from the real-life person you are fictionalizing. I do think all writers pull from real life, but there is a line. Sonya crossed that line several times - using Dawn's name, using a kidney donation, and copying her letter verbatim in earlier drafts. Real-life people and situations should be a jumping-off point, not the whole story. Neither of these women comes across well, and certainly, if Sonya was my "friend" I'd be wondering what she really thought of me. I teach middle-school and this whole thing seems like that is where it belongs - back in junior high.
I know at some point in the drafts the name was changed from Dawn to Rose, but the fact that it began with Dawn's name AND her letter is so malicious when viewed with the knowledge of the gossip circles.
Completely agree. I watched this saga unfold on Twitter and was bewildered by how many people--writers, even!--were fawning over Sonya and eviscerating Dawn. Don't get me wrong, Dawn's need for attention sounds annoying as hell, and "do writers not care about my kidney donation?" is admittedly a hilariously cringe line. But plagiarism is far, far worse than just being cringe-y and annoying. It's inexcusable.
Everything Dawn did tracks with what kidney donors are asked to do. Court documents and Dawn’s own Facebook very much support her claim that Sonya was a friend of hers for many years. She is not the nutty person she has been made out to be.
TBH, I'm not sure why you feel conflicted. Larson is a plagiarist. Dawn's character might come off as grating and the consequences of this lawsuit might be annoying to some, but let's be real. Larson plagiarized Dorland's text. It's not art, not fiction--it's word for word the same!
She's conflicted for the same reason that so many writers are on Larson's side in this--because, like she admitted, she also is "inspired" by people she knows, and if she acknowledges that Larson's and her groupchat friends were incredibly cruel, she'd have to look at her own behavior and writing process. I'm not a writer, and I'm the first to admit that Dawn's whole thing would grate and I'm petty enough to mock her a bit behind her back. But what Larson, Ng, et al did was way beyond that. They followed someone they disliked for the express purpose of mocking her. Larson was encouraged to copy Dawn's letter and lampoon her in her story because they found her so irritating. Larson repeatedly assured Dawn that they were friends. If that is what goes on lit fic author group chats...well, it's no wonder they're so lacking in imagination that they have to mine real life friends and acquaintances for ideas. It might not be illegal, but is this were fiction, there's not a single person out there who wouldn't be rooting for Larson to get her comeuppance.
@@lascuba The reason I made the comment is because Alexa seemed more concerned about the chats being made public than the heinous act Larson committed. Considering social media posts, chats, and email correspondences can be made public in a wide variety of legal proceedings, Alexa's concern seemed silly and not thought out. Sure, private conversations getting out there can be frustrating, especially since weird stuff can be disclosed with writers, odd ideas, outlandish theories, etc. But Larson is the one to blame here. Sure, Dawn could have handled things differently, but I think she had the right to sue. And it's Larson's actions that merit this exposure and its fallout (i.e. private stuff being disclosed) is on her. Whatever legal and literary ramifications this whole case has, Larson bears the greater culpability. Alexa seemed more worried about chats than the whole plagiarism and unethical conduct aspect of the story, and that was what I couldn't get and why I made the comment. And yes, like you, I'm sure most of us hope Larson gets what she deserves. (Not that Dawn is entirely blameless in this either.)
@@lascuba this is the reason i don't like the writing and art community. art being such a strong thing, leads many people with issues in this communities in hopes of finding support. and even if art is a good healer, you don't turn into a good person overnight. but art people have a strong moral compass even if we don't follow it ourselves. so it is easy for us to do something off morality, let's face it we are all complicated. and to hide their flaws others will be like 'i condemn this behavior, so i am not like you.' this is what sonya did. and this mockery, judgement can soon turn into bullying. the small you are the harder it will be for you.
@@biguattipoptropica This whole thing has turned into a three-ring circus. Everyone, including the entire literary community, is coming out like idiots. Dawn and her search for public validation when her good act should have been its own reward. Sonya and her disingenuous friendship and blatant plagiarism which suggests her true writing abilities are less than what she claims. And then the absolute gall she has to play the race card when she was the thief, not Dawn?! I mean come on! Geesh, these women both have a lot to learn about being human AND a proper adult with moral backbone and sense of responsibility and culpability.
POV: your friend does something pretty kind and selfless, but brags about it. its starting to annoy you and their other friends, even though they only talked about it privately. do you a) act like a normal adult human being and say to them “hey you’re kind of acting like an idiot”, or b) keep telling them to their face that they’re “tremendous” before writing a character assassination story about how selfish and entitled they are which you then publish for potentially millions of people to see (and for profit!)? take your time! it’s a tricky one!
Maybe I'll change her name and the letter a little after publishing an audiobook? That still makes me a good art friend if I message her about how important her friendship is?
Exactly!! I am not even sure why Alexa is conflicted about who is the asshole here. Yes, ESH. But also Sonya >>>>>>>>> Dawn in the assholey-ness beyond doubt! Also, hottake: Anyone who looks towards Facebook pettiness to draw "inspiration" for their writing needs to just get a life and have more experiences to draw inspiration from.
I recognize this thread is old, but I feel like this take lacks a little nuance. Sure, Larson's behavior was bad. She went about everything the wrong way. In no way can anybody twist her to look like the good person in this story (I would argue nobody is the good person in this story). But I feel like Dawn's story and the discussions around it have less to do with Dawn herself and more about what she represents -- white tears and the white savior complex. If you think this whole topic has nothing to do with the intersections of race and class, you're not looking close enough. Dawn's initial behavior is not just troubling because it's bordering on narcissistic, but it genuinely demonstrates a belief system that she deserves praise on the basis of doing something altruistic. You can see her entitlement to praise and social capital when she goes out of her way to email Larson just for the absence of a like or comment. Again, I'm not trying to defend Larson or Grubstreet co. But I do think that simplifying this conflict to a good person being annoying/"bragging" about a good deed overlooks a lot of potential nuanced conversation about the fragile ego of a narcissistic white woman and what happens when she doesn't receive the kind of positive attention she seeks just for doing something...decent?
I feel like this kind of story is radically transformed based on whose point of view it is taken from, as we all know as writers. We also have no idea who these people are in their personal lives. She was so fucked up to write the story but it’s important to take things with skepticism.
Bottom line, Larson should not have taken the original letter word for word or even close to the original wording at any point in the drafting process. Don’t plagiarize, kids!
I seem to be in the minority here, but I don't think that what Sonya did comes under the vague heading of 'inspired by real life', and I think what she did was deeply unethical. It was far too identifiable as about this specific woman and even lifted her words verbatim, and seems to have been scathing about her, in framing her as privileged and narcissistic. It's okay to portray a fictional donor as flawed, but it seems in rather bad taste when based on a real life person who (apparently) did a genuinely altruistic thing and hadn't really done anything unethical, even if she had been gauche and attention seeking. Add to this that Sonya basically tried to justify this with reference to Dawn's race, using the 'white person vs POC author' to try and frame Dawn's motivation as something it doesn't seem to have been. Dawn comes across as attention seeking, but I don't think she actually was in the wrong for being insulted by this and wanting them to pull the content from her letter to her organ recipient. And now she apparently has people mocking her all over the place for having done something that, at its heart, was not only actually harmless but life saving for another person (assuming it was genuine). I don't know the words for it, but, I can't help but notice there's a certain.. hrm.. common desire to gleefully tear people down for doing apparently self sacrificing or charitable things the moment that they actually appear to be expecting any acclaim for it. And I get why that is- it can come across as bragging, and additionally, unfortunately due to people taking advantage of people's good will, can be reasons for suspicion, as the most vocal people of this type are often the most dishonest. That said, I do think there's a certain strand of this that is basically people jumping at any opportunity to assuage their own discomfort at someone else doing something more charitable than they are willing to do by piling on someone for doing something charitable for 'the wrong reasons'. In a way, that piece is almost potentially a 'revenge' for that act of attempting to get acclaim for that charitable act.
I felt the same thing! Like Sonya was resolving her wish that the recipient would refuse to meet with Dawn by having the character do that as some kind of righteous thing (as if the donor in the story being a white savior cancels out giving a whole kidney). It seemed like Sonya was insecure about Dawn’s sacrifice, I guess because she needs to be the best or something?
@@jessicam3707 I'm not even sure I get the white savior angle of the donation? Was it something in the short story, with the letter having been sent when they wouldn't meet her or something? Because in the real story it was a generalized donation, which is why the letter was written to whoever would get it, so race shouldn't even come into it...
@@lexihopes Yeah, exactly, in the short story it was meant to be something about race, but it still felt a LOT like Sonya felt that Dawn’s narcissistic tendencies were really intertwined with her whiteness. As if mental health issues are divided up by race
I like your point about how there is a connection to our own feelings of guilt for not doing more to help others that leads us to mock and feel superior to anyone who does a good thing for a “wrong” reason.
Larson pulling the race card by saying Dawn was trying to get credit for a writer of color's work is absolutely insane. 🤦♀️ And as far as her note about "she shouldn't want to be identified with this character," isn't that kind of the whole point? Of course she wouldn't want people to think that character is about her... that's exactly why she's upset, I would imagine. Larson essentially took her pretty public life story, barely changed it enough to be unrecognizable, and then demonized the character that was clearly supposed to be Dawn. Obviously some stupid people who can't separate fact from fiction are going to think badly of Dawn because of that character. I'm sorry, but Larson's entire response is just completely ridiculous to me. And as for the group chats, tbh, I don't feel sorry for anyone for the chats being subpoenaed. You shouldn't talk crap about people, and if you're going to do that, you need to own up to the possible consequences of that person you're talking about finding out what you said. I'm not saying I'm perfect and never talk crap about people, but I do know that the times I have done that, I was wrong to do so, and if the person found out, it would be nobody's fault but my own. Gossip and talking badly about people has consequences, and I don't really feel bad for people for having to deal with those consequences. I think private group chats that center around gossip like that are harmful to everyone involved. Just because you are speaking privately or anonymously (or so you think) doesn't mean people aren't going to be hurt by what you've said. In general, I think the internet is dangerous at times for making people feel like their normal moral values of not being cruel to others can just go out the window, as if they are no longer responsible for the words they use when they're online. That's not the case. We are all still responsible, myself included, for the things we say online.
I might surely be questioning Dorland's altruism when she created a FB group dedicated to her kidney donation, BUT I hate that Larson used the "but I'm a writer of colour, woe is me, feel bad for me" card and her friends jumped in, mislabeling this dumbass drama as "white savior" moves on the part of the book fair. (Good for them clapping back by the way.) Like this woman ACTUALLY used someone's letter in her poorly concealed version of art imitating life, and she couldn't foresee this going down badly???? 🤦♀️ I can't even...
This is what happens when critiques of white supremacy are so abstracted from any major, substantive change and all that's left is, "I don't like this other woman." I'm a writer of color myself, the day to day microaggressions add up, but jfc Sonya just wanted to bury Dawn and also have Dawn feel grateful(?) About it?
Is there really a debate? *Sonya Larson is a bully* . She's a plagiarizer who preys on people to profit off of and then humiliates her victim with people her victim thinks are her friends. This is career-ending levels of plagiarism and bad conduct. And those authors that are trying to make this go away because Larson's a friend? *The author community needs to do better.* And we need to hold Sonya Larson accountable for her actions because *we should be better than this* .
Absolutely right. I’m glad BBF canceled the event because she didn’t deserve such publicity. Inspiration is one thing, Wicked Theft is another. This information was given in a private personal context.
Also, I haven't yet met a single adult who doesn't seek some degree of validation, especially if they are feeling vulnerable and have what they believe to be a support network. Even posting here shows our need to be heard and understood and cared about.
Seven kinds of wow. So many incisive comments below have already said what I'm thinking, but I'll add just this: one of these people actually saved a person's life with a kidney donation. No matter how cringe and awful and whatever: she DID give her kidney. Her motivations can be as garbage as they come, but I tell you, I'm not about to give anyone my kidney!
Dawn has issues, most likely unconscious and invisible to her. She donated for attention. But in the end, she did a good thing. Meanwhile, Sonia, stole the story, probably feeling empowered to "shame" Dawn because of this unconscious behavior for attention, and that feels needlessly cruel. In addition, Sonia blatantly copied the story, near word for word, in those early drafts, including using the name "Dawn" which couldn't be more blatant, but now is (1) Lying, (2) Gaslighting Dawn, and (3) Using her "I am POC, you are white, so back off" which is appalling. Yeah, neither women comes off well, but Sonia feels like someone who uses her work to tear people down and then feels completely "superior" to them and acts like she's not doing just that. BOTH women have issues. WE all have issues. These issues just collided with each other, but I feel more for Dawn, because to donate a kidney for attention shows an extreme issue and instead of helping her through it, Sonia exploited it for a story.
Exactly my thoughts. Even the attention Dawn was seeking was in a private group chat with people she thought were her friends. People who could have easily messaged her to tell her that it looked bad for her to be seeking approval for a good deed. Sonia definitely could have shared her feelings of it with her first, instead she lied that it was all good then went to laugh at her behind her back. I don’t know enough about Dawn, but to me it sounds like she doesn’t have enough good friends around her that can guide her when they think she’s not handling something well.
None of those people ever claimed to be her friends, though? They knew of each other through their profession- some workshops, and a mutual organization. Dawn added them to a facebook group none of them asked to be in. She emailed Sonya because she didn't even have her phone number (until, of course, she tracked it down in order to text/call her to ask why she didn't respond to her emails). She chose to seek approval from people she barely knew, and she chose to harass them- through facebook, phone, email, zoom, and places of work- when she didn't get the response she was looking for. Sonya repeatedly admitted, from the beginning, that the kidney donor idea had been inspired by Dawn- “I hope it doesn’t feel too weird for your gift to have inspired works of art." Not sure how this is lying or gaslighting. And to boil down her experiences into her pulling the race card is...a very unfortunate take.
@@JA-br4yr they actually did claim to be her friend to her face if you look at the emails and group chats. They lied in the article because they assumed no one would check.
even just thinking for a moment about the idea of donating for attention... this is not about donating money, or things, it's donating an organ! i find it hard to imagine that attention-seeking or narcissism is 100% the cause....
I could not get over how Larson described Dorland as "a goldmine" to her equally mean friends. I understand that sometimes talent comes with a bit of mean-spirit, self-absorption, and even cruelty, yet when I actually face it I find it unbearable. Maybe Larson doesn't care for decency at all, but regardless decent people don't see others' torture, hardship or weakness as "a goldmine". Larson is a nasty person that disgusts me.
The whole "this woman is a goldmine" really made me go yikes 😬 Dawn does sounds like a validation seeking person, like the type that everyone just puts up with and announcing your kidney donation just CAUSE does sound so ego driving But...Sonya also sounds kinda underhanded, like those private chats etc. When she said "goldmine" its like...okay yeah Dawn may be narrsastic and maybe even have a savior compelx...but she is human, that comment sounded just as dehumanizing and if you don't like her that much then just stop associating with her??
I feel like putting 'white' in front of 'savior' is actually an example of a kind of worrying trend of trying to misuse actually useful concepts Sonya also misused in order to make a criticism sound more justified and righteous than it is. A 'white savior' is a white person trying to put themselves in a messiah like role specifically for others who aren't white. Like, it's not really a 'white saviour' thing to want to donate a kidney to someone, kind of like how you're not a 'white saviour' if you are white and donate to a cancer charity, or become a fire fighter or a paramedic. It's not just 'white person who wants to help people', it's not even really 'white person who wants to help a specific person who's not white', it means something specific that doesn't apply here.
@@Graid no yeah I agree, I meant to put savoir but I guess I wanted to give a wider birth, mostly because I don't know these women personally so IDK how Dawn may have come off to Sonya, but I do agree, because I mean...usually you don't know the race of who gets your kidney if you just donate to donate and not a particular person I was using Sonya's words if anything, but I'll edit it to my initial intent
I agree with you but I do think Sonya DID try to not associate with Dawn. It seems like Dawn was the one initiating each contact between her and others.
@@scheherazade2291 that's not true. Dawn actually broke off contact with them after she moved. Them calling her Trump during her Lakers appearance didn't stem from any direct contact with her. Dawn also quietly unfriended Sonya on Facebook, it's in the group chat
So a thing about announcing the kidney donation is that a lot of donation centres encourage you to poistively tell as many people as you can about the experience because it increases the odds that somone who wouldn't have or were on the fence would do so (like, for example, the wife of the guy who got Dawn's kidney who donated her own after reading Dawn's letter). So it's entirely possible that she wasn't even telling her friends about it "for clout" but because she wanted to encourage people she thought were her friends to be kind in kind. A message reveald in the group chat the Group Chat subpoena has (I believe Sonya) say "What does she want me to, donate an organ?"(sic) and I honestly think Dawn may have picked the wrong people to try and influence
Making good art doesn’t excuse asshole behaviour. That kind of nonsense belongs in the past. Dawn clearly has self-awareness issues and probably needs good friends around her to call her out, but Sonja’s actions were unethical and cruel. I’ve been caught in the middle of unethical author behaviour before and it’s really not fun for anyone involved. Crazy story, but despite Dawn’s narcissism, I couldn’t help but feel sorry for her.
Okay, so I've recently learned some extra content about this which makes what Dawn did sound a lot more reasonable. Donors are encouraged to start a Facebook group to have some support along the way, they are also asked to write a letter to their donor. There's usually a 'chain' in kidney donation because donors are donating for loved ones. Which puts a different spin on her letter. The Facebook group only had about 60 people in it, not hundreds, and Sonja Larson was viewing every post and not interacting, which is why Dawn reached out to see if she wanted to stay or go. Sonja was there to mine material and gossip about Dawn behind her back. Anyway, I think knowing a lot of this puts Dawn's actions in a different context and makes it sound much less narcissistic than the original article.
Sonya, YTA. Simply, it wasn’t her story to write. She took words straight out of another author and labeled it as her own, I’m surprised other writers would find this appropriate at all.
Another odd thing is that she's writing about a character who has received a donor organ when she has not had that experience herself. It's like reading a story about a character with cancer when the author has never experienced that. It's just going to at best come across as misinformation as to what that experience is actually like, and at worst, flat and inauthentic to those who have actually gone through it.
@@celisewillisEr, that's a normal thing for writers, though. How many people have gone through the experience of saving the world from a dark lord? How many people have escaped a burning building or collapsing temple? How many people go hand to hand with terrorists? You can write about things you haven't gone through. You just use your previous, similar experiences and map that onto them. Sonya a bitch tho.
The woman who donated is probably desperate for attention because she has such terrible friends. Sonya pretended to be her friend, stole very personal parts of her life and wrote a super unflattering story about Dawn. When Dawn justifiably asked about it Sonya called her a racist and sued her? I can’t see this as ESH? I mean Dawn needs better friends but Sonya is a terrible person. She’s a bad artist and a trash “friend” But thank you for the excellent summary.
A few things you seem to have missed, based on the comments: organizations that facilitate organ donations ask people to be as public about it as possible, because, since people can't directly be paid for the organs in the US, the way most non-directed donors hear about it is by word of mouth. Kidney recipients are pissed at Sonya Larson. I saw someone say they don't care if Dawn Dorland demanded a parade. The story itself was terrible and misrepresented how organ donation works. People are worried it will discourage non-directed donors, which are already rare. The Facebook group was for medical updates. The letter was to the last person in the donation chain, not the person Dorland directly donated her kidney to (she was reassuring them because people without anyone to donate a kidney so they can receive a kidney tend to be a bit squeamish and uncomfortable with living donors who are strangers). Sonya Larson did pretend to be friends with Dawn Dorland, for years. According to the chats and Dorland (there is no reason not to believe this, Dorland is not accused of lying) they had each other over at their homes several times. Also, Dorland had a new group of friends in LA and eventually completely cut contact with the writing group. She offered to introduce someone from that writing group to her friends when he originally moved to LA and he was planning on using her to make connections and then dropping her.
You can be vocal (a private group hardly counts) without confronting people for not giving you enough praise. I’ve needed donations like this, and am really disgusted at how Dawn took the medical nightmare of others to demand long-term personal glory from people she knew. Yes, people who need donations may not care too much in the moment when they get to live, but that doesn’t excuse Dawn taking the medical tragedies and nightmares of others and confronting people for not praising her enough, then even trying to make a writing conference about herself. Chances are the people she knew there were sick of it after she confronted them not praising her enough. Dawn and Sonya are both assholes.
I haven’t read any of Sonya’s work, but this whole debacle makes her sound like a wholly uncreative person. She took so much “inspiration” from Dawn’s story because she had nothing to add, nothing to say save for her commentary on the white savior complex. Anyone can look at a real life event and say “that would make a great story!” but if you have nothing to add yourself, why do you need to tell it? Her saying she couldn’t come up with something better than Dawn’s own letter is the icing on the cake for me lol
Is sounds like Sonya didn’t take as much as it seems at first. The letter, which was changed for the finished piece, the name, also changed, and that it was a kidney. The circumstances, the families, and the lessons were all on her. I don’t think there’d even me a lawsuit at all if Sonya hadn’t used the letter verbatim in an earlier draft. It’s a placeholder, and I think Dawn will lose. They’s both behaved poorly in several ways though.
If I remember right, dawn did talk about how she associated healing from her trauma with the kidney donation. In that light I feel like it's almost even more tragic what Sonya and the others in the group chat did with the gas lighting.
Definitely yeah, the further this story went the more sick I started to feel (and as messy and dramatic as the situation is, and as grating Dawn's behaviour must've been, to hear Alexa laugh about it so excitedly made me reconsider long and hard about the picture I've built about her in my head)
This is morally so messy. I'm not gonna go into "friendship" and shade, because some comments have already laid those out beautifully. What I want to say is that this has been an active discussion in art circles for years and the partially accepted response is as follows: "If you are a good enough artist, no one will know the origin except those involved." As artists we have to execute the job that we are paid for. The fact that Larson couldn't fictionalize this story even after the edits means that she's not good at her job 🤷🏾♀️ But honestly there is no one real answer and even now the discussion continues in every facet of art.
Also, Larson sounds like a character inspired by a terrible girl I had to deal with in college. I don't take kindly to people who talk crap behind other people's backs anymore. That is a horrible thing to do to anyone.
Idk, based on your cliffnotes in this video, it sounds like both of these people are terrible. But as much as Dawn might be an annoying/self-centered person, Sonya was the one who plagiarized her letter and circumstance and then tried to act like “why would you want to read yourself into this story? I only named the character Dawn, had her donate a kidney, and took your letter almost verbatim.” It’s hard for me to have any sympathy for Sonya when she just as easily could have distanced herself from this person that she clearly didn’t like, and not have made the transpositions of her story so obvious. As reddit always says: play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Both of these people won stupid prizes, and they both come out of this looking terrible.
Hmmm, you know, I wonder if Dawn's being an annoying, glory seeking "white saviour" _was_ seen as a plus in this case. Like you and Sonya pointed out, why would you _want_ to identify with this horrible, narcissist character? You could add in all the ugly, unflattering details and the subject could theoretically never call you out on it because it's basically admitting that they're actually an awful person. Sounds like a form of insurance. Too bad Sonya overestimated how much Dawn would want to protect her "good image".
This! I also like how Sonya goes on to suggest that Dawn should write about donating the kidney like that wasn't what they were all making fun of her for.
Definitely an ESH situation. That being said, for me Sonya is the one that crossed a legal line here by using verbatim portions of Dawn's letter without credit. One thing I'm curious about is how does an earlier copyright infringing version of the short story impact its legality after the revision. I'm guessing that since its clout is at least partially based on prior success it's at the very least a grey area, and likely an outright violation.
@@deroshkin Yeah, the early versions having an audio form (not just floating around, but effort was actually taken to make an audio reading!) is what really gets me. If she had not published anything publicly until after she transformed it, well it would still be a bit shitty, especially the way she was being two faced about it, but honestly I'd call it fair enough. And why call her Dawn in early drafts instead of just grabbing any other placeholder name? And admitting that she wasn't able to change it to her standards of not plagiarized in her group chats? Just put in the work to transform it *before* making it public. At most, get some feedback from your group chat peeps or another private writer group (though group chat is prob easier since they already have the context) to help you get it up to where you feel it's been changed enough.
Dawn would have had to pass a psych evaluation to donate a kidney. Maybe afterwards she got addicted to the ackalades and it went too her head. Big deal. She didn't hurt anyone, in fact she saved lives. One of her friends should tell her to take it down a few notches. Sonya is malicious, unethical, and dishonest and she's the one who sparked the legal action and exposed the her group's private communications. Like others have said, Dawn may be a little cringe, but Sonya is unethical and cruel.
Literally nobody came out of that piece looking not terrible. Unfortunately, I've found there's now less and less comradery in artist circles.It's unfortunate and not really that surprising.
I’ve been in the writing world for many years. There is less camaraderie, but also far fewer people who actually want the criticism they ask for and who want praise when seeking advice.
People saying things to each other in writing is usually discoverable. Saying, "But it's a private group chat!" and thinking that gives a legal protection is childish. It's the LAW - not high school.
I cannot imagine what it must be like for someone dying as they wait on a donation list having to read about GROWN PROFESSIONAL ADULTS making fun of someone for donating a kidney. Sonya Larson and her author friends trying to make this go away should be ashamed of themselves.
@@LauraGomez-bl2so I was actually imagining the specific person who got the kidney, and the letter, and finding all this and connecting the dots... I'm not sure how I would react, but these people sound exhausting even from a place completely disconnected to them.
@@LauraGomez-bl2so in the court docs Larson talks shit in the group chat about dawn posting about being a laker for a day and getting to be on the Jumbotron at ar game. One of them even says it’s “trump-like” behavior. Someone else on Twitter found a video from a guy who SPECIFICALLY CITED HER LAKER FOR A DAY APPEARANCE as the thing that made him to decide to go through with kidney donation. Larson and her friends are just such massively shitty people
@@viliphied Y'know what? If this story actually inspires people to donate organs then I'm 100% Team Dawn. If someone like her had donated a piece of their liver back when I was a teenager, my uncle might still be alive today. Instead, by the time they found him a liver to replace the one that working with toxic chemicals and in sufficient protective gear for 20 yrs had filled with cancer, he was too sick to survive the transplant. He died a week before his 51st birthday. So no, I don't give a damn about organ donors' motivations, I just care that they donate. (Yes, I'm registered as an organ donor! No, I'm not a candidate for live donation, due to various chronic health conditions, which would make the procedure too dangerous. )
As someone who has lived with major medical issues most of my life, including organ loss, it grates on me to see someone do something that is helpful turn around and try to make someone else’s medical need into a story glorifying herself. It took someone else being in a frightening position of near death for her to have a story at all.
there are some people in this world who will do good, even for a selfish reason. but there are people who will do nothing and still judge others if they don't do good deeds in the right way. what sonya did was shitty. and the excuse she gave to defend herself was even shittier. she used her theme of her story as a moral point to defend herself, when the discussions wasn't about the moral ground of her story but the legal ground of the situation. whatever you say, she did not do right by looking down on a person's kidney donation. even though dawn was not perfect but i don't know what this kidney donation means to her and maybe the emotions attached to her kidney donation made her feel the need of validation. it is not always about attention, i don't know what is going on behind the scene in her life and mind. the chats going public is horrible, but to me as someone not a part of the drama, the thing that is most horrible is that from the chats we get to know what mentality sonya had that led her to this story. she literally had the vibe that dawn is not the right type of good person, and by laughing at her, she and the others give me the feeling that 'i am a better person, cause i'm not like her, i condemn this attitude'. and that makes me think of another moral question, can a story born from this shitty mentality sever a theme of redemption of a white savior. can it really serve that morality that she is so serious about?
I think it speaks to larger problems at Grub Street Writing: Christopher Castellani, who is an artistic director at Grub Street, actually said "My mission in life is going to be to exact revenge on this pestilence of a person [re: Dawn Dorland]" Dawn invited a small number of people into a private group chat and said they could decline. Sonya stayed in the group even when questioned by Dawn if she wanted to leave, all so she could mock Dorland behind her back with author Celeste Ng. Alison Murphy - who is white - and Larson who is white/chinese - both Grub Street employees during their time with Dorland - colluded to use race to try and" cancel" Dorland. Roxane Gay gets an award from Grub Street then claims Dorland didn't actually donate her kidney...even though there's a video of a man who outright says Dorland inspired him to give a kidney to save someone's life.
Admitting that you straight up plagiarized someone's words doesn't make you "a good artist but a shitty person." It makes you a shitty artist, too. How can you feel like a good artist for just taking someone else's words? That makes zero sense to me. I totally disagree that this is an "everyone sucks here" situation. Dawn literally didn't do anything wrong, except being a little extra about her kidney donation, which people thought was weird. She didn't do anything. She was just a person living her life, and it sounds like this other person was being fake and friendly to her face, while secretly talking crap about her behind her back and writing a story about her, intentionally making her the villain character, and implying some pretty horrible things about her as well, in regards to racism, which are completely unfounded. I'm honestly shocked anyone could read this story and think Dawn is, in any way, to blame here. I feel terrible for her. This sounds like a nightmare, and I can't imagine going through this and, on top of everything, having people act like you were somehow equally to blame in all of it.
So many great comments here. I think Dawn was looking for acceptance, particularly from fellow writers. She desperately needed validation, approval, to feel included. (Don’t we all?) She was willing to try anything. Yes, donating a kidney is a long way to go for this. Sonya was the ultimate mean girl on the playground. She delighted in preying upon Dawn’s vulnerability. Commenting in salty private group chats is one thing, but the publishing of “The Kindest” was beyond cruel and catty. It especially sickens me that she tried to pull the race card on this. Just ugly. Glad she was exposed for who she really is. I hope Dawn gets off social media and finds healing and a group of real friends who will truly value her as a person and a writer.
I'm surprised so many people are ignoring Dawn's socioeconomic background. Middle of nowhere Iowa, living in poverty, abuse. Most people born into that _never_ get out. And she managed to climb out of that and go to college and (presumably) pull herself out of poverty. As someone with a similar background, social mobility is a blessing and a curse. There's more money, but those experiences stay with you. And you may be farther behind your peers because you didn't have the resources at a critical time in your life. There's a palatable sense of alienation from those who never had to do without. I can see where she would have a desperate need for acceptance from a group of intellectuals in a field she wanted to be apart of.
God, it puts you off writing communities! Thank god for Alexa! EDIT: But this isn't just about writing. It's also about humans. Larson, and her friends, are not people I'd want to be friends with. And as someone from several marginalised identities, including colour, I certainly don't appreciate Larson's appropriation of PoC and using that to marginalise Dorland.
@@joethehobo89 not at all, but if Dawn hadn't found out that everyone was making fun of her behind her back, and had been asked for permission, her response would have been different in my opinion.
Yeah I think so. dawn is more like, I am so damn hurt becuz I think you are my friend, I share with you and you make fun of me, of my noble donation. it's like betrayal
When you look closer at Sonya's behavior, she's so hell bent on condemning another woman's shadow that she fails to see that she's exhibiting the very behaviors she's condemning in Dawn. That's how psychological projection and shadows work, the negative aspects of ourselves that we fail to own we will loathe in others. Dawn's behavior is obviously appalling but I don't think she was harming anyone besides herself by seeking validation in a very cringy way. Sonya's behavior however is more insidious. The very behaviors she's displaying are passive aggression, character assassination, exploiting someone's story of childhood trauma for personal gain which are all signs of narcissistic behavior. She's identified Dawn's thirst for attention and validation, yet her own blindspot prevents her from seeing the lengths she's gone to for attention and validation. It feels like she's gotten some twisted sense of pleasure in the humiliation of another human being. I have a feeling this is a pattern for Sonya because she's very skilled at this. She has enlisted an entire group chat to be on her side. What is one woman's private Facebook group is another woman's group chat. This feels like a historical tale of no good deed goes unpunished. Why must giving be altruistic? There are 100,000 people on the kidney transplant list waiting for their turn to receive an organ. They do not care if their receiptient is doing it for the right reason. The way Dawn donated, by initiating a kidney donor chain enables not one, but multiple people to receive kidney transplants. The longest running kidney transplant chain is 100 people long. These are people that would otherwise still most likely be waiting for a kidney or die waiting like many often do. We need to celebrate our living donors. Dawn is both a flawed human being, with a need for validation and a hero who has literally saved lives. You can be both good and bad at the same time. I hope both of these woman seek psychotherapy and explore what drove them to seek validation in the way they did. It's normal to want validation but there are healthier ways of seeking it especially when it's at the expense of yourself or another human being.
I think Sonya is a Dark Empath, which is a form of narcissism other people find extremely hard to detect because they are genuinely, if superficially, empathetic and appear very warm and kind. But they're actually quite calculating and two-faced in the service of their own needs. Her friends will likely never understand or admit how they've been manipulated to defend her.
I have to say, I absolutely HATE that Dorland's _completely normal_ excitement about and pride about her probably scary, certainly beneficial act is being given shade by people. *Get real* and tell me you wouldn't talk about such a thing with your friends and acquaintances. Is it a little needy to ask a friend why they had nothing to say about a huge event in your life? Maybe, a little bit. Is it also understandable to seek out why a massive group snub seems to be happening to you? Uh, yeah. Being proud about something big you've done isn't white privilege, for God's sake. Nothing about any of this is relevant to race, and Larson shouldn't have tried to make it so. Larson was an ass, and if I were in Dorland's place I'd probably take Larson's actions as a thrown gauntlet, too.
It falls into a grey area since the verbatim letter ultimately served as a placeholder and was replaced before publication. Doesn’t mean Sonya isn’t a bitch though. And the neediness on Dawn’s part is that she didn’t feel she was getting enough praise from people whose own lives were probably busy too, to the point that she started confronting people about why they weren’t praising her enough. As the person who has lived with major medical issues including losing my own organs, I find it VERY offensive that she’s trying to make someone else’s medical nightmare into something where she should be constantly praised. She does have a savior complex and is acting like she is outright owed something. To use an example more people might understand, if you were to make 25 meals to give to homeless people, how much of that is altruism if you decide to post online with the expectation of praise ad adoration, especially if you start confronting people for not giving you enough, and how much is appropriating someone else’s nightmare situation for personal glory? And for those meal recipients-while they may ne glad for the food, how do you think it would make them emotionally feel knowing they were merely the means to an end of personal glory?
The NYT piece is so perfectly woven in the style of a "literary" piece to pair with the literary writers that it itself feels like fiction. Honestly such impressive writing and story telling. Larson should have changed it from a kidney donation to some other "altruistic" act. So, Alexa, when can we expect a writer's circle thriller from ya? 😅😆🤣
"When can we expect a writer's circle thriller?" Ooooohhh, don't joke about that! I'm serious. Between this, and real life fandom/fan fiction circle drama I've read about, you could make a helluva story with this premise.
@@rachdanaelee , same (50% joking). Like I said, this whole thing is riveting, so a novel with this premise could be even moreso! Probably not YA.....or could it? It would depend on the circumstances of the plagiarism/stealing in the plot...
I know. She should've changed it to something like adopting a baby or volunteering at a battered woman's shelter. And WHY did none of her writer MFA group chat friends tell her to change it?!? So what if the letter is "too perfect." You're a writer change it to something more "perfect." That's what fiction writing is. But didn't anyone think to tell her this was a mad idea. Did no one like Sonia either?? Do they all just hate each other??
@@DisWriter , do they all hate each other? Maybe not hate, but they all may be just as ruthless and calculating. I'm getting back-stabby vibes from those group chat conversations.
It's one thing to draw traits from somebody you know--and dislike--and put them into a character. But to Sonya, her antagonist is literally Dawn. And for somebody who casually uses the word 'tremendous', she could have been smart enough to do the bare minimum and erase the fine details. But it wasn't about being smart; Sonya is clearly just as self-centered as Dawn. She sees herself as untouchable--why sue first? Why not scrap the work and apologise? She knew what she did. "I've tried to change it but I can't seem to - that letter was just too damn good," said the highschool bully with a superiority complex, who wanted everybody to think of Dawn just as she did, because she was right, of course. If Dawn wasn't so completely unlikable, nobody would have even considered her to be the Bad Art Friend. Dawn is a crap person, but initially she didn't do anything *to* Sonya. Sonya, however, based an immoral character on Dawn, let everybody know she did it, did nothing to hide it (until she felt her newfound success might be compromised), then attempted to deter Dawn by accusing her of identifying with the immoral character who was made (and named!) in her image... Talk about gaslighting! And yes, I know, if Dawn wasn't so persistent or grossly entitled it would be a lot easier to give her the empathy anybody in that position would deserve, but it doesn't mean she doesn't deserve it. Sonya could have left the facebook group, pressed block. Cared a smidgen about Dawn as a human being, even if she isn't a great one.
Absolutely agreed. As an outsider who knows absolutely nothing about either of these women, I'm listening to this video and I'm honestly extremely confused as to how anyone is saying Dawn was in the wrong... that's so ridiculous.
I mean yeah, being so extra about the kidney thing was weird, but that's irrelevant really. What Sonya did was extremely messed up, and regardless of how weird or annoying you think someone is, that doesn't justify anything she did. And then she had the audacity to pull the race card and act like Dawn is trying to take away the success of a writer of color. Girl, please. 🙄 that's so low and so absurd. Being a writer of color doesn't make you magically immune to any kind of criticism or legality.
@@CassTeaElle At first when Alexa mentioned the people teasing Dawn on twitter, I thought Dawn might have deserved it. By the end of the video I realised that some authors or bookish people, like many academics, will always side with the 'smarter' party, as they see it as a reflection of their 'smart' selves.
I thought it was ironic how thousands of tweeters were demonizing Dawn over sharing the news of her kidney donation. Like, yes. That's annoying and all, but how is it difference from all the other morally righteous performances people throw on Twitter? Like, people announce their donations to various groups and organizations ALL THE TIME. They shout about all the good deeds they've done, and get public pats on the back for it. While I do think it is, in a way, attention-seeking, I think it's something we ALL do to some degree. We all want to feel good about doing something good.
@Marc Wyatt Not to mention, she'll be on meds for the rest of her life and there's always a risk of overworking the remaining kidney. It's not an easy decision to make. Even if Dawn bragged about it, how does that make her a privileged narcissist?
I'm not surprised that group chats are being used in a court case. I feel like when you say things through written communication on the internet or by text, you do so with the understanding that someone other than the intended recipient could see those things, especially if there's a court case. Digital footprints also apply in the case of the different drafts of the story. Did Sonya think no one would find the old published draft of the story just because there was a new one? Dawn annoyed people, and that isn't a crime. Sonya plagiarized someone, and that is a crime. Sonya's definitely in the wrong.
I'm an artist, but I'm also a Christian, so: Dorland: save a life (or many lives). Larson: said many bad words about her friend and wrote a story using a friend's name and her letter. Ethically, Larson sucks. Artistically - if you're CREATIVE, be f'ing creative and don't take a story word for word - change a name (even thinking about a story for a first time), a good gesture (not a kidney donation, there are many selfless acts), words in the letter, character's backstory, ethnicity ect. If you steal, steal from many sources - take name from a friend, backstory from 3 other people, selfless act do yourself (if you're so f'ing smart to psychoanalyze that character later, give your kidney and see it for yourself what it's like). For me it's obvious that Larson is a bad writer friend. Everything Dorland did before was just being a human. My beloved grandma needs a huge praise after she cooks something for me and guess what - she deserves it, even when she asks for it. She doesn't need an amateur psychoanalyzing. Everything Larson did was cold, intentional and calculated. Dorland's reaction to seeing Larson story was also human. TL;DR If you're creative, be creative and invent a story, not take someone's else's word for word.
"But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: that thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:3. THAT is what is cringey about Dorland. She didn't ask support from a few friends/family, she apparently set up an FB group and added all of her friends to let them know how good she is for donating a kidney, rather than posting it to a place people could choose to access it or doing it with close support. And as someone who was forcefully added to many MLM FB groups back in the day, not having a choice in what's in your feed is super annoying and selfish on the person making you join. I do agree that Larson is in the wrong, but Dorland is not an angel, she clearly just wants people to think she is. And my love language is words of affirmation, so I get that, but needing hundreds of people to pat you on the back for a good deed isn't a healthy way of getting that love language need met.
So after learning about how kidney donations work, (and things like the transplant chain) and how important and life-saving, and greatly needed they are, I now consider bragging about it a fucking moral obligation to at least get other people to try donating their kidneys. In fact when you donate a kidney you are encouraged to share the story. It's also worth considering that the person who Dawn wrote the letter to was at the end of the transplant chain. NOBODY RESERVED THEIR KIDNEYS FOR THEM. The white saviour complex argument feels like a very hollow excuse. Larson is CLEARLY in the wrong here. Kolker is ALSO in the wrong for the abhorrently immoral framing and downplaying of the act. Also keep in mind that the NYT article fudged with the timeline a bit. It's actually quite clear that the private chat was talking shit about her donation transplant posts from the outset. That fact pretty much settles it with me that her use of Dawn's kidney transplant has a malicious undertone to it. At first I thought Dawn was being obnoxious for posting publicly about her transplant and letter (and in some respects she still was, reaching out to others due to their lack of response to her post), but ultimately I am now considering becoming a living donor. The lawsuit side is a different matter entirely. Sadly it seems like there are grave repercussions, and even though what Larson did was wrong she does not deserve any financial hardship for it, and I would not be surprised if she got a lot of harassment for it too. In that respect Dawn has taken this way too far.
You've still missed basic information-Sonya Larson sued first. The discovery becoming public is because she sued Dawn Dorland for defamation. I'm sorry, but you can't go on harassment campaigns for six years (at least) then expect no financial or social repercussions. Her bed is of her own making, don't cry for her she has to lay in it.
@@biguattipoptropica I was aware of this but for brevity chose to omit it. I guess I was made uncomfortable by the extent, not necessarily the decision to sue itself because as you said Larson sued first. Also when I wrote this I was actually less aware of what Larson was doing originally than I am now lol so don't worry I have precisely ZERO sympathy for her
Only legally protected communications are truly private (doctor/client, attorney/client, etc.). The courts don't care about your opinion as to what constitutes a private communication. Even verbal communications between two people which have not been recorded in any medium are not private. If they were, lawsuits involving "verbal" contracts could not move forward. Except for legally protected communications, ALL communications can be subpoenaed and made public. I can't believe that a person as intelligent and sophisticated as you can't seem to wrap your head around basic legal principles in the United States.
I feel like I remember you mentioning in a "what not to do..." video that you should never name characters after friends, family, classmates, coworkers, and so on. This is a clear example why. Inspiration is one thing, but drafting the character _as_ Dawn is...interesting? Is that safe to say?
Yeah I think if you have a good relationship with someone you can pay homage--but like ASK them or at least WARN THEM. I've accidentally used friend's names for characters who get murdered and it's a joke between us that I love them and it's not a message haha.
For NaNo, I'm making a second attempt at a story I tried and failed to write several years ago. In the intervening time I've become friends with a woman with the same name as the protagonist. So my protagonist is Janine now.
For me, the thing about the short story is that it is basically talking negatively behind someone's back, but then to their face, and presenting it to the whole world. It's that mean-spiritedness that doesn't care about the actual person they were gaining inspiration from and what the consequences of sharing the story would be. It's one thing to write a story about someone you love and changing their name--if you communicate with the person and ask for permission to do such a thing, the story may end up being a testament to the friendship. It's another thing to write a story about someone you look down on. You're essentially still talking about that person even if you changed their name in the story. And I don't think that sort of thing should be done, unless the story is changed significantly to the point it does not reflect reality and would not be recognizable to readers, so that it is no longer about that specific person who may have inspired it.
This doesn’t seem that messy. Dawn was the super annoying, attention needing friend and instead of just maybe not saying anything Sonya writes an entire short story to slander the woman. I get she may have been inspired or whatever, but just by her personality and her actions here, to me if she really just felt inspired and wanted to write a short story with those themes she could have worked harder to change aspects of the story that were glaringly obviously about Dawn. She did all of this intentionally, and her malicious behavior was just proven through the way she talked about Dawn behind her back. Though I think having private chats and emails subpoenaed is a little excessive when it comes to literary issues like this, (because this isn’t a capital murder trial and nobody’s life is in danger here) it’s kind of a breach of privacy but honestly Sonya deserved to be hung out to dry like that. If she just couldn’t help but write this exact story, then she should have waited and published it later when it wasn’t so fresh and easily seen. Dawn following Sonya around is just the results of her own anger and embarrassment. Her annoying traits and probably the part of herself she’s most insecure about was publicly displayed for the world to see and ripped apart by someone she thought of as a friend. She’s hurt and angry and humiliated I’m sure and acting out. Dawn was annoying but Sonya was the malicious bad art friend here.
Genuinely yeah - who would NOT lash out for hurt, confusion, betrayal and humiliation by what Sonya did! It was honestly a little shocking to listen to this video because I can't see Sonya's position as anything but horrifyingly cruel and opportunistic.
Dawn believed they were art friends, so did Sonya until she decided to exploit her friend. Then to feel better, she distanced herself and told herself they were never friends. She reveals it when she admits she feels like a horrible person but a great artist. She wouldn't feel so bad about what she's doing if she never felt like or acted like a friend to Dawn. She's "tremendously" two-faced. Dawn is an easy person to mock because she's unselfaware and cringy, but Sonya is way worse because she is fully aware of what she's doing. There's a very cliquey "mean girl" vibe in the group chats and among the people who presented themselves as friends to Dawn. Dawn is self absorbed to an irritating degree, but when you know she comes from an abusive background, Sonya Larceny's appropriation and mockery of her personal story is pretty damning. I feel that everyone deriding Dawn now on social media is not so much on the side of artistic license, but, rather, belongs wholeheartedly to the mean girl clique.
"I hope it doesn't feel too weird for your gift to have inspired works of art." What always feels weird to me is people referring to their own efforts as "works of art". Especially in this case since it seems that Larson was not yet published at the time. Dorland does seem needy, though donating a kidney really is huge, so I understand her wanting to talk about it. But Larson is beyond the pale -- nasty and mean -- and a plagiarizing thief. Dorland now has material to write a story about someone stealing her life for their own gain.
Most of the time when I see people refer to their own stuff as “works of art,” it’s because the quality is low enough that no one else will be the ones to call it art.
I think it’s one thing to take inspiration from real people (we all do as writers), but it’s an entirely different thing to take someone else’s important life event/choice and to 1) write about it without making substantive changes and/or permission and 2) to make that person your story’s villain. Dawn might have been over the top, but Sonya crossed an ethical line.
I am fascinated by this story. It feels a bit like Gone Girl to me, but without the gore. Human nature can be so deliciously unsightly, and our particular unsightliness can react with someone else's like bleach with ammonia. And I mean both Dorland (whose obsessive nature and a gaping wound in place of identity turned her into a bona fide stalker) and Larson, who seems to think that she's "the cool one" in this but comes off as cowardly and cruel. Also, the article itself is a work of literary art. "Characters with large blind spots" indeed.
A great example of a "bad art friend" would be Truman Capote. He led Perry Smith to believe that he was trying to help him build a case for his defense at his murderer trial. It was a ploy to build trust so he could learn and exploit the details of the crime for his book In Cold Blood.
It was sad and pretty exploitative, but Capote at least credited his source. What Larson's doing here would be the equivalent of Capote mining Perry and then writing a *fiction* book claiming Perry was a character he came up with from scratch... I take that back: there's no comparison between the writing of Capote and those of either Larson (I read the story for free in the court files. Spoiler alert: the New Yorker's review was spot on) or Dorland or even Ng; maybe Kolker could come close.
@@SweetJeopardy My point wasn't that Capote and Larson are exact parallels, just that Capote was a "bad art friend." Perry was far from the only victim. As I recall, a substantial portion of the New York literary scene, along with many others, were furious with Capote for allegedly violating their confidances. I believe many complaints were related to their portrayal, thinly veiled or otherwise, in Capote's last book, Music For Chameleons.
@@robertabrahamsen9076 Close, it was "Answered Prayers", and yes it was a roman à clef (specifically the short story "La côte Basque") which has more parallels with, say, "The devil wears Prada". He didn't plagiarize or lift anybody's writings, but he did spill some boiling tea which was very personal and embarrassing to the parties being described. The difference with "In cold blood" is that instead of being widely acclaimed for this, he was forever shunned and vilified in social circles, which contributed to the self-destructive cirmcustances leading to his death shortly after; the quality of the stories in "Answered Prayers" was also not up to his standards.
Wow! It's been a week since this was uploaded and who knew there was yet another twist to the story with the case files and Dorland's clarification regarding her interactions on FB! You should really consider doing an epilogue. This story's proven to be deeper than anybody expected!
Like you can get inspired by real-life but the short story brings to mind (to me) fanfiction and you can't sell fanfiction in its purest form without changing all the ties to its origins I feel that the story wasn't changed enough to the point where everyone and their grandma could connect the dots even before all this really blew up & I see the author of it could be covered by this quote "Steal a jewel, not the entire crown" and well, she stole the entire crown
I think the fanfiction comparison is a really good one. Yes, fanfic is technically transformative. And sometimes it's damn good art that wouldn't have come about if the author wasn't pulling inspiration from the original work! But you still can't profit off of it until you change enough details that it can't be tied so directly to the original author's work.
I admittedly have no read the article, and I am certainly not an expert in plagiarism or the legal processes involved here.... But on a moral level it seems like plagiarism to me? Or at least crosses the line and goes well beyond heavy inspiration. She basically admitted in the group chat, "I want to come up with something better but the original letter was so good I can't, so I'm putting verbatim quotes in my story." I feel like it should be the responsibility of the writer to change enough aspects of the story so that a different letter would make sense and be impactful to the reader.
This was my take as well. It seems like she copied the letter and then changed just enough words for it not to pop up in the same google search. I think Larson's earlier quote of "She shouldn't want to be associated with my story's portrayal..." gives a lot away. It sounds like Larson knew she was potentially crossing the plagiarism boundary, but expected Dorland to keep quiet because the story was so unflattering. It's actually kind of funny - the Chunky Monkeys gossiped about what an oblivious narcissist she is, but then are surprised when she continues to act like an oblivious narcissist.
Isn’t the previous published version, the audio version, that is literally plagiarized the linchpin? Even if it was change later on, it was the initial version that has helped her get into the places that she is now. She’s been affected financially in someway from a previously plagiarized version. To me that’s the legal argument. But then again, I decided to go study religion instead of go to law school so what do I know.
@@BrekkeEl Yeah, I went and re-listened to the video and you're right. The verbatim copying wasn't just in a draft version that got rearranged before any publication - there was orignally an audiobook that contained the blatant plagiarism. Larson changed the story sometime between the audio recording and submitting to the festival.
I understand your feelings about private conversations being subpoenaed and made public, but when you called them ‘sacred’ I had to roll my eyes a bit. When you put something into writing (texts, chats, emails, letters, whatever) you lose control over it. That could mean someone sharing it without your consent or a court using it as evidence against you. It’s scary and it’s not fair but it is what it is.
Yeah, like the letter to the recipient wasn't sacred enough to become fodder for group chat slander and audiobook plagiarism and slander, but the group chats confirning the intent are sacred
As a writer, the people you take reference from should never notice that they are the original for your fiction characters(neither should the other readers). It's the same thing when it comes to taking inspirations from real life culture to build up your own fantasy world. The best way to do that is to make it your own and mostly unrecognizable unless you bring it up yourself. The only difference is, you COULD write a fantasy world with blatant references in non-offensive way, but you could NEVER do that with your reference persons. Never. Just think about it and be smart. We still need to live in the society at the end of the day. Being nice to other people in many situations=saving your own ass.
It seems like Larson wants everyone to know she is making fun of Dawn's attention-seeking issue. That's why at the first place she uses the original name and letter. Maybe she thought she never felt sorry of hurting Dawn because she believes she just said what everyone wants to.
@@steviebinks6445 I agree. I think the verbatim letter was a reference meant to be seen by Dawn, like a malicious "Easter egg" for Dawn and for Larson's in-crowd. She regarded Dawn as someone so lowly that she thought she'd get away with it too! Sonya trolled too close to the sun and got burnt. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes...
I've only got one word for this story: YIKES. Okay, maybe I've got a few more words. Here in the EU, or at least my country, you're not allowed to donate your kidney to a stranger. You need to prove that you have strong ties to the person you want to donate to. I think the main intent is to prevent illegal organ trade since it's hard to monitor whether money is being exchanged for those kidneys but this case goes to show that there are ethical problems when it comes to donating a part of your body to a stranger too. If one thing's clear in this story, it's that it wasn't healthy altruism that made Dawn donate her kidney. On Sonya's part, I found it in especially bad taste to accuse Dawn of racism when she claimed the letter (and story) as her own. We have so much genuine racism in this world but this was clearly not a case of that. She played the POC card against rightful claims and thereby undermined the TRUE discrimitations POC face.
I don’t see how it is clear that Dawn donated her kidney with bad motivations in mind just because you make a fb group to keep people updated with the recovery.
@@YraxZovaldo That's not what I meant. I don't think her motives were *bad*. But the extremely strong need for validation (of which she apparently couldn't get enough of) proves that it wasn't a healthy, altruistic decision.
I think it's even more upsetting that a well known author like Celeste Ng also pulled the race card in defense of Sonya. Eugh. I'm glad I gave up reading Little Fires Everywhere halfway... petty of me to say that but I won't be reading any of her work if she's the same kind of person as Sonya.
My take: disguise enough details so that the person who inspires you is not humiliated. That was Larson's error. Truman Capote became a pariah in high society when the subjects of his "inspiration" recognised themselves. And he never recovered from it.
Uhh… yet first draft shouldn’t have been an exact copy, but this isn’t plagiarism. It’s parody. Is the Onion or Saturday Night Live plagiarizing when it takes a quote from a politician and creates its own wacky alternate world around it? The text is used in a completely different way. It’s not like the Sonia also donated a kidney and copy-pasted Dawn’s letter. And it’s not like Dawn published and copyrighted her kidney donation letter.
@@ghostdreamer7272 I'm not sure about the legal scenario but I on the ethical level I disagree it counts as parody when it's actually supposed to be a work of fiction. This isn't The Onion or Saturday Night Live doing a parody via a quote from a politician. This is someone trying to pass off a real life person's real life letter as a letter written by their fictional character. I think it'd be pretty inappropriate if say, a crime drama TV show had a plot about a very uncharitably portrayed organ donor and lifted quotes verbatim from a real life organ donor without their permission and based the plot around an uncharitable take upon them.
@@ghostdreamer7272 Disagree. Her lawyers are not arguing that it's a parody. If it was that, she'd say that. Instead, the claim is that the story has nothing to do with Dawn. Why lie if the law is on your side?
@@Graid Agreed. The parody acknowledges the reference. They don't hide it. The fact that they aren't claiming it's a parody makes that argument entirely moot.
Given all the new info that has rolled out on this, maybe consider a response since this is getting a lot of views. My feelings have evolved seeing more the court docs, background etc. NYT was definitely trying to invoke a particular response.
You can be artfully, insightfully, even relevantly cruel, even doing in service of a worthy cause. Doesn't change the fact that it is an exercise in cruelty, abd if you target it all on one real, actual person who is going to know, and see, and have to process and cope with it one way or another...
Ok having now read the article, isn't it abundantly obvious that Sonya is the terrible one here? What did Dawn do but follow her intuition that Sonya was a HAAAAAAAAATER and try to shut her down? It's a sad state when a group of grown ass people bully a woman (who mistakenly considers them friends) for donating an organ to a stranger in need. Sonya likening this to being a white saviour and Dawn's standing up for herself as being white privilege is clearly racist. Unless she shows remorse, I for one hope her career takes a hit.
Apparently kidney donors are encouraged to talk about their donations. Presumably because kidneys are desperately needed by desperately sick people. I saw Savy's stream on this issue and there's just a whole lot of information that the article hasn't covered and it really just makes Sonya look increasingly bad. Dawn's main issue is that she really shouldn't have threatened to sue the One City One Story people but that may well have been influenced by a lawyer giving her advice. Her main reaction was just to tell folks that she had a letter plagiarized. Gotta say Donne, you're coming down very hard on a woman who really doesn't seem to have actually bragged that much about a pretty serious thing she did. And like, I get that it's obnoxious, but that doesn't merit the weird vitriol Sonya was dishing out. And yes, kidney donors are encouraged to talk A LOT about their donations, because there are hundreds of thousands every year who die because their kidneys are failing. In light of that, I can't really get mad at the woman who was likely doing as she was encouraged to do because it was bringing attention, however small, to a serious medical issue. And part of what was revealed in the dms and such was that they apparently work as part of the same organization and that one of Sonya's friends who worked with them in human relations or whatever AND IS SUPPOSED TO BE IMPARTIAL apparently just straight told Sonya she was on her side when Dawn mentioned that the she and Sonya were having issues. (Unrelated to the plagiarism, because this happened before that reveal I think.) This is a deliberate and malicious conflict of interest from someone who's supposed to be impartial. Like, there was some weird interpersonal shit going on here that I don't think we know the full of extent and probably won't ever know. It's important to note that it wasn't just Sonya here, it seemed like there was a group just out to hate Dawn for some reason. This isn't even getting into the fact that it's morally shitty take a private correspondence and then just put it in your book. This letter was shared in a private group and shown to people Dawn thought she could trust. This wasn't just taking someone's work, this was taking something private and shoving it out into the world for mockery. Saying this is an everyone sucks here situation really downplays the weird maliciousness Sonya seemed to display. I get not liking a person, but this was extremely petty.
Donating a kidney is really hard. It takes a toll on her health. She might have just wanted to create a group for support. She did something that saved someone's life. Who cares if she brags?
I envy people who have never had a friend constantly demand their time and attention and praise without caring that others might be too busy to make their lives about praising that friend. Post a big post, sure, fine, whatever. But imagine being directly confronted for not giving enough of your time and attention to someone who thinks even writer conferences months later should be about them.
One of the things that they ridiculed was that Dawn was working with a hospital to publicize donor programs. They literally mocked the fact that she was working with healthcare workers to increase organ donation, laughing at the very idea. And if you go to their social media, every one of these people is waving banners of social involvement. Ng's Twitter looks like she's a combination of the Pope and the United Nations. It's not like any of these people aren't calling attention to themselves and their goodness.
Confronting people for not giving you the attention you feel entitled to is pretty fucking self-centered. She didn’t stop to think that those who weren’t giving her enough attention to satisfy her may have had stuff happening in their own lives.
Nothing wrong with asking for attention. You can always say no. But why would you deny a friend such a little thing? It’s such a small effort and brings joy to your friend. It gives meaning and significance on a moment of importance in their lives. It would be weird if friends gave no reaction. So it’s only logical to ask after it. This notion, that women who do not put others and their needs before their own, are selfish, seems very toxic.
Grub Street is a nice place. Disappointed to see that they employ Sonya in an upper level position. Plagiarizing a letter into a story should’ve made her done there.
I think one of the questions in the plagiarism lawsuit is... "What is published?" If you count that first audio file that was made public as published, then yes that use of Dawn's almost verbatim letter is plagiarized and Larson is culpable. That piece was published. We wouldn't say that an original Audible audiobook without a physical copy isn't published. Just because it's not the most recent published version doesn't mean that the letter wasn't at one point put almost verbatim into a work that was published. And Larson is over there just digging her own grave admitting through the various group texts/chats that it is plagiarized and she doesn't want to change it. But then when the heat gets turned on, Larson knows what she did is wrong and changes it. Further digging that hole. If nothing was plagiarized, why does she change it? You start to get into all sorts of legal questions like... life rights. Who owns the life rights to Dawn's situation? The expectations of privacy in a private group chat (the one Dawn created and invited everyone to). Did Larson break that in publishing Dawn's letter? And then, you get into malicious intent. Did Sonya use Dawn's story and letter with malicious intent? And then, is it believable that someone in those Boston writing circles would know that the character of Dawn/Rose in the story is based on Dawn? Potentially defaming her. Then I wonder about fair use. Was Larson using the letter within a fair use context? IDK a lot of the answers to those questions. It's just food for conversation. Don't get me wrong, I agree ESH. I don't want to have to acknowledge someone's kidney donation every time I see them. It's weird. Keep your organs to yourself. But something I keep thinking about is... to a certain extent a lot of people are calling Dawn crazy because she was so obsessive in trying to get the plagiarism noticed -- in trying to hold Larson accountable. How much is that akin to the people who accused and had proof that Rona Wang plagiarized people's work? If there is a paper trail and you're trying to get people to believe you... at what point is it no longer crazy? Women are so often not believed when they try to point out a crime. And Larson fed into that, gaslighting Dawn for months/years. I want Emily D. Baker to cover this.
I’m really surprised that Rona Wang hasn’t come up more in this. Especially with Pitch Wars going on right now. Plagiarism is legit, and it’s so harmful for those who have their work stolen. I think Dawn clearly has gone over the edge of acceptable behavior, stalking people in zoom meetings and calling around to where people work. But, on the other hand I think you bring up a really good point. Women are gaslit all the time. And if she doesn’t make a big stink about it, will this just be swept under the rug?
@@BrekkeEl Right?! I feel like Rona's plagiarism has been brushed under the rug. But the same people who blasted her when that happened are now the same people blasting Dawn when Sonya is the one who plagiarized and admitted it. Dawn doesn't come out of it smelling of roses. She's got some issues she needs to work on in therapy. I'll be curious to see what happens to the legal cases.
As far as I'm concerned, if it's available to the public, it IS published. If I got on RUclips and said I'd written a poem and then just read The Hill We Climb, I would be plagiarizing Amanda Gorman. Even if I wrote a poem on my own but "borrowed" two lines, or if the whole wording was different but had the exact same ideas and structure as Gorman's poem, I would be plagiarizing, because plagiarizing is stealing someone's work/ideas, not only a word-for-word copy. Obviously Gorman is a massively well-known poet now and someone would flag that, but what if it was a poem my friend had posted on her private FB and I had stolen it and posted it to RUclips? Still plagiarism because I didn't write it but am claiming I did. If she had used the letter as a placeholder in an early draft, I would lean more toward Sonya, but the audio was publicly available and thus, it was plagiarism.
Thank you so much for covering this! I did go read the article, too. Totally fascinating story! And, honestly, while I question the motives of anyone who feels entitled to a ticker tape parade for doing an act of charity, the "mean girl" mob mentality of the group chat was really unfair. As for the story, it was ludicrously transparent and very clear Larson knew exactly what she was doing, lied about it, and made herself the victim when things didn't play out according to plan. Yes, writers borrow from real life and real people, but taking inspiration from a neighbor gardening isn't the same as taking a very specific event from an acquaintance's life (without any sort of discussion beforehand) and using it in such a demeaning, obvious way. :(
I honestly don't know what to think of this, but one thing that really irritates me is Larson pulling the race card. I really don't think it is the case that Dawn was trying to use white privilege to "steal credit" from Larson. Anyone, POC or not, is allowed to bring up the topic of being used as "inspiration" for a story and absolutely has the right to bring forth the accusation of plagiarism when it is right there in front of everyone's eyes. I mean, Larson basically admitted plagiarising in those messages! Dawn has every right to defend her side of the story without her race being brought into the matter. I don't know or follow the authors, and they both definitely suck. But out of the two, Larson is by far worse for being malicious about it. And it was completely out of order for her to accuse Dawn with the whole race thing when she knew damn well that she was plagiarising Dawn herself. It seemed she was scared of being exposed so she pulled the race card to direct attention away from her and onto Dawn, and I'm honestly glad the attempt was so pathetic because it is just another thing added to the list of unfair things she's done. There's nothing wrong with telling someone, including your own "friend", that they are being a bit too boastful. Instead, she went behind Dawn's back with the intention to mock her. Larson is the bad person here.
Sonya is definitely the bad art friend. Dawn may be self-absorbed and obsessive, but Sonia’s behavior was very unethical. She should have known better, but she chose her own ego over ethics in the end.
Seems like the kidney donating woman likes to be told how amazing she is and needs validation. Maybe only donated kidneys to get positive feedback from others. The other woman honestly should’ve changed up the story a lot more and she wouldn’t be in this mess. Like change the organ donated (like partial liver donation) and sorry but the letter…. She is a writer. She should’ve changed it up so it had the same feel but not the same words. Because even if she wins her case she looks petty as hell and kind of obsessed with the other woman’s obsession with herself. Also that comment about race was an easy cop out because nowadays you can’t argue against that without looking like a racist asshole and she knew exactly what she was doing with that. Especially when the story was literally about the woman. I really don’t see anything inherently wrong with writing about someone you can’t stand and putting it into a story format but the entire world isn’t supposed to catch hints and KNOW who you’re actually talking about. This is very Capote of her and we all know how that ended 🤣
It was also a private group if I'm not mistaken. So she didn't want the world in general to like her. She wanted the good opinion of people who actually matter to her.
Taking inspiration for a villain from someone in your life that specifically harmed you, was awful and malicious, clearly bigoted, etc. is one thing (and even then you should still like? not plagiarize or do things that can get you into legal trouble??) But making someone your villain and mocking them to all of you friends behind their back just because they're annoying is another. It was especially disturbing to me that the almost-word-for-word line of the early-draft letter was a line where Dawn is talking about the struggles and abuse in her own like. Like is she self-righteous or embarrassing? Maybe. Is this a "first-world problems" thing? Maybe: I don't know because I don't know this woman and what 'abuse' she's even referring to. But either way its just...cruel and I don't understand how this could be defensible behavior.
I literally had to go pop popcorn for this video. Dawn is nuts, yes. But in my opinion, Sonya so obviously sucks far more than Dawn. This isn't "inspiration" this is big chunks of Dawn's life/story plagiarized. As writers, yes, we can take snippets and echoes from our life and transport that into our fiction, but this was done so heavy handed. Frankly, no matter how good the short story may be, it shows a serious lack of skill on Sonya's part that she couldn't dissociate Dawn's story from hers. It honestly just felt like Sonya felt empowered and entitled to borrow so heavy handed from Dawn's story because she assumed that, like she, others found her to be just as ridiculous. Regardless of how annoying someone is, it doesn't mean you can plagiarize them. And the gaslighting that came afterwards sort of just solidifies Sonya Larson as a not so great person.
The problem is that we more or less own our life story. If an author wants to write “based on true events/real life” it needs to be a public event (9/11, any of the wars, COVID). If an author wants to use someone else’s life, or a moment of their life, to inform their story that person must either be dead (thus nobody owns the right to their life story anymore) or you must have explicit permission. To me, there’s a difference in taking an aspect of someone’s personality that you find intriguing and playing around with it as part of a larger more complex character and narrative (ie transformative work), and using your interpretation of an actual person and event in their life to form the plot and major character work in your story (essentially, stealing someone’s life story). Any way you look at it, Dawn should be compensated. Did Dawn do something socially embarrassing? Yes. The thing is, we don’t know her motivation or reasoning for making the Facebook group or thinking her friends would be more interested in her donation - Kidney donation is a major surgery after all. Also, when one is excited about something their friends also tend to be excited about it as well (because that’s how good friendship works). There are so many ways you can look at this where Dawn does the exact same things, but none of them are for attention. It was Larson’s assumption that Dawn was seeking attention. I think this may be more of a case of seeing in others your own flaws. At the end of the day, Dawns worst crime was being embarrassing (and possibly attention seeking). The Law suit, reaching out to people in the publishing industry etc, all of that was justified. Larson, on the other hand, is an incredibly manipulative and two-faced person.
I get a summary of the NYT every morning. I saw the title of this article, was intrigued, but didn't click on it. Now it looks like I'll have to go back and read it. Thank you for this video.
The irony of Sonya being known for writing characters with blind spots, and herself having her own glaring blind spot, is just **chef's kiss**
Also, this just confirmed to me that we don't need another spinoff of Real Housewives. We need a reality series with writers and authors
Lol, I never knew how much drama goes in these writers groups, I see new reality tv series in a works.
Lol!!!! I would watch it!
I feel as though she really *could've* reworked the letter. I can't feel bad for laziness.
Had Larson been a good artist, she would have subtexted the -kidney story- inspiration so that only a few hawk-eyed readers would have put the pieces together. The biggest problem here is not the inspiration but the plagiarism.
Good Writer's are thieves, but Good Thieves don't get caught
There's a couple of things that hit me about the article. Number one, Dawn is very much a struggling writer. She's been trying to get a book published for years. That Sonya launched her career on the back of Dawn's own freaking story in this way has got to be beyond terrible. Also, Sonya's gaslighting when Dawn called her out. She just deflected. The whole, "Of course it isn't you, the donor in the story is terrible and you wouldn't want to be that inspiration" when becomes clear that is EXACTLY how Sonya sees Dawn and she basically wrote what she saw. And apparently did it gleefully at first, to entertain Dawn's other detractors in the writing group; I'm sure that's why she didn't change the name until later. Otherwise, that's a no brainer. You change it before anyone sees the draft. And I find her "writer of color" defense pretty disgusting in these circumstances.
Also there's the nasty element of continuing to pretend to be Dawn's friend for, given the chat comments and her own behavior, more material. That's kind of the worst.
"you shouldn't want to be the character that I have turned you into" is some silence of the lambs level mindgames
@@danielx555
well said
So let me see if I got this right.
1) Dawn did something selfless that could save someone’s life.
2) Dawn decided to brag about this selfless act, but in a group with people she thought were her friends.
3) Seeing no reaction, Dawn decided to email directly for approval, to which Larson congratulated her for doing something ‘tremendous’
4) Larson went behind her back to laugh at her with people Dawn thought were her friends.
5) Larson decided that instead of talking to Dawn about the problem of her seeking validation, she was going to write a story about her for profit.
6) Dawn found this out and recognized that her life (kidney donation, writing a letter to the recipient, looking for attention) was turned into a story by a ‘friend’. In this story she was basically mocked.
7) Larson denies this and gaslights Dawn by claiming it’s not about her and that Dawn is trying to use white privilege to take a story away from a POC
8) Dawn reacts further by calling everyone’s attention to the matter, sending Larson a bunch of emails, and basically doing everything she thinks she should in order to get Larson not to write a story about her/profit off a story about her/avoid mentioning her as the inspiration
9) a supporter backs off from helping Larson, seeing the potential legal problems her actions could cause. Larson decides to sue Dawn for defamation, to which Dawn countersues because well Larson did in fact take this part of her life and turn it into a story.
10) seeing as things weren’t really changing, Dawn requested the article to cover the whole thing so she can get the truth out there.
Well, my take away is that Dawn might be a hard person to be around, but what she did was something that could save someone’s life. Her bragging wasn’t malicious and perhaps if one good friend had talked to her directly, she wouldn’t have continued looking for validation (in this instance). Where as Larson was intentionally malicious, from acting like she supported Dawn’s deed then going behind her back to laugh, to turning what she shared into a story for profit instead of talking to her, to gaslighting her and playing the white privilege vs POC card (when that wasn’t the issue).
Perhaps I have this view because of the implied friendship between the 2, but even if they weren’t, it’s still unkind to mock someone this way especially when they haven’t done anything to you.
Dawn might have reacted extremely and in some senses badly, but it was in defense of herself. Her negative traits in this case were not harming anybody, not until Larson did what she did.
I think Dawn is slightly more redeemable here, but I found excerpts of court docs online and apparently when she threatened to sue the festival if the story was released, Dawn ALSO suggested that Sonya's story be replaced with one that Dawn wrote! They're both so petty!
@@hardnewstakenharder I think Sonya shot her foot by being a two faced back stabber. But definitely Dawn is not okay either.
@@hardnewstakenharder this is where things start tumbling out of control and getting muddy. Because clearly Dawn is a flawed human as well, and now many of her other negative traits such as career jealousy are coming out and effecting people such as the anthology people, when everything could have been avoided if Sonya simply talked to her directly about her behaviour. And as for suggesting it use one of her own stories, I think part of that motive is coming from the thought of how Sonya would be profiting off of Dawn’s own life. Where as Dawn herself theoretically could have written a piece about kidney donation if she wanted to. So in her mind it would only be fair. Again: neither of these people make good decisions and certainly aren’t friends.
They weren't friends. Dawn just added a bunch of people (including other writers) into a private FB group so she could brag about her kidney donation. We've all been added to useless FB groups by acquaintances we haven't seen in ages. You don't need to be a friend for that.
That said, I agree with everything else you said. The gaslighting and the playing of the POC card, which was just a pathetic ploy to get sympathy. Dawn is a weirdo but Larson is definitely way worse.
Turns out dawn wasn’t even seeking validation, she saw on Facebook that Larson had seen the posts but wasn’t interacting with them, which she noted was unusual. She began to suspect that Larson may not actually be her friend, and was in fact right!
In short, I find Larson to morally, be a shit “friend”, and legally, to be dumb.
Yes writers take inspiration from everywhere, but to use information so personally given, information that is incredibly personal to Dawn ( I mean she mentioned her childhood trauma and abuse in the letter!) for her own personal gain, all while trying to appear as the sweet friend, is disgusting. If you’re going to be so obvious about it, then you might as well be upfront with it. How are you going to give your MC the same first name (couldn’t even change it to Skylar?), publish it with the same verbatim text, and then still attempt to deny, gaslight, and victimize yourself. The “Woe am I, the besieged WOC author” schtick is just as bad as Dorland’s martyr routine, but I guess the irony is lost on her (Not important, but I say this as a WOC)
Again, I too think Dawn was too much with the kidney, but I also feel that it’s a wicked thing to take the exact letter she wrote, a likely emotional piece based on her trauma, pain, and life, and twist it the way Sonya did, making light of what, regardless of how outwardly silly it may seem, was someone’s personal feelings. Imagine printing someone’s diary and sharing pages of it to the whole school, or making fun of a bully because they don’t have a dad, even if they deserve it, it’s just in bad taste.
I couldn’t agree more! Larson is obviously the wrong one here. If Dawn wants to scream she donated a kidney does it make her slightly narcissistic? Maybe but it’s her experience. Sonya using her story to profit off of it and turn it into a race debate is gross
It wasn’t a private diary though. It was a public Facebook post on social media. Still wrong to use it the way she did but if you put something out there publicly on the Internet like that, you can’t control how other people may react to it or use it for inspiration. Sonya clearly should have not used it period or had her character do something similar... she didn’t even change the character name until later drafts. But Dawn acted just as poorly too by harassing and stalking Sonya. They were both wrong.
@@ameliesayshola8854 wasn't the letter's contents only revealed in Dawn's private Facebook group though? Not public? (Haven't read the full article, only watched the video, so might be wrong)
@@HopefullyHopeful that's correct, Dawn shared the letter in a private group she created and invited Sonya to. I don't think there's anything wrong with Sonya taking inspiration, but she should've taken bigger steps to distance her story from Dawn's story, especially since Dawn's story is unusual (donating a kidney is not -super- unusual, but donating a kidney to no one in particular is quite unusual).
Everyone is awful here, Sonya is cruel but also Dawn shouldn't be stalking her in zoom meetings. Also, when Dawn requested that Sonya's story be pulled from the festival, Dawn also suggested that it be replaced with HER OWN short fiction! Both are social strivers, and I hope my personal writing community isn't as awful.
This whole thing is such a wild ride and I think the portion about the group chat subpoena could serve as a powerful wake up call to people who regularly talk shit about people in their lives. There’s a difference between meaningfully venting about someone who is stressing you out and hate-watching everything someone posts online. Writers are no exception. To quote someone on Twitter: “The article describes [Dawn’s] upbringing as poor. Dawn describes her childhood as “marred by trauma and abuse,” her blurb talks about how she’s “always an outsider” but “sunnily earnest” and how she tries almost too-hard to make connections with everyone she meets. Sonya, in contrast, is described as “popular” in their spaces, with a middle-class upbringing, obviously talented, garnering success in ways Dawn never could. Her writing sounds complex and powerful, she’s well spoken, and she seems wildly smart even just in glimpses. I’m not saying that what Dawn did was correct or justified but I *am* saying that there’s a certain degree to which the response seems to be punishing her for being embarrassing…I think I’d rather have an annoying, obnoxious, embarrassing friend who emails me about why I haven’t mentioned their exalted kidney altruism than a friend who’s this casually cruel to people and then gaslights them about it.”
WAIT because I literally haven’t been able to stop thinking about this now I remember last year when I wrote an essay in an academic setting chronicling the social interactions of someone who I had DEFINITELY been shit talking in several group chats. Obviously names and locations were changed for privacy but now I’m like AAAAA am I Sonya?!? I had zero qualms about writing that essay. AM I THE BAD ART FRIEND?!? This article has thrown me for a LOOP. I need everyone to read it.
😂I think that’s a bit different, presuming you didn’t use excessively private info and you actually changed enough details. That quote you posted honestly really encapsulates everything that annoys me about Sonya. So Dawn likes attention? Honestly so what? She still a gave a kidney, she was only looking for some support from her “close friends” and maybe people who donate organs should be given a little extra special treatment. I don’t disagree that she clearly has a problem, but a friend should talk that out with her, should help her move past a need for attention, or decide they can’t deal with it and end the friendship cordially. Everyone has flaws, and Sonya’s ability to backstab and tease this women, tease her upbringing and trauma, which is what she did by publishing her letter, all while still claiming to be besties makes me want to vomit. If she is so horrible why continue speaking to her?
Well said 👏 👏. Sonya sounds like the type of awful school bully who drives young girls to extreme anguish.
@@britwww Hey girl, if you are, then the first step was realizing it; second step is to change 😂 learn from Sonya!
Re: obviously talented, the story is included in the court docs. It is…not very good
As a middle school educator, the whole article reeked of adolescent nonsense. The idea that a woman, desperate for positive attention and engagement during a tumultuous time in her life, is the subject of that kind of treatment is very juvenile. Yes, Dawn's behavior was embarrassing (going out of her way to keep track of who interacted and who had not was unnecessary and a bad look), but Sonya's behavior, as well as that of her friends, was cold and cruel in a way that could never be attributed as a proportional reaction to Dawn's perceived sins. Taking letters Dawn shared of her personal life, with the explicit intent to reproduce them in a negative light is just mean. It's not a kind thing to do. And to double down? To continually accuse Dawn of having some sort of ulterior motive, consciously or otherwise, that was an attack on Sonya as a woman of color, is ridiculous.
Totally agree with you
completely agree with you. Larson and so-called writer friends are too cruel, and the whole thing is not interesting at all. As an Asian, I feel so sorry about the all the characters in the story. The whole thing should be more about human weaknesses than race and color
Yeah she basically used her status as a woc to be her sword and shield. And tried to weaponize Dawn's whiteness against her. Not cool. And Alexa kept mentioning the sanctity of group chats but all the info and material Sonya stole was from Dawn's private FB group. It's not like she made it all public so anyone can see. Also, there is very little that goes untouched in discovery. Most of this happened online so what did they expect? This is similar in a way to the Omegaverse lawsuit. Don't push forward with lawsuits unless you're okay with everyone looking at your dirty laundry in that situation. People can be so dense. I would never sue someone if I know damn well I wrote emails or chat messages that prove the other side's allegations. Even if Sonya wins the legal battle, I hope this hurts her personally and professionally.
@@TreeDwellingShrimp
I think Alexa does not realize that everything someone says can be used against them in court. It's a little surprising since she writes thrillers. That's not an insult btw, but someone who writes thrillers and detective books should know what is considered evidence by the law.
Also, social media is very open about the fact that what you post on their platform is not protected by free speech or privacy laws.
Exactly. I'm surprised and a bit disappointed that Alexa can even be in doubt about
As unpleasant and attention-seeking as Dawn may be, she did not deserve to have her story stolen or her letter plagiarized. Take all emotion out of the story and look at the facts: Sonia's actions are unethical and so is the rest of her writing group for not stopping her when they knew what she was doing.
I’m surprised that people are so shocked about group chats and private emails being subpoenaed. In family court and criminal court it happens all the time. Specifically having text messages subpoenaed is pretty common.
Yep. Still terrifying.
Nothing on the Internet is truly private or secure. And this would be a good reminder to all of us of that. The Internet literally is forever, and just because you delete things doesn’t mean they can’t be found. You don’t own your chats on third-party websites. That includes email. It’s a such a good reminder, hopefully something most of us will never after deal with.
I don’t have much sympathy. She sued Dawn for defamation. Of course this would be subpoenaed in discovery.
Phone records and even answering machine messages have been subpoenaed for years--chats and texts are pretty much the same thing.
I think people don't usually envision themselves being part of an issue that would require that privacy to be broken.
Plus most people aren't aware of the legal system or its processes.
If all a person wants in exchange for giving a dying stranger a kidney is some validation, I think that’s a fair exchange.
Whether what Sonya did was legally plagiarism or not is secondary to her pettiness.
Also, private correspondence is often subpoenaed in legal battles, that’s hardly shocking.
Eh, Dawn's main crime was being a bit cringey. But Sonya comes across as a complete b word. Her two-facedness, her playing the 'taking ownership away from people of colour' card when she knew full well the piece was in fact about Dawn.
Was it about Dawn or how people who get some help feel about the people who feel they "Saved them"?
I remember my sister helping me with something, and I remember feeling like I was a kid again, even though I was an adult. I was under her rules, her orders, her schedule. It rankled. I hated feeling that way. she didn't make me feel that way, but I can get way someone who gets a supposedly "anonymous" kidney would feel about having to genuflect to the person who donated. There's something a bit irritating about the letter, even if you want to credit it with good intentions.
and I think that is a fair reading of the story, from Larson's perspective.
And that is NOT me saying I don't get Dorland's pain at finding out people she thought were friends weren't, in the most horrifying way possible. That had to hurt so much.
Sonya turned a personal story that was important to another person into a story that was in effect, "Look at this white savior complex. She is a loser."
I am mixed race and I think there are some people that have been straight up insulting in the same veins which they "try” to help. And it isn't a thing that I have seen that is strictly a problem with race. I see it in all sort of scenarios. And it is often through ignorance than actual malice. But one thing is the same among them all.... "making assumptions instead of directly talking". However, the way Sonya put it was taking Donland story, flandarizing her, put her in clown makeup and put her under a shameful light-- which again, "trying" to help... Which I think Sonya's solution to combat white savior complex through a personal story is just as useless (*i think she too is guilty of said savior complex*) and frankly, a dirty move.
All Sonya did really was to just added more salt. At least someone can take that kidney.
I agree. Too much evidence that there was some "mean girl" conduct in this, and then Larson trying to play victim via race while blind to the privilege of her upbringing.
@@obobob1867 yeah the kidney meme is pretty amusing but people are maybe losing track of the actual good deed Dawn has done for a total stranger. How many people willing choose to undergo surgery and give up an organ like that? Who cares if she’s a bit cringe or needy or sensitive or not entirely self aware of how she comes across. What good has Sonya done in this situation? Just cruelty, mockery, plagiarism, backstabbing, initiating lawsuits…
@@barbarafolk1854 I think Sonya does admit in a group chat (or text) with other friends that the story was, indeed, about Dawn. An earlier version of the story, which was made into an audiobook, did contain sections of Dawn's letter directly. Verbatim. And that would, technically, be plagiarism. And Sonya even admits to knowingly using Dawn's letter--that was quoted in the article. I agree Sonya wrote an inspirational piece and didn't steal the story from Dawn (because Dawn didn't write a story; she simply shared her true life events), but it is clear that Sonya write the story based on Dawn, especially given what we know about that person. Really, the only thing she added in was the recipient. It's clear, based on her exchanges with friends, that the story's rich white lady is Dawn. That's still not plagiarism, but it is a violation in a way. If Sonya's story was a Creative Nonfiction (not a fictional short), then she'd be in a ton of trouble because it's just...wrong...to use a person's personal journey as part of your story without getting their permission. No way would it have been published w/o fact-checking. Or, in the least, speaking with them. I think she's morally (and perhaps ethically) in the wrong, but not necessarily legally.
Let's see:
Team Dawn: She donated a kidney, but wasn't selfless about it. She was needy in wanting validation after the act.
Team Sonya: (1) She used her literary work to shame a friend who donated a kidney in a way that wasn't entirely selfless. (2) She lied about having Dawn's name in the original version and copying near word for word parts of Dawn's story. (3) She gaslit Dawn into thinking defending herself meant she wanted to be that "white-savior" narcissist version in the story Sonya imagined. (4) She used her status as POC to make Dawn, a white woman, feel like no one would support her if she tried to fight this.
Hmm...I don't know about you, but I see one woman saved someone's life and her only crime was not being ENTIRELY selfless about it.
The other is ironically calling someone a narcissist while displaying many narcissistic traits herself. You don't have to be an armchair psychologist to know the word, "Projection."
In the end, I side with Dawn Dorland.
Dawn's crime is minimal. If I do the washing up I expect praise, I don't know what I'd expect if I gave a kidney.
Exactly. Donating a kidney is a massive act of altruism with potential health risks that actually saved a stranger's life. I'd at least want people I considered friends to care!
Yup yup yup. Agree completely. And as an Asian American POC, completely cannot stand by what Larson did no matter the reason.
People don't realize that with live organ donation, the donor is more at risk than the recipient (though perhaps less so with kidney than liver). The recipient often feels better almost immediately, while the recovery for the donor can be tough. So, yeah, maybe Dawn should have let up on the bragging, but it was no small thing she did.
Tbh. The way people got fooled into thinking somebody giving up a part of their BODY is bad if they don't do it entirely out of the goodness of their heart is fucking weird, our culture is so obsessed with purity like that
Perhaps the greatest irony here is that Sonya Larson is fascinated by people who come across poorly without knowing it.
There is is!
I don’t see any reason to feel conflicted, honestly.
Dorland may be needy, annoying, and clueless, but Larson seems to be a bully and a gaslighter . Based on the group chat and the texts, she appears to have been motivated by maliciousness and was fully aware that she was also ripping off Dorland’s words, only revising the story when it gained traction.
I think the fact that the author group chat was subpoenaed is delicious. No, make that “tremendous.”
Tremendous! Hahah
I agree. I'm only reading all this now, but I basically clicked the video due to the title and then was a little disturbed by the poster's opinion so I took a look at the comments. I don't think being annoying should EVER justify stealing someone else's writing or basically idk, author-bullying instead of cyber bullying? Larson's book directly affected Dorland's friend group with her fellow writers. It's commented in one of the portions before Dorland reads Larson's short story that she felt like people were treating her different.
That sounds a LOT like cyber bullying to me- just with a published work which arguably makes it worse. I've been cyber bullied like that and it starts the same way. At first, you don't know what's going on but no one wants to sit next to you or talk to you. It takes time to find out someone was talking badly about you online in private chats or in social media sites you don't use.
That's literally all I can think of right now after hearing about all that. As annoying as Dorland probably was, I feel pretty bad for her now. My heart hurts for her.
Dawn sounds annoying, but Sonya sounds malicious and dishonest.
Bingo. Dawn is the annoying person that is superficially seen as "bad" but then you dig a little and find a lot of issues and go, "OH!" and just move on. OR if you are her friend, try to get her counseling. Sonya sounds incredibly calculating and malicious, like someone fully prepared to steal, lie, deceive, and invalidate an entire person's experience/existence (even her own, miss POC) just to make a name for herself in the writing world. She seems desperate.
Sonya is vile person
Dawn may be a lot but people with character defects also have legal rights and Sonya is treading very close to the line of plagarism. I’ll add that she sued first for defamation. She had to know this would come up in discovery, or she had a very bad lawyer IMO
@@learnerlove6853 at the end of the article, Dawn is following around Sonya to different writing panels and sitting in; apparently she's doing "research." They both suck!
In short, yes.
as a writer, so many writers being defensive of sonya is disgusting to me. she used the real name and letter originally. that says it all. how easy would it have been to do a story of a white saviour doing something seemingly altruistic without directly ripping her off? easy. so easy it hurts, that it would take less than a minute to do. but she didn't want to do a white saviour story. she wanted to be shitty towards dawn. plain and simple. dawn is cringey and annoying and that makes her an easy target to rip into. but she still donated a kidney that someone out there needed, so i really don't care if she was irritating and insufferable about it. versus some writers deciding to get high off tearing it apart for no other reason than it annoyed them. she has become catty in response and that makes me roll my eyes but honestly, i don't really blame her, either, when someone did this to her.
maybe more writers should be honest about why they're 'conflicted' on this: they've been cruel to people in their lives through their writing and perhaps used more personal details than they should have and now they have to realise they were in fact shitty for doing so. you can be inspired. you can write about living people in your life. but you have a responsibility to realise it's just like gossiping in a group chat: there's a chance it will get back to the person you were talking about if you aren't careful and YOU have to deal with that. this is why my inspiration is in fact only that. inspiration i work into something else.
I just want to point out that as flawed as Dawn is, she posted a letter to private FB group of people she considered friends and in the opening line mentions being abused at an early age- and Sonya Larson thought this was appropriate to take verbatim and put in a public work of fiction. Dawn may be considered attention-seeking, but Sonya Larson appears to be at best insensitive, and at worst a bully using an abuse victim's struggles as a step up in her career.
I've had this quote as the background of my work laptop for years: Dance like no one is watching. Email like it may one day be read aloud at a deposition.
The writing drama eclipses the fact that she gave a KIDNEY, a KIDNEY. Am I the only one that is a bit sad that none of her friends thought that was a nice thing to do in the beginning? Regardless of wanting validation she gave a kidney.
Donating a kidney is an incredibly nice thing to do. I'm sure the person who received that kidney doesn't really care about how their doner talked about it afterwards or if their motives were entirely selfless and pure.
But emailing your friend about not reply to a group chat message about your kidney donation is a bit much.
Right!! A lot of people are stuck on the fact she was disappointed no one had commented on it at the event she went to, but if it was any other life event (like say she got married or had a baby) it wouldn't be at all weird to expect acknowledgement about it
Dawn wasn’t getting enough attention to satisfy her. It sounds like she wanted everyone to stop what they were doing to constantly praise her, which isn’t okay. She literally went out of her way to confront people about not giving her enough attention, clearly without regard to how other people may have been too busy with their own lives to make her the center of their lives. I am that person who has been deathly ill, and I still don’t expect people to make me, even when I was literally expected to die, the center of their worlds. Yet Dawn was expecting that, to the point of getting confrontational.
If one of my friends did that I'd call her an idiot, but I'd be proud of her. What Sonya did is almost inhumane. I understand not wanting to praise Dawn (who was clearly looking for attention), but doing all of that behind the back of someone who sees you as her friend is disgusting.
It reminds me of that Cyberbullying movie, where the culprit was the best friend all along
@@Author.Noelle.Alexandria She needs a reality check but she didn't need her name dragged through the mud publicly.
While Dawn sounds like she has some serious issues (a desperate need for attention being one of them), Sonya sounds not only cruel but not too bright either. At least change the protagonist's name from the real-life person you are fictionalizing. I do think all writers pull from real life, but there is a line. Sonya crossed that line several times - using Dawn's name, using a kidney donation, and copying her letter verbatim in earlier drafts. Real-life people and situations should be a jumping-off point, not the whole story. Neither of these women comes across well, and certainly, if Sonya was my "friend" I'd be wondering what she really thought of me. I teach middle-school and this whole thing seems like that is where it belongs - back in junior high.
I agree. It was painful article to read
I know at some point in the drafts the name was changed from Dawn to Rose, but the fact that it began with Dawn's name AND her letter is so malicious when viewed with the knowledge of the gossip circles.
Completely agree. I watched this saga unfold on Twitter and was bewildered by how many people--writers, even!--were fawning over Sonya and eviscerating Dawn. Don't get me wrong, Dawn's need for attention sounds annoying as hell, and "do writers not care about my kidney donation?" is admittedly a hilariously cringe line. But plagiarism is far, far worse than just being cringe-y and annoying. It's inexcusable.
Everything Dawn did tracks with what kidney donors are asked to do. Court documents and Dawn’s own Facebook very much support her claim that Sonya was a friend of hers for many years. She is not the nutty person she has been made out to be.
I agree, Sonya sounds cruel and the talking behind this other girls back, writing a story and laughing about it it’s so petty and catty.
TBH, I'm not sure why you feel conflicted. Larson is a plagiarist. Dawn's character might come off as grating and the consequences of this lawsuit might be annoying to some, but let's be real. Larson plagiarized Dorland's text. It's not art, not fiction--it's word for word the same!
She's conflicted for the same reason that so many writers are on Larson's side in this--because, like she admitted, she also is "inspired" by people she knows, and if she acknowledges that Larson's and her groupchat friends were incredibly cruel, she'd have to look at her own behavior and writing process.
I'm not a writer, and I'm the first to admit that Dawn's whole thing would grate and I'm petty enough to mock her a bit behind her back. But what Larson, Ng, et al did was way beyond that. They followed someone they disliked for the express purpose of mocking her. Larson was encouraged to copy Dawn's letter and lampoon her in her story because they found her so irritating. Larson repeatedly assured Dawn that they were friends. If that is what goes on lit fic author group chats...well, it's no wonder they're so lacking in imagination that they have to mine real life friends and acquaintances for ideas. It might not be illegal, but is this were fiction, there's not a single person out there who wouldn't be rooting for Larson to get her comeuppance.
@@lascuba The reason I made the comment is because Alexa seemed more concerned about the chats being made public than the heinous act Larson committed. Considering social media posts, chats, and email correspondences can be made public in a wide variety of legal proceedings, Alexa's concern seemed silly and not thought out. Sure, private conversations getting out there can be frustrating, especially since weird stuff can be disclosed with writers, odd ideas, outlandish theories, etc. But Larson is the one to blame here. Sure, Dawn could have handled things differently, but I think she had the right to sue. And it's Larson's actions that merit this exposure and its fallout (i.e. private stuff being disclosed) is on her. Whatever legal and literary ramifications this whole case has, Larson bears the greater culpability. Alexa seemed more worried about chats than the whole plagiarism and unethical conduct aspect of the story, and that was what I couldn't get and why I made the comment. And yes, like you, I'm sure most of us hope Larson gets what she deserves. (Not that Dawn is entirely blameless in this either.)
@@lascuba this is the reason i don't like the writing and art community. art being such a strong thing, leads many people with issues in this communities in hopes of finding support. and even if art is a good healer, you don't turn into a good person overnight. but art people have a strong moral compass even if we don't follow it ourselves. so it is easy for us to do something off morality, let's face it we are all complicated. and to hide their flaws others will be like 'i condemn this behavior, so i am not like you.' this is what sonya did. and this mockery, judgement can soon turn into bullying. the small you are the harder it will be for you.
@@susanlaine9054 Larson sued Dorland.
@@biguattipoptropica This whole thing has turned into a three-ring circus. Everyone, including the entire literary community, is coming out like idiots. Dawn and her search for public validation when her good act should have been its own reward. Sonya and her disingenuous friendship and blatant plagiarism which suggests her true writing abilities are less than what she claims. And then the absolute gall she has to play the race card when she was the thief, not Dawn?! I mean come on! Geesh, these women both have a lot to learn about being human AND a proper adult with moral backbone and sense of responsibility and culpability.
POV: your friend does something pretty kind and selfless, but brags about it. its starting to annoy you and their other friends, even though they only talked about it privately. do you a) act like a normal adult human being and say to them “hey you’re kind of acting like an idiot”, or b) keep telling them to their face that they’re “tremendous” before writing a character assassination story about how selfish and entitled they are which you then publish for potentially millions of people to see (and for profit!)?
take your time! it’s a tricky one!
Maybe I'll change her name and the letter a little after publishing an audiobook? That still makes me a good art friend if I message her about how important her friendship is?
Publish it and block them on FB lolololol
Exactly!! I am not even sure why Alexa is conflicted about who is the asshole here. Yes, ESH. But also Sonya >>>>>>>>> Dawn in the assholey-ness beyond doubt!
Also, hottake: Anyone who looks towards Facebook pettiness to draw "inspiration" for their writing needs to just get a life and have more experiences to draw inspiration from.
I recognize this thread is old, but I feel like this take lacks a little nuance.
Sure, Larson's behavior was bad. She went about everything the wrong way. In no way can anybody twist her to look like the good person in this story (I would argue nobody is the good person in this story). But I feel like Dawn's story and the discussions around it have less to do with Dawn herself and more about what she represents -- white tears and the white savior complex. If you think this whole topic has nothing to do with the intersections of race and class, you're not looking close enough. Dawn's initial behavior is not just troubling because it's bordering on narcissistic, but it genuinely demonstrates a belief system that she deserves praise on the basis of doing something altruistic. You can see her entitlement to praise and social capital when she goes out of her way to email Larson just for the absence of a like or comment.
Again, I'm not trying to defend Larson or Grubstreet co. But I do think that simplifying this conflict to a good person being annoying/"bragging" about a good deed overlooks a lot of potential nuanced conversation about the fragile ego of a narcissistic white woman and what happens when she doesn't receive the kind of positive attention she seeks just for doing something...decent?
I feel like this kind of story is radically transformed based on whose point of view it is taken from, as we all know as writers. We also have no idea who these people are in their personal lives. She was so fucked up to write the story but it’s important to take things with skepticism.
Bottom line, Larson should not have taken the original letter word for word or even close to the original wording at any point in the drafting process. Don’t plagiarize, kids!
She knew it, too! Came out in her text. It gets you in the end.
I seem to be in the minority here, but I don't think that what Sonya did comes under the vague heading of 'inspired by real life', and I think what she did was deeply unethical. It was far too identifiable as about this specific woman and even lifted her words verbatim, and seems to have been scathing about her, in framing her as privileged and narcissistic. It's okay to portray a fictional donor as flawed, but it seems in rather bad taste when based on a real life person who (apparently) did a genuinely altruistic thing and hadn't really done anything unethical, even if she had been gauche and attention seeking.
Add to this that Sonya basically tried to justify this with reference to Dawn's race, using the 'white person vs POC author' to try and frame Dawn's motivation as something it doesn't seem to have been.
Dawn comes across as attention seeking, but I don't think she actually was in the wrong for being insulted by this and wanting them to pull the content from her letter to her organ recipient. And now she apparently has people mocking her all over the place for having done something that, at its heart, was not only actually harmless but life saving for another person (assuming it was genuine).
I don't know the words for it, but, I can't help but notice there's a certain.. hrm.. common desire to gleefully tear people down for doing apparently self sacrificing or charitable things the moment that they actually appear to be expecting any acclaim for it. And I get why that is- it can come across as bragging, and additionally, unfortunately due to people taking advantage of people's good will, can be reasons for suspicion, as the most vocal people of this type are often the most dishonest. That said, I do think there's a certain strand of this that is basically people jumping at any opportunity to assuage their own discomfort at someone else doing something more charitable than they are willing to do by piling on someone for doing something charitable for 'the wrong reasons'. In a way, that piece is almost potentially a 'revenge' for that act of attempting to get acclaim for that charitable act.
I felt the same thing! Like Sonya was resolving her wish that the recipient would refuse to meet with Dawn by having the character do that as some kind of righteous thing (as if the donor in the story being a white savior cancels out giving a whole kidney). It seemed like Sonya was insecure about Dawn’s sacrifice, I guess because she needs to be the best or something?
@@jessicam3707 I'm not even sure I get the white savior angle of the donation? Was it something in the short story, with the letter having been sent when they wouldn't meet her or something? Because in the real story it was a generalized donation, which is why the letter was written to whoever would get it, so race shouldn't even come into it...
@@lexihopes Yeah, exactly, in the short story it was meant to be something about race, but it still felt a LOT like Sonya felt that Dawn’s narcissistic tendencies were really intertwined with her whiteness. As if mental health issues are divided up by race
I like your point about how there is a connection to our own feelings of guilt for not doing more to help others that leads us to mock and feel superior to anyone who does a good thing for a “wrong” reason.
@@lexihopes I...don't either. Maybe Sonya is projecting?
Larson pulling the race card by saying Dawn was trying to get credit for a writer of color's work is absolutely insane. 🤦♀️
And as far as her note about "she shouldn't want to be identified with this character," isn't that kind of the whole point? Of course she wouldn't want people to think that character is about her... that's exactly why she's upset, I would imagine. Larson essentially took her pretty public life story, barely changed it enough to be unrecognizable, and then demonized the character that was clearly supposed to be Dawn. Obviously some stupid people who can't separate fact from fiction are going to think badly of Dawn because of that character.
I'm sorry, but Larson's entire response is just completely ridiculous to me.
And as for the group chats, tbh, I don't feel sorry for anyone for the chats being subpoenaed. You shouldn't talk crap about people, and if you're going to do that, you need to own up to the possible consequences of that person you're talking about finding out what you said.
I'm not saying I'm perfect and never talk crap about people, but I do know that the times I have done that, I was wrong to do so, and if the person found out, it would be nobody's fault but my own. Gossip and talking badly about people has consequences, and I don't really feel bad for people for having to deal with those consequences. I think private group chats that center around gossip like that are harmful to everyone involved. Just because you are speaking privately or anonymously (or so you think) doesn't mean people aren't going to be hurt by what you've said. In general, I think the internet is dangerous at times for making people feel like their normal moral values of not being cruel to others can just go out the window, as if they are no longer responsible for the words they use when they're online. That's not the case. We are all still responsible, myself included, for the things we say online.
I might surely be questioning Dorland's altruism when she created a FB group dedicated to her kidney donation, BUT I hate that Larson used the "but I'm a writer of colour, woe is me, feel bad for me" card and her friends jumped in, mislabeling this dumbass drama as "white savior" moves on the part of the book fair. (Good for them clapping back by the way.) Like this woman ACTUALLY used someone's letter in her poorly concealed version of art imitating life, and she couldn't foresee this going down badly???? 🤦♀️ I can't even...
This is what happens when critiques of white supremacy are so abstracted from any major, substantive change and all that's left is, "I don't like this other woman." I'm a writer of color myself, the day to day microaggressions add up, but jfc Sonya just wanted to bury Dawn and also have Dawn feel grateful(?) About it?
Larson seems narcissistic to me. Weaponizing "WOC" for her own personal gain is so disrespectful.
The book fair is really the MVP here.
@@ds2465 I'd say that the biggest winner is whoever got that kidney.
I don’t think it is that strange to make a Facebook group to get people updated on how you are recovering from a surgery.
Is there really a debate? *Sonya Larson is a bully* . She's a plagiarizer who preys on people to profit off of and then humiliates her victim with people her victim thinks are her friends. This is career-ending levels of plagiarism and bad conduct. And those authors that are trying to make this go away because Larson's a friend? *The author community needs to do better.* And we need to hold Sonya Larson accountable for her actions because *we should be better than this* .
Absolutely right. I’m glad BBF canceled the event because she didn’t deserve such publicity. Inspiration is one thing, Wicked Theft is another. This information was given in a private personal context.
Also, I haven't yet met a single adult who doesn't seek some degree of validation, especially if they are feeling vulnerable and have what they believe to be a support network. Even posting here shows our need to be heard and understood and cared about.
Seven kinds of wow. So many incisive comments below have already said what I'm thinking, but I'll add just this: one of these people actually saved a person's life with a kidney donation. No matter how cringe and awful and whatever: she DID give her kidney. Her motivations can be as garbage as they come, but I tell you, I'm not about to give anyone my kidney!
I hasten to add I am no relation to the Chris Castellani mentioned in the article. (Oh I bet we're 6th cousins or something, but no idea who he is.)
@@cmcastellani haha I was wondering that!
Dawn has issues, most likely unconscious and invisible to her. She donated for attention. But in the end, she did a good thing. Meanwhile, Sonia, stole the story, probably feeling empowered to "shame" Dawn because of this unconscious behavior for attention, and that feels needlessly cruel. In addition, Sonia blatantly copied the story, near word for word, in those early drafts, including using the name "Dawn" which couldn't be more blatant, but now is (1) Lying, (2) Gaslighting Dawn, and (3) Using her "I am POC, you are white, so back off" which is appalling. Yeah, neither women comes off well, but Sonia feels like someone who uses her work to tear people down and then feels completely "superior" to them and acts like she's not doing just that. BOTH women have issues. WE all have issues. These issues just collided with each other, but I feel more for Dawn, because to donate a kidney for attention shows an extreme issue and instead of helping her through it, Sonia exploited it for a story.
Exactly my thoughts. Even the attention Dawn was seeking was in a private group chat with people she thought were her friends. People who could have easily messaged her to tell her that it looked bad for her to be seeking approval for a good deed. Sonia definitely could have shared her feelings of it with her first, instead she lied that it was all good then went to laugh at her behind her back. I don’t know enough about Dawn, but to me it sounds like she doesn’t have enough good friends around her that can guide her when they think she’s not handling something well.
Exactly what I thought! Thank you. It’s just wicked, and then dumb, to be so obvious and refuse to admit it,
None of those people ever claimed to be her friends, though? They knew of each other through their profession- some workshops, and a mutual organization. Dawn added them to a facebook group none of them asked to be in. She emailed Sonya because she didn't even have her phone number (until, of course, she tracked it down in order to text/call her to ask why she didn't respond to her emails). She chose to seek approval from people she barely knew, and she chose to harass them- through facebook, phone, email, zoom, and places of work- when she didn't get the response she was looking for. Sonya repeatedly admitted, from the beginning, that the kidney donor idea had been inspired by Dawn- “I hope it doesn’t feel too weird for your gift to have inspired works of art." Not sure how this is lying or gaslighting. And to boil down her experiences into her pulling the race card is...a very unfortunate take.
@@JA-br4yr they actually did claim to be her friend to her face if you look at the emails and group chats. They lied in the article because they assumed no one would check.
even just thinking for a moment about the idea of donating for attention... this is not about donating money, or things, it's donating an organ! i find it hard to imagine that attention-seeking or narcissism is 100% the cause....
I could not get over how Larson described Dorland as "a goldmine" to her equally mean friends. I understand that sometimes talent comes with a bit of mean-spirit, self-absorption, and even cruelty, yet when I actually face it I find it unbearable. Maybe Larson doesn't care for decency at all, but regardless decent people don't see others' torture, hardship or weakness as "a goldmine". Larson is a nasty person that disgusts me.
The whole "this woman is a goldmine" really made me go yikes 😬 Dawn does sounds like a validation seeking person, like the type that everyone just puts up with and announcing your kidney donation just CAUSE does sound so ego driving
But...Sonya also sounds kinda underhanded, like those private chats etc. When she said "goldmine" its like...okay yeah Dawn may be narrsastic and maybe even have a savior compelx...but she is human, that comment sounded just as dehumanizing and if you don't like her that much then just stop associating with her??
I feel like putting 'white' in front of 'savior' is actually an example of a kind of worrying trend of trying to misuse actually useful concepts Sonya also misused in order to make a criticism sound more justified and righteous than it is. A 'white savior' is a white person trying to put themselves in a messiah like role specifically for others who aren't white. Like, it's not really a 'white saviour' thing to want to donate a kidney to someone, kind of like how you're not a 'white saviour' if you are white and donate to a cancer charity, or become a fire fighter or a paramedic. It's not just 'white person who wants to help people', it's not even really 'white person who wants to help a specific person who's not white', it means something specific that doesn't apply here.
@@Graid no yeah I agree, I meant to put savoir but I guess I wanted to give a wider birth, mostly because I don't know these women personally so IDK how Dawn may have come off to Sonya, but I do agree, because I mean...usually you don't know the race of who gets your kidney if you just donate to donate and not a particular person
I was using Sonya's words if anything, but I'll edit it to my initial intent
I agree with you but I do think Sonya DID try to not associate with Dawn. It seems like Dawn was the one initiating each contact between her and others.
@@scheherazade2291 that's not true. Dawn actually broke off contact with them after she moved. Them calling her Trump during her Lakers appearance didn't stem from any direct contact with her. Dawn also quietly unfriended Sonya on Facebook, it's in the group chat
So a thing about announcing the kidney donation is that a lot of donation centres encourage you to poistively tell as many people as you can about the experience because it increases the odds that somone who wouldn't have or were on the fence would do so (like, for example, the wife of the guy who got Dawn's kidney who donated her own after reading Dawn's letter). So it's entirely possible that she wasn't even telling her friends about it "for clout" but because she wanted to encourage people she thought were her friends to be kind in kind. A message reveald in the group chat the Group Chat subpoena has (I believe Sonya) say "What does she want me to, donate an organ?"(sic) and I honestly think Dawn may have picked the wrong people to try and influence
Larson and Ng and the others appear to be angry that somebody from a lower social class dared to speak to them. It's a really gross story.
Making good art doesn’t excuse asshole behaviour. That kind of nonsense belongs in the past. Dawn clearly has self-awareness issues and probably needs good friends around her to call her out, but Sonja’s actions were unethical and cruel. I’ve been caught in the middle of unethical author behaviour before and it’s really not fun for anyone involved. Crazy story, but despite Dawn’s narcissism, I couldn’t help but feel sorry for her.
Okay, so I've recently learned some extra content about this which makes what Dawn did sound a lot more reasonable. Donors are encouraged to start a Facebook group to have some support along the way, they are also asked to write a letter to their donor. There's usually a 'chain' in kidney donation because donors are donating for loved ones. Which puts a different spin on her letter. The Facebook group only had about 60 people in it, not hundreds, and Sonja Larson was viewing every post and not interacting, which is why Dawn reached out to see if she wanted to stay or go. Sonja was there to mine material and gossip about Dawn behind her back. Anyway, I think knowing a lot of this puts Dawn's actions in a different context and makes it sound much less narcissistic than the original article.
Sonya, YTA. Simply, it wasn’t her story to write. She took words straight out of another author and labeled it as her own, I’m surprised other writers would find this appropriate at all.
I am kind of scary of people saying they're somehow divided by both arguments. Sonya, YTA, definitely.
Another odd thing is that she's writing about a character who has received a donor organ when she has not had that experience herself. It's like reading a story about a character with cancer when the author has never experienced that. It's just going to at best come across as misinformation as to what that experience is actually like, and at worst, flat and inauthentic to those who have actually gone through it.
@@celisewillisEr, that's a normal thing for writers, though. How many people have gone through the experience of saving the world from a dark lord? How many people have escaped a burning building or collapsing temple? How many people go hand to hand with terrorists? You can write about things you haven't gone through. You just use your previous, similar experiences and map that onto them.
Sonya a bitch tho.
The woman who donated is probably desperate for attention because she has such terrible friends. Sonya pretended to be her friend, stole very personal parts of her life and wrote a super unflattering story about Dawn.
When Dawn justifiably asked about it Sonya called her a racist and sued her?
I can’t see this as ESH? I mean Dawn needs better friends but Sonya is a terrible person. She’s a bad artist and a trash “friend”
But thank you for the excellent summary.
A few things you seem to have missed, based on the comments: organizations that facilitate organ donations ask people to be as public about it as possible, because, since people can't directly be paid for the organs in the US, the way most non-directed donors hear about it is by word of mouth.
Kidney recipients are pissed at Sonya Larson. I saw someone say they don't care if Dawn Dorland demanded a parade. The story itself was terrible and misrepresented how organ donation works. People are worried it will discourage non-directed donors, which are already rare.
The Facebook group was for medical updates.
The letter was to the last person in the donation chain, not the person Dorland directly donated her kidney to (she was reassuring them because people without anyone to donate a kidney so they can receive a kidney tend to be a bit squeamish and uncomfortable with living donors who are strangers).
Sonya Larson did pretend to be friends with Dawn Dorland, for years. According to the chats and Dorland (there is no reason not to believe this, Dorland is not accused of lying) they had each other over at their homes several times.
Also, Dorland had a new group of friends in LA and eventually completely cut contact with the writing group. She offered to introduce someone from that writing group to her friends when he originally moved to LA and he was planning on using her to make connections and then dropping her.
You can be vocal (a private group hardly counts) without confronting people for not giving you enough praise. I’ve needed donations like this, and am really disgusted at how Dawn took the medical nightmare of others to demand long-term personal glory from people she knew. Yes, people who need donations may not care too much in the moment when they get to live, but that doesn’t excuse Dawn taking the medical tragedies and nightmares of others and confronting people for not praising her enough, then even trying to make a writing conference about herself. Chances are the people she knew there were sick of it after she confronted them not praising her enough. Dawn and Sonya are both assholes.
I haven’t read any of Sonya’s work, but this whole debacle makes her sound like a wholly uncreative person. She took so much “inspiration” from Dawn’s story because she had nothing to add, nothing to say save for her commentary on the white savior complex. Anyone can look at a real life event and say “that would make a great story!” but if you have nothing to add yourself, why do you need to tell it? Her saying she couldn’t come up with something better than Dawn’s own letter is the icing on the cake for me lol
Is sounds like Sonya didn’t take as much as it seems at first. The letter, which was changed for the finished piece, the name, also changed, and that it was a kidney. The circumstances, the families, and the lessons were all on her. I don’t think there’d even me a lawsuit at all if Sonya hadn’t used the letter verbatim in an earlier draft. It’s a placeholder, and I think Dawn will lose. They’s both behaved poorly in several ways though.
If I remember right, dawn did talk about how she associated healing from her trauma with the kidney donation. In that light I feel like it's almost even more tragic what Sonya and the others in the group chat did with the gas lighting.
Definitely yeah, the further this story went the more sick I started to feel (and as messy and dramatic as the situation is, and as grating Dawn's behaviour must've been, to hear Alexa laugh about it so excitedly made me reconsider long and hard about the picture I've built about her in my head)
This is morally so messy. I'm not gonna go into "friendship" and shade, because some comments have already laid those out beautifully.
What I want to say is that this has been an active discussion in art circles for years and the partially accepted response is as follows:
"If you are a good enough artist, no one will know the origin except those involved."
As artists we have to execute the job that we are paid for. The fact that Larson couldn't fictionalize this story even after the edits means that she's not good at her job 🤷🏾♀️
But honestly there is no one real answer and even now the discussion continues in every facet of art.
Also, Larson sounds like a character inspired by a terrible girl I had to deal with in college. I don't take kindly to people who talk crap behind other people's backs anymore. That is a horrible thing to do to anyone.
Idk, based on your cliffnotes in this video, it sounds like both of these people are terrible. But as much as Dawn might be an annoying/self-centered person, Sonya was the one who plagiarized her letter and circumstance and then tried to act like “why would you want to read yourself into this story? I only named the character Dawn, had her donate a kidney, and took your letter almost verbatim.”
It’s hard for me to have any sympathy for Sonya when she just as easily could have distanced herself from this person that she clearly didn’t like, and not have made the transpositions of her story so obvious. As reddit always says: play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Both of these people won stupid prizes, and they both come out of this looking terrible.
Hmmm, you know, I wonder if Dawn's being an annoying, glory seeking "white saviour" _was_ seen as a plus in this case. Like you and Sonya pointed out, why would you _want_ to identify with this horrible, narcissist character? You could add in all the ugly, unflattering details and the subject could theoretically never call you out on it because it's basically admitting that they're actually an awful person. Sounds like a form of insurance.
Too bad Sonya overestimated how much Dawn would want to protect her "good image".
This! I also like how Sonya goes on to suggest that Dawn should write about donating the kidney like that wasn't what they were all making fun of her for.
Definitely an ESH situation.
That being said, for me Sonya is the one that crossed a legal line here by using verbatim portions of Dawn's letter without credit.
One thing I'm curious about is how does an earlier copyright infringing version of the short story impact its legality after the revision. I'm guessing that since its clout is at least partially based on prior success it's at the very least a grey area, and likely an outright violation.
@@deroshkin Yeah, the early versions having an audio form (not just floating around, but effort was actually taken to make an audio reading!) is what really gets me. If she had not published anything publicly until after she transformed it, well it would still be a bit shitty, especially the way she was being two faced about it, but honestly I'd call it fair enough. And why call her Dawn in early drafts instead of just grabbing any other placeholder name? And admitting that she wasn't able to change it to her standards of not plagiarized in her group chats? Just put in the work to transform it *before* making it public. At most, get some feedback from your group chat peeps or another private writer group (though group chat is prob easier since they already have the context) to help you get it up to where you feel it's been changed enough.
Dawn would have had to pass a psych evaluation to donate a kidney. Maybe afterwards she got addicted to the ackalades and it went too her head. Big deal. She didn't hurt anyone, in fact she saved lives. One of her friends should tell her to take it down a few notches. Sonya is malicious, unethical, and dishonest and she's the one who sparked the legal action and exposed the her group's private communications. Like others have said, Dawn may be a little cringe, but Sonya is unethical and cruel.
The evals more or less ensure someone isn’t being forced and that they understand the full physical ramifications.
Literally nobody came out of that piece looking not terrible. Unfortunately, I've found there's now less and less comradery in artist circles.It's unfortunate and not really that surprising.
really I want a BBC miniseries adaption of this piece...
@@learnerlove6853 oh you know netflix is gonna get ahold of this
@@AmandaDuncil whoever it is i hope its CAMP
I’ve been in the writing world for many years. There is less camaraderie, but also far fewer people who actually want the criticism they ask for and who want praise when seeking advice.
People saying things to each other in writing is usually discoverable. Saying, "But it's a private group chat!" and thinking that gives a legal protection is childish. It's the LAW - not high school.
I cannot imagine what it must be like for someone dying as they wait on a donation list having to read about GROWN PROFESSIONAL ADULTS making fun of someone for donating a kidney. Sonya Larson and her author friends trying to make this go away should be ashamed of themselves.
That is a good point, actually. I'm sure the guy who got her kidney couldn't give a shit how much she brags about it!
@@LauraGomez-bl2so I was actually imagining the specific person who got the kidney, and the letter, and finding all this and connecting the dots... I'm not sure how I would react, but these people sound exhausting even from a place completely disconnected to them.
@@LauraGomez-bl2so in the court docs Larson talks shit in the group chat about dawn posting about being a laker for a day and getting to be on the Jumbotron at ar game. One of them even says it’s “trump-like” behavior. Someone else on Twitter found a video from a guy who SPECIFICALLY CITED HER LAKER FOR A DAY APPEARANCE as the thing that made him to decide to go through with kidney donation. Larson and her friends are just such massively shitty people
@@viliphied Y'know what? If this story actually inspires people to donate organs then I'm 100% Team Dawn. If someone like her had donated a piece of their liver back when I was a teenager, my uncle might still be alive today. Instead, by the time they found him a liver to replace the one that working with toxic chemicals and in sufficient protective gear for 20 yrs had filled with cancer, he was too sick to survive the transplant. He died a week before his 51st birthday. So no, I don't give a damn about organ donors' motivations, I just care that they donate.
(Yes, I'm registered as an organ donor! No, I'm not a candidate for live donation, due to various chronic health conditions, which would make the procedure too dangerous. )
As someone who has lived with major medical issues most of my life, including organ loss, it grates on me to see someone do something that is helpful turn around and try to make someone else’s medical need into a story glorifying herself. It took someone else being in a frightening position of near death for her to have a story at all.
there are some people in this world who will do good, even for a selfish reason. but there are people who will do nothing and still judge others if they don't do good deeds in the right way. what sonya did was shitty. and the excuse she gave to defend herself was even shittier. she used her theme of her story as a moral point to defend herself, when the discussions wasn't about the moral ground of her story but the legal ground of the situation.
whatever you say, she did not do right by looking down on a person's kidney donation. even though dawn was not perfect but i don't know what this kidney donation means to her and maybe the emotions attached to her kidney donation made her feel the need of validation. it is not always about attention, i don't know what is going on behind the scene in her life and mind.
the chats going public is horrible, but to me as someone not a part of the drama, the thing that is most horrible is that from the chats we get to know what mentality sonya had that led her to this story. she literally had the vibe that dawn is not the right type of good person, and by laughing at her, she and the others give me the feeling that 'i am a better person, cause i'm not like her, i condemn this attitude'.
and that makes me think of another moral question, can a story born from this shitty mentality sever a theme of redemption of a white savior. can it really serve that morality that she is so serious about?
I think it speaks to larger problems at Grub Street Writing:
Christopher Castellani, who is an artistic director at Grub Street, actually said "My mission in life is going to be to exact revenge on this pestilence of a person [re: Dawn Dorland]"
Dawn invited a small number of people into a private group chat and said they could decline. Sonya stayed in the group even when questioned by Dawn if she wanted to leave, all so she could mock Dorland behind her back with author Celeste Ng.
Alison Murphy - who is white - and Larson who is white/chinese - both Grub Street employees during their time with Dorland - colluded to use race to try and" cancel" Dorland.
Roxane Gay gets an award from Grub Street then claims Dorland didn't actually donate her kidney...even though there's a video of a man who outright says Dorland inspired him to give a kidney to save someone's life.
Admitting that you straight up plagiarized someone's words doesn't make you "a good artist but a shitty person." It makes you a shitty artist, too. How can you feel like a good artist for just taking someone else's words? That makes zero sense to me.
I totally disagree that this is an "everyone sucks here" situation. Dawn literally didn't do anything wrong, except being a little extra about her kidney donation, which people thought was weird. She didn't do anything. She was just a person living her life, and it sounds like this other person was being fake and friendly to her face, while secretly talking crap about her behind her back and writing a story about her, intentionally making her the villain character, and implying some pretty horrible things about her as well, in regards to racism, which are completely unfounded.
I'm honestly shocked anyone could read this story and think Dawn is, in any way, to blame here. I feel terrible for her. This sounds like a nightmare, and I can't imagine going through this and, on top of everything, having people act like you were somehow equally to blame in all of it.
Imagine being the person who got Dawn’s kidney and finding out this backstory lmao I’m dying
So many great comments here. I think Dawn was looking for acceptance, particularly from fellow writers. She desperately needed validation, approval, to feel included. (Don’t we all?) She was willing to try anything. Yes, donating a kidney is a long way to go for this.
Sonya was the ultimate mean girl on the playground. She delighted in preying upon Dawn’s vulnerability. Commenting in salty private group chats is one thing, but the publishing of “The Kindest” was beyond cruel and catty. It especially sickens me that she tried to pull the race card on this. Just ugly. Glad she was exposed for who she really is.
I hope Dawn gets off social media and finds healing and a group of real friends who will truly value her as a person and a writer.
I'm surprised so many people are ignoring Dawn's socioeconomic background. Middle of nowhere Iowa, living in poverty, abuse. Most people born into that _never_ get out.
And she managed to climb out of that and go to college and (presumably) pull herself out of poverty.
As someone with a similar background, social mobility is a blessing and a curse. There's more money, but those experiences stay with you. And you may be farther behind your peers because you didn't have the resources at a critical time in your life. There's a palatable sense of alienation from those who never had to do without. I can see where she would have a desperate need for acceptance from a group of intellectuals in a field she wanted to be apart of.
God, it puts you off writing communities! Thank god for Alexa!
EDIT: But this isn't just about writing. It's also about humans. Larson, and her friends, are not people I'd want to be friends with.
And as someone from several marginalised identities, including colour, I certainly don't appreciate Larson's appropriation of PoC and using that to marginalise Dorland.
Read the article, had a full rant. Hot take: this isn't about writing, it's about friendship and bullying.
Don't forget the plagiarizing, though.
@@joethehobo89 not at all, but if Dawn hadn't found out that everyone was making fun of her behind her back, and had been asked for permission, her response would have been different in my opinion.
Yeah I think so. dawn is more like, I am so damn hurt becuz I think you are my friend, I share with you and you make fun of me, of my noble donation. it's like betrayal
When you look closer at Sonya's behavior, she's so hell bent on condemning another woman's shadow that she fails to see that she's exhibiting the very behaviors she's condemning in Dawn. That's how psychological projection and shadows work, the negative aspects of ourselves that we fail to own we will loathe in others. Dawn's behavior is obviously appalling but I don't think she was harming anyone besides herself by seeking validation in a very cringy way. Sonya's behavior however is more insidious. The very behaviors she's displaying are passive aggression, character assassination, exploiting someone's story of childhood trauma for personal gain which are all signs of narcissistic behavior. She's identified Dawn's thirst for attention and validation, yet her own blindspot prevents her from seeing the lengths she's gone to for attention and validation. It feels like she's gotten some twisted sense of pleasure in the humiliation of another human being. I have a feeling this is a pattern for Sonya because she's very skilled at this. She has enlisted an entire group chat to be on her side. What is one woman's private Facebook group is another woman's group chat.
This feels like a historical tale of no good deed goes unpunished. Why must giving be altruistic? There are 100,000 people on the kidney transplant list waiting for their turn to receive an organ. They do not care if their receiptient is doing it for the right reason. The way Dawn donated, by initiating a kidney donor chain enables not one, but multiple people to receive kidney transplants. The longest running kidney transplant chain is 100 people long. These are people that would otherwise still most likely be waiting for a kidney or die waiting like many often do. We need to celebrate our living donors.
Dawn is both a flawed human being, with a need for validation and a hero who has literally saved lives. You can be both good and bad at the same time. I hope both of these woman seek psychotherapy and explore what drove them to seek validation in the way they did. It's normal to want validation but there are healthier ways of seeking it especially when it's at the expense of yourself or another human being.
I think Sonya is a Dark Empath, which is a form of narcissism other people find extremely hard to detect because they are genuinely, if superficially, empathetic and appear very warm and kind. But they're actually quite calculating and two-faced in the service of their own needs. Her friends will likely never understand or admit how they've been manipulated to defend her.
@@alaskau9175 I just looked this up and oooof yeah
@videotapeses I'm learning about the ripple effects from your note. Thanks!
I have to say, I absolutely HATE that Dorland's _completely normal_ excitement about and pride about her probably scary, certainly beneficial act is being given shade by people. *Get real* and tell me you wouldn't talk about such a thing with your friends and acquaintances. Is it a little needy to ask a friend why they had nothing to say about a huge event in your life? Maybe, a little bit. Is it also understandable to seek out why a massive group snub seems to be happening to you? Uh, yeah.
Being proud about something big you've done isn't white privilege, for God's sake. Nothing about any of this is relevant to race, and Larson shouldn't have tried to make it so.
Larson was an ass, and if I were in Dorland's place I'd probably take Larson's actions as a thrown gauntlet, too.
It falls into a grey area since the verbatim letter ultimately served as a placeholder and was replaced before publication. Doesn’t mean Sonya isn’t a bitch though.
And the neediness on Dawn’s part is that she didn’t feel she was getting enough praise from people whose own lives were probably busy too, to the point that she started confronting people about why they weren’t praising her enough. As the person who has lived with major medical issues including losing my own organs, I find it VERY offensive that she’s trying to make someone else’s medical nightmare into something where she should be constantly praised. She does have a savior complex and is acting like she is outright owed something. To use an example more people might understand, if you were to make 25 meals to give to homeless people, how much of that is altruism if you decide to post online with the expectation of praise ad adoration, especially if you start confronting people for not giving you enough, and how much is appropriating someone else’s nightmare situation for personal glory? And for those meal recipients-while they may ne glad for the food, how do you think it would make them emotionally feel knowing they were merely the means to an end of personal glory?
Too much fence-sitting. I find Sonya's behavior to be morally and creatively bankrupt, not to mention legally stupid.
The NYT piece is so perfectly woven in the style of a "literary" piece to pair with the literary writers that it itself feels like fiction. Honestly such impressive writing and story telling.
Larson should have changed it from a kidney donation to some other "altruistic" act.
So, Alexa, when can we expect a writer's circle thriller from ya? 😅😆🤣
"When can we expect a writer's circle thriller?"
Ooooohhh, don't joke about that! I'm serious. Between this, and real life fandom/fan fiction circle drama I've read about, you could make a helluva story with this premise.
@@stephaniewozny3852 I really was only jesting like 50%... it couldn't be YA though
@@rachdanaelee , same (50% joking). Like I said, this whole thing is riveting, so a novel with this premise could be even moreso!
Probably not YA.....or could it? It would depend on the circumstances of the plagiarism/stealing in the plot...
I know. She should've changed it to something like adopting a baby or volunteering at a battered woman's shelter. And WHY did none of her writer MFA group chat friends tell her to change it?!? So what if the letter is "too perfect." You're a writer change it to something more "perfect." That's what fiction writing is. But didn't anyone think to tell her this was a mad idea. Did no one like Sonia either?? Do they all just hate each other??
@@DisWriter , do they all hate each other? Maybe not hate, but they all may be just as ruthless and calculating. I'm getting back-stabby vibes from those group chat conversations.
It's one thing to draw traits from somebody you know--and dislike--and put them into a character. But to Sonya, her antagonist is literally Dawn. And for somebody who casually uses the word 'tremendous', she could have been smart enough to do the bare minimum and erase the fine details. But it wasn't about being smart; Sonya is clearly just as self-centered as Dawn. She sees herself as untouchable--why sue first? Why not scrap the work and apologise? She knew what she did. "I've tried to change it but I can't seem to - that letter was just too damn good," said the highschool bully with a superiority complex, who wanted everybody to think of Dawn just as she did, because she was right, of course.
If Dawn wasn't so completely unlikable, nobody would have even considered her to be the Bad Art Friend. Dawn is a crap person, but initially she didn't do anything *to* Sonya. Sonya, however, based an immoral character on Dawn, let everybody know she did it, did nothing to hide it (until she felt her newfound success might be compromised), then attempted to deter Dawn by accusing her of identifying with the immoral character who was made (and named!) in her image... Talk about gaslighting! And yes, I know, if Dawn wasn't so persistent or grossly entitled it would be a lot easier to give her the empathy anybody in that position would deserve, but it doesn't mean she doesn't deserve it.
Sonya could have left the facebook group, pressed block. Cared a smidgen about Dawn as a human being, even if she isn't a great one.
Absolutely agreed. As an outsider who knows absolutely nothing about either of these women, I'm listening to this video and I'm honestly extremely confused as to how anyone is saying Dawn was in the wrong... that's so ridiculous.
I mean yeah, being so extra about the kidney thing was weird, but that's irrelevant really. What Sonya did was extremely messed up, and regardless of how weird or annoying you think someone is, that doesn't justify anything she did. And then she had the audacity to pull the race card and act like Dawn is trying to take away the success of a writer of color. Girl, please. 🙄 that's so low and so absurd. Being a writer of color doesn't make you magically immune to any kind of criticism or legality.
@@CassTeaElle At first when Alexa mentioned the people teasing Dawn on twitter, I thought Dawn might have deserved it. By the end of the video I realised that some authors or bookish people, like many academics, will always side with the 'smarter' party, as they see it as a reflection of their 'smart' selves.
I thought it was ironic how thousands of tweeters were demonizing Dawn over sharing the news of her kidney donation. Like, yes. That's annoying and all, but how is it difference from all the other morally righteous performances people throw on Twitter? Like, people announce their donations to various groups and organizations ALL THE TIME. They shout about all the good deeds they've done, and get public pats on the back for it. While I do think it is, in a way, attention-seeking, I think it's something we ALL do to some degree. We all want to feel good about doing something good.
@Marc Wyatt Not to mention, she'll be on meds for the rest of her life and there's always a risk of overworking the remaining kidney. It's not an easy decision to make. Even if Dawn bragged about it, how does that make her a privileged narcissist?
I'm not surprised that group chats are being used in a court case. I feel like when you say things through written communication on the internet or by text, you do so with the understanding that someone other than the intended recipient could see those things, especially if there's a court case.
Digital footprints also apply in the case of the different drafts of the story. Did Sonya think no one would find the old published draft of the story just because there was a new one? Dawn annoyed people, and that isn't a crime. Sonya plagiarized someone, and that is a crime. Sonya's definitely in the wrong.
I'm an artist, but I'm also a Christian, so:
Dorland: save a life (or many lives).
Larson: said many bad words about her friend and wrote a story using a friend's name and her letter.
Ethically, Larson sucks.
Artistically - if you're CREATIVE, be f'ing creative and don't take a story word for word - change a name (even thinking about a story for a first time), a good gesture (not a kidney donation, there are many selfless acts), words in the letter, character's backstory, ethnicity ect.
If you steal, steal from many sources - take name from a friend, backstory from 3 other people, selfless act do yourself (if you're so f'ing smart to psychoanalyze that character later, give your kidney and see it for yourself what it's like).
For me it's obvious that Larson is a bad writer friend. Everything Dorland did before was just being a human. My beloved grandma needs a huge praise after she cooks something for me and guess what - she deserves it, even when she asks for it. She doesn't need an amateur psychoanalyzing. Everything Larson did was cold, intentional and calculated. Dorland's reaction to seeing Larson story was also human.
TL;DR If you're creative, be creative and invent a story, not take someone's else's word for word.
"But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: that thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly." Matthew 6:3. THAT is what is cringey about Dorland. She didn't ask support from a few friends/family, she apparently set up an FB group and added all of her friends to let them know how good she is for donating a kidney, rather than posting it to a place people could choose to access it or doing it with close support. And as someone who was forcefully added to many MLM FB groups back in the day, not having a choice in what's in your feed is super annoying and selfish on the person making you join. I do agree that Larson is in the wrong, but Dorland is not an angel, she clearly just wants people to think she is. And my love language is words of affirmation, so I get that, but needing hundreds of people to pat you on the back for a good deed isn't a healthy way of getting that love language need met.
So after learning about how kidney donations work, (and things like the transplant chain) and how important and life-saving, and greatly needed they are, I now consider bragging about it a fucking moral obligation to at least get other people to try donating their kidneys. In fact when you donate a kidney you are encouraged to share the story. It's also worth considering that the person who Dawn wrote the letter to was at the end of the transplant chain. NOBODY RESERVED THEIR KIDNEYS FOR THEM. The white saviour complex argument feels like a very hollow excuse. Larson is CLEARLY in the wrong here. Kolker is ALSO in the wrong for the abhorrently immoral framing and downplaying of the act.
Also keep in mind that the NYT article fudged with the timeline a bit. It's actually quite clear that the private chat was talking shit about her donation transplant posts from the outset. That fact pretty much settles it with me that her use of Dawn's kidney transplant has a malicious undertone to it.
At first I thought Dawn was being obnoxious for posting publicly about her transplant and letter (and in some respects she still was, reaching out to others due to their lack of response to her post), but ultimately I am now considering becoming a living donor.
The lawsuit side is a different matter entirely. Sadly it seems like there are grave repercussions, and even though what Larson did was wrong she does not deserve any financial hardship for it, and I would not be surprised if she got a lot of harassment for it too. In that respect Dawn has taken this way too far.
You've still missed basic information-Sonya Larson sued first. The discovery becoming public is because she sued Dawn Dorland for defamation.
I'm sorry, but you can't go on harassment campaigns for six years (at least) then expect no financial or social repercussions. Her bed is of her own making, don't cry for her she has to lay in it.
@@biguattipoptropica I was aware of this but for brevity chose to omit it. I guess I was made uncomfortable by the extent, not necessarily the decision to sue itself because as you said Larson sued first. Also when I wrote this I was actually less aware of what Larson was doing originally than I am now lol so don't worry I have precisely ZERO sympathy for her
Only legally protected communications are truly private (doctor/client, attorney/client, etc.). The courts don't care about your opinion as to what constitutes a private communication. Even verbal communications between two people which have not been recorded in any medium are not private. If they were, lawsuits involving "verbal" contracts could not move forward. Except for legally protected communications, ALL communications can be subpoenaed and made public. I can't believe that a person as intelligent and sophisticated as you can't seem to wrap your head around basic legal principles in the United States.
I feel like I remember you mentioning in a "what not to do..." video that you should never name characters after friends, family, classmates, coworkers, and so on. This is a clear example why. Inspiration is one thing, but drafting the character _as_ Dawn is...interesting? Is that safe to say?
Yeah I think if you have a good relationship with someone you can pay homage--but like ASK them or at least WARN THEM. I've accidentally used friend's names for characters who get murdered and it's a joke between us that I love them and it's not a message haha.
For NaNo, I'm making a second attempt at a story I tried and failed to write several years ago. In the intervening time I've become friends with a woman with the same name as the protagonist. So my protagonist is Janine now.
For me, the thing about the short story is that it is basically talking negatively behind someone's back, but then to their face, and presenting it to the whole world. It's that mean-spiritedness that doesn't care about the actual person they were gaining inspiration from and what the consequences of sharing the story would be.
It's one thing to write a story about someone you love and changing their name--if you communicate with the person and ask for permission to do such a thing, the story may end up being a testament to the friendship. It's another thing to write a story about someone you look down on. You're essentially still talking about that person even if you changed their name in the story. And I don't think that sort of thing should be done, unless the story is changed significantly to the point it does not reflect reality and would not be recognizable to readers, so that it is no longer about that specific person who may have inspired it.
This doesn’t seem that messy. Dawn was the super annoying, attention needing friend and instead of just maybe not saying anything Sonya writes an entire short story to slander the woman. I get she may have been inspired or whatever, but just by her personality and her actions here, to me if she really just felt inspired and wanted to write a short story with those themes she could have worked harder to change aspects of the story that were glaringly obviously about Dawn. She did all of this intentionally, and her malicious behavior was just proven through the way she talked about Dawn behind her back. Though I think having private chats and emails subpoenaed is a little excessive when it comes to literary issues like this, (because this isn’t a capital murder trial and nobody’s life is in danger here) it’s kind of a breach of privacy but honestly Sonya deserved to be hung out to dry like that. If she just couldn’t help but write this exact story, then she should have waited and published it later when it wasn’t so fresh and easily seen.
Dawn following Sonya around is just the results of her own anger and embarrassment. Her annoying traits and probably the part of herself she’s most insecure about was publicly displayed for the world to see and ripped apart by someone she thought of as a friend. She’s hurt and angry and humiliated I’m sure and acting out.
Dawn was annoying but Sonya was the malicious bad art friend here.
Genuinely yeah - who would NOT lash out for hurt, confusion, betrayal and humiliation by what Sonya did! It was honestly a little shocking to listen to this video because I can't see Sonya's position as anything but horrifyingly cruel and opportunistic.
100% agree with you!
Agree. As a TL;DR you could just say: Sonya f*cked around and found out
Dawn believed they were art friends, so did Sonya until she decided to exploit her friend. Then to feel better, she distanced herself and told herself they were never friends. She reveals it when she admits she feels like a horrible person but a great artist. She wouldn't feel so bad about what she's doing if she never felt like or acted like a friend to Dawn. She's "tremendously" two-faced.
Dawn is an easy person to mock because she's unselfaware and cringy, but Sonya is way worse because she is fully aware of what she's doing. There's a very cliquey "mean girl" vibe in the group chats and among the people who presented themselves as friends to Dawn.
Dawn is self absorbed to an irritating degree, but when you know she comes from an abusive background, Sonya Larceny's appropriation and mockery of her personal story is pretty damning.
I feel that everyone deriding Dawn now on social media is not so much on the side of artistic license, but, rather, belongs wholeheartedly to the mean girl clique.
"I hope it doesn't feel too weird for your gift to have inspired works of art." What always feels weird to me is people referring to their own efforts as "works of art". Especially in this case since it seems that Larson was not yet published at the time.
Dorland does seem needy, though donating a kidney really is huge, so I understand her wanting to talk about it. But Larson is beyond the pale -- nasty and mean -- and a plagiarizing thief. Dorland now has material to write a story about someone stealing her life for their own gain.
Most of the time when I see people refer to their own stuff as “works of art,” it’s because the quality is low enough that no one else will be the ones to call it art.
I think it’s one thing to take inspiration from real people (we all do as writers), but it’s an entirely different thing to take someone else’s important life event/choice and to 1) write about it without making substantive changes and/or permission and 2) to make that person your story’s villain. Dawn might have been over the top, but Sonya crossed an ethical line.
A reminder that "private" is never truly "private" online.
I am fascinated by this story. It feels a bit like Gone Girl to me, but without the gore. Human nature can be so deliciously unsightly, and our particular unsightliness can react with someone else's like bleach with ammonia. And I mean both Dorland (whose obsessive nature and a gaping wound in place of identity turned her into a bona fide stalker) and Larson, who seems to think that she's "the cool one" in this but comes off as cowardly and cruel. Also, the article itself is a work of literary art. "Characters with large blind spots" indeed.
A great example of a "bad art friend" would be Truman Capote. He led Perry Smith to believe that he was trying to help him build a case for his defense at his murderer trial. It was a ploy to build trust so he could learn and exploit the details of the crime for his book In Cold Blood.
It was sad and pretty exploitative, but Capote at least credited his source. What Larson's doing here would be the equivalent of Capote mining Perry and then writing a *fiction* book claiming Perry was a character he came up with from scratch...
I take that back: there's no comparison between the writing of Capote and those of either Larson (I read the story for free in the court files. Spoiler alert: the New Yorker's review was spot on) or Dorland or even Ng; maybe Kolker could come close.
@@SweetJeopardy My point wasn't that Capote and Larson are exact parallels, just that Capote was a "bad art friend." Perry was far from the only victim. As I recall, a substantial portion of the New York literary scene, along with many others, were furious with Capote for allegedly violating their confidances. I believe many complaints were related to their portrayal, thinly veiled or otherwise, in Capote's last book, Music For Chameleons.
@@robertabrahamsen9076 Close, it was "Answered Prayers", and yes it was a roman à clef (specifically the short story "La côte Basque") which has more parallels with, say, "The devil wears Prada". He didn't plagiarize or lift anybody's writings, but he did spill some boiling tea which was very personal and embarrassing to the parties being described. The difference with "In cold blood" is that instead of being widely acclaimed for this, he was forever shunned and vilified in social circles, which contributed to the self-destructive cirmcustances leading to his death shortly after; the quality of the stories in "Answered Prayers" was also not up to his standards.
Wow! It's been a week since this was uploaded and who knew there was yet another twist to the story with the case files and Dorland's clarification regarding her interactions on FB! You should really consider doing an epilogue. This story's proven to be deeper than anybody expected!
Like you can get inspired by real-life but the short story brings to mind (to me) fanfiction and you can't sell fanfiction in its purest form without changing all the ties to its origins
I feel that the story wasn't changed enough to the point where everyone and their grandma could connect the dots even before all this really blew up & I see the author of it could be covered by this quote
"Steal a jewel, not the entire crown"
and well, she stole the entire crown
I think the fanfiction comparison is a really good one. Yes, fanfic is technically transformative. And sometimes it's damn good art that wouldn't have come about if the author wasn't pulling inspiration from the original work! But you still can't profit off of it until you change enough details that it can't be tied so directly to the original author's work.
I admittedly have no read the article, and I am certainly not an expert in plagiarism or the legal processes involved here.... But on a moral level it seems like plagiarism to me? Or at least crosses the line and goes well beyond heavy inspiration. She basically admitted in the group chat, "I want to come up with something better but the original letter was so good I can't, so I'm putting verbatim quotes in my story." I feel like it should be the responsibility of the writer to change enough aspects of the story so that a different letter would make sense and be impactful to the reader.
This was my take as well. It seems like she copied the letter and then changed just enough words for it not to pop up in the same google search. I think Larson's earlier quote of "She shouldn't want to be associated with my story's portrayal..." gives a lot away. It sounds like Larson knew she was potentially crossing the plagiarism boundary, but expected Dorland to keep quiet because the story was so unflattering. It's actually kind of funny - the Chunky Monkeys gossiped about what an oblivious narcissist she is, but then are surprised when she continues to act like an oblivious narcissist.
Isn’t the previous published version, the audio version, that is literally plagiarized the linchpin? Even if it was change later on, it was the initial version that has helped her get into the places that she is now. She’s been affected financially in someway from a previously plagiarized version. To me that’s the legal argument. But then again, I decided to go study religion instead of go to law school so what do I know.
@@BrekkeEl Yeah, I went and re-listened to the video and you're right. The verbatim copying wasn't just in a draft version that got rearranged before any publication - there was orignally an audiobook that contained the blatant plagiarism. Larson changed the story sometime between the audio recording and submitting to the festival.
I understand your feelings about private conversations being subpoenaed and made public, but when you called them ‘sacred’ I had to roll my eyes a bit. When you put something into writing (texts, chats, emails, letters, whatever) you lose control over it. That could mean someone sharing it without your consent or a court using it as evidence against you. It’s scary and it’s not fair but it is what it is.
Yeah, like the letter to the recipient wasn't sacred enough to become fodder for group chat slander and audiobook plagiarism and slander, but the group chats confirning the intent are sacred
As a writer, the people you take reference from should never notice that they are the original for your fiction characters(neither should the other readers).
It's the same thing when it comes to taking inspirations from real life culture to build up your own fantasy world. The best way to do that is to make it your own and mostly unrecognizable unless you bring it up yourself.
The only difference is, you COULD write a fantasy world with blatant references in non-offensive way, but you could NEVER do that with your reference persons.
Never.
Just think about it and be smart. We still need to live in the society at the end of the day. Being nice to other people in many situations=saving your own ass.
It seems like Larson wants everyone to know she is making fun of Dawn's attention-seeking issue. That's why at the first place she uses the original name and letter. Maybe she thought she never felt sorry of hurting Dawn because she believes she just said what everyone wants to.
@@steviebinks6445 I agree. I think the verbatim letter was a reference meant to be seen by Dawn, like a malicious "Easter egg" for Dawn and for Larson's in-crowd. She regarded Dawn as someone so lowly that she thought she'd get away with it too! Sonya trolled too close to the sun and got burnt. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes...
I've only got one word for this story: YIKES.
Okay, maybe I've got a few more words. Here in the EU, or at least my country, you're not allowed to donate your kidney to a stranger. You need to prove that you have strong ties to the person you want to donate to. I think the main intent is to prevent illegal organ trade since it's hard to monitor whether money is being exchanged for those kidneys but this case goes to show that there are ethical problems when it comes to donating a part of your body to a stranger too. If one thing's clear in this story, it's that it wasn't healthy altruism that made Dawn donate her kidney.
On Sonya's part, I found it in especially bad taste to accuse Dawn of racism when she claimed the letter (and story) as her own. We have so much genuine racism in this world but this was clearly not a case of that. She played the POC card against rightful claims and thereby undermined the TRUE discrimitations POC face.
I don’t see how it is clear that Dawn donated her kidney with bad motivations in mind just because you make a fb group to keep people updated with the recovery.
@@YraxZovaldo That's not what I meant. I don't think her motives were *bad*. But the extremely strong need for validation (of which she apparently couldn't get enough of) proves that it wasn't a healthy, altruistic decision.
I think it's even more upsetting that a well known author like Celeste Ng also pulled the race card in defense of Sonya. Eugh. I'm glad I gave up reading Little Fires Everywhere halfway... petty of me to say that but I won't be reading any of her work if she's the same kind of person as Sonya.
My take: disguise enough details so that the person who inspires you is not humiliated. That was Larson's error. Truman Capote became a pariah in high society when the subjects of his "inspiration" recognised themselves. And he never recovered from it.
One lady donated a kidney. The other commited plagiarism...
Uhh… yet first draft shouldn’t have been an exact copy, but this isn’t plagiarism. It’s parody. Is the Onion or Saturday Night Live plagiarizing when it takes a quote from a politician and creates its own wacky alternate world around it? The text is used in a completely different way. It’s not like the Sonia also donated a kidney and copy-pasted Dawn’s letter. And it’s not like Dawn published and copyrighted her kidney donation letter.
@@ghostdreamer7272 I'm not sure about the legal scenario but I on the ethical level I disagree it counts as parody when it's actually supposed to be a work of fiction. This isn't The Onion or Saturday Night Live doing a parody via a quote from a politician. This is someone trying to pass off a real life person's real life letter as a letter written by their fictional character. I think it'd be pretty inappropriate if say, a crime drama TV show had a plot about a very uncharitably portrayed organ donor and lifted quotes verbatim from a real life organ donor without their permission and based the plot around an uncharitable take upon them.
@@ghostdreamer7272 Disagree. Her lawyers are not arguing that it's a parody. If it was that, she'd say that. Instead, the claim is that the story has nothing to do with Dawn. Why lie if the law is on your side?
@@Graid Agreed. The parody acknowledges the reference. They don't hide it. The fact that they aren't claiming it's a parody makes that argument entirely moot.
Given all the new info that has rolled out on this, maybe consider a response since this is getting a lot of views. My feelings have evolved seeing more the court docs, background etc. NYT was definitely trying to invoke a particular response.
I would love to read more on this situation. Do you have recommendations for sources? Google search results haven’t been particularly helpful.
Just when I thought I should start looking for writing friends again, I watch this. 🤣
Love the blouse and honestly so glad you're covering because I kept seeing people talk about kidneys on twitter and thought I was going mad lol
You can be artfully, insightfully, even relevantly cruel, even doing in service of a worthy cause. Doesn't change the fact that it is an exercise in cruelty, abd if you target it all on one real, actual person who is going to know, and see, and have to process and cope with it one way or another...
Ok having now read the article, isn't it abundantly obvious that Sonya is the terrible one here? What did Dawn do but follow her intuition that Sonya was a HAAAAAAAAATER and try to shut her down?
It's a sad state when a group of grown ass people bully a woman (who mistakenly considers them friends) for donating an organ to a stranger in need. Sonya likening this to being a white saviour and Dawn's standing up for herself as being white privilege is clearly racist. Unless she shows remorse, I for one hope her career takes a hit.
Apparently kidney donors are encouraged to talk about their donations. Presumably because kidneys are desperately needed by desperately sick people. I saw Savy's stream on this issue and there's just a whole lot of information that the article hasn't covered and it really just makes Sonya look increasingly bad. Dawn's main issue is that she really shouldn't have threatened to sue the One City One Story people but that may well have been influenced by a lawyer giving her advice. Her main reaction was just to tell folks that she had a letter plagiarized. Gotta say Donne, you're coming down very hard on a woman who really doesn't seem to have actually bragged that much about a pretty serious thing she did. And like, I get that it's obnoxious, but that doesn't merit the weird vitriol Sonya was dishing out. And yes, kidney donors are encouraged to talk A LOT about their donations, because there are hundreds of thousands every year who die because their kidneys are failing. In light of that, I can't really get mad at the woman who was likely doing as she was encouraged to do because it was bringing attention, however small, to a serious medical issue.
And part of what was revealed in the dms and such was that they apparently work as part of the same organization and that one of Sonya's friends who worked with them in human relations or whatever AND IS SUPPOSED TO BE IMPARTIAL apparently just straight told Sonya she was on her side when Dawn mentioned that the she and Sonya were having issues. (Unrelated to the plagiarism, because this happened before that reveal I think.) This is a deliberate and malicious conflict of interest from someone who's supposed to be impartial. Like, there was some weird interpersonal shit going on here that I don't think we know the full of extent and probably won't ever know. It's important to note that it wasn't just Sonya here, it seemed like there was a group just out to hate Dawn for some reason.
This isn't even getting into the fact that it's morally shitty take a private correspondence and then just put it in your book. This letter was shared in a private group and shown to people Dawn thought she could trust. This wasn't just taking someone's work, this was taking something private and shoving it out into the world for mockery. Saying this is an everyone sucks here situation really downplays the weird maliciousness Sonya seemed to display. I get not liking a person, but this was extremely petty.
Donating a kidney is really hard. It takes a toll on her health. She might have just wanted to create a group for support. She did something that saved someone's life. Who cares if she brags?
I envy people who have never had a friend constantly demand their time and attention and praise without caring that others might be too busy to make their lives about praising that friend. Post a big post, sure, fine, whatever. But imagine being directly confronted for not giving enough of your time and attention to someone who thinks even writer conferences months later should be about them.
It never fails to amaze me how women can condemn other women for wanting attention. What the hell is wrong with wanting attention and asking for it.
One of the things that they ridiculed was that Dawn was working with a hospital to publicize donor programs. They literally mocked the fact that she was working with healthcare workers to increase organ donation, laughing at the very idea. And if you go to their social media, every one of these people is waving banners of social involvement. Ng's Twitter looks like she's a combination of the Pope and the United Nations. It's not like any of these people aren't calling attention to themselves and their goodness.
Confronting people for not giving you the attention you feel entitled to is pretty fucking self-centered. She didn’t stop to think that those who weren’t giving her enough attention to satisfy her may have had stuff happening in their own lives.
Nothing wrong with asking for attention. You can always say no. But why would you deny a friend such a little thing? It’s such a small effort and brings joy to your friend. It gives meaning and significance on a moment of importance in their lives. It would be weird if friends gave no reaction. So it’s only logical to ask after it. This notion, that women who do not put others and their needs before their own, are selfish, seems very toxic.
Grub Street is a nice place. Disappointed to see that they employ Sonya in an upper level position. Plagiarizing a letter into a story should’ve made her done there.
lol the amount of times you mentioned the horror of the exposed group chats makes me wonder just how juicy your own group chat gossip must be 👀😜
Let the subpoenas roll! 🙃
I think one of the questions in the plagiarism lawsuit is... "What is published?" If you count that first audio file that was made public as published, then yes that use of Dawn's almost verbatim letter is plagiarized and Larson is culpable. That piece was published. We wouldn't say that an original Audible audiobook without a physical copy isn't published. Just because it's not the most recent published version doesn't mean that the letter wasn't at one point put almost verbatim into a work that was published. And Larson is over there just digging her own grave admitting through the various group texts/chats that it is plagiarized and she doesn't want to change it. But then when the heat gets turned on, Larson knows what she did is wrong and changes it. Further digging that hole. If nothing was plagiarized, why does she change it?
You start to get into all sorts of legal questions like... life rights. Who owns the life rights to Dawn's situation? The expectations of privacy in a private group chat (the one Dawn created and invited everyone to). Did Larson break that in publishing Dawn's letter? And then, you get into malicious intent. Did Sonya use Dawn's story and letter with malicious intent? And then, is it believable that someone in those Boston writing circles would know that the character of Dawn/Rose in the story is based on Dawn? Potentially defaming her. Then I wonder about fair use. Was Larson using the letter within a fair use context? IDK a lot of the answers to those questions. It's just food for conversation.
Don't get me wrong, I agree ESH. I don't want to have to acknowledge someone's kidney donation every time I see them. It's weird. Keep your organs to yourself. But something I keep thinking about is... to a certain extent a lot of people are calling Dawn crazy because she was so obsessive in trying to get the plagiarism noticed -- in trying to hold Larson accountable. How much is that akin to the people who accused and had proof that Rona Wang plagiarized people's work? If there is a paper trail and you're trying to get people to believe you... at what point is it no longer crazy? Women are so often not believed when they try to point out a crime. And Larson fed into that, gaslighting Dawn for months/years.
I want Emily D. Baker to cover this.
“It’s weird. Keep your organs to yourself.” 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I’m really surprised that Rona Wang hasn’t come up more in this. Especially with Pitch Wars going on right now. Plagiarism is legit, and it’s so harmful for those who have their work stolen. I think Dawn clearly has gone over the edge of acceptable behavior, stalking people in zoom meetings and calling around to where people work. But, on the other hand I think you bring up a really good point. Women are gaslit all the time. And if she doesn’t make a big stink about it, will this just be swept under the rug?
@@BrekkeEl Right?! I feel like Rona's plagiarism has been brushed under the rug. But the same people who blasted her when that happened are now the same people blasting Dawn when Sonya is the one who plagiarized and admitted it. Dawn doesn't come out of it smelling of roses. She's got some issues she needs to work on in therapy. I'll be curious to see what happens to the legal cases.
As far as I'm concerned, if it's available to the public, it IS published. If I got on RUclips and said I'd written a poem and then just read The Hill We Climb, I would be plagiarizing Amanda Gorman. Even if I wrote a poem on my own but "borrowed" two lines, or if the whole wording was different but had the exact same ideas and structure as Gorman's poem, I would be plagiarizing, because plagiarizing is stealing someone's work/ideas, not only a word-for-word copy. Obviously Gorman is a massively well-known poet now and someone would flag that, but what if it was a poem my friend had posted on her private FB and I had stolen it and posted it to RUclips? Still plagiarism because I didn't write it but am claiming I did. If she had used the letter as a placeholder in an early draft, I would lean more toward Sonya, but the audio was publicly available and thus, it was plagiarism.
Thank you so much for covering this! I did go read the article, too. Totally fascinating story! And, honestly, while I question the motives of anyone who feels entitled to a ticker tape parade for doing an act of charity, the "mean girl" mob mentality of the group chat was really unfair. As for the story, it was ludicrously transparent and very clear Larson knew exactly what she was doing, lied about it, and made herself the victim when things didn't play out according to plan. Yes, writers borrow from real life and real people, but taking inspiration from a neighbor gardening isn't the same as taking a very specific event from an acquaintance's life (without any sort of discussion beforehand) and using it in such a demeaning, obvious way. :(
I honestly don't know what to think of this, but one thing that really irritates me is Larson pulling the race card. I really don't think it is the case that Dawn was trying to use white privilege to "steal credit" from Larson. Anyone, POC or not, is allowed to bring up the topic of being used as "inspiration" for a story and absolutely has the right to bring forth the accusation of plagiarism when it is right there in front of everyone's eyes. I mean, Larson basically admitted plagiarising in those messages! Dawn has every right to defend her side of the story without her race being brought into the matter. I don't know or follow the authors, and they both definitely suck. But out of the two, Larson is by far worse for being malicious about it. And it was completely out of order for her to accuse Dawn with the whole race thing when she knew damn well that she was plagiarising Dawn herself. It seemed she was scared of being exposed so she pulled the race card to direct attention away from her and onto Dawn, and I'm honestly glad the attempt was so pathetic because it is just another thing added to the list of unfair things she's done. There's nothing wrong with telling someone, including your own "friend", that they are being a bit too boastful. Instead, she went behind Dawn's back with the intention to mock her. Larson is the bad person here.
Sonya is definitely the bad art friend. Dawn may be self-absorbed and obsessive, but Sonia’s behavior was very unethical. She should have known better, but she chose her own ego over ethics in the end.
Seems like the kidney donating woman likes to be told how amazing she is and needs validation. Maybe only donated kidneys to get positive feedback from others. The other woman honestly should’ve changed up the story a lot more and she wouldn’t be in this mess. Like change the organ donated (like partial liver donation) and sorry but the letter…. She is a writer. She should’ve changed it up so it had the same feel but not the same words. Because even if she wins her case she looks petty as hell and kind of obsessed with the other woman’s obsession with herself.
Also that comment about race was an easy cop out because nowadays you can’t argue against that without looking like a racist asshole and she knew exactly what she was doing with that. Especially when the story was literally about the woman.
I really don’t see anything inherently wrong with writing about someone you can’t stand and putting it into a story format but the entire world isn’t supposed to catch hints and KNOW who you’re actually talking about. This is very Capote of her and we all know how that ended 🤣
It was also a private group if I'm not mistaken.
So she didn't want the world in general to like her.
She wanted the good opinion of people who actually matter to her.
Taking inspiration for a villain from someone in your life that specifically harmed you, was awful and malicious, clearly bigoted, etc. is one thing (and even then you should still like? not plagiarize or do things that can get you into legal trouble??) But making someone your villain and mocking them to all of you friends behind their back just because they're annoying is another.
It was especially disturbing to me that the almost-word-for-word line of the early-draft letter was a line where Dawn is talking about the struggles and abuse in her own like. Like is she self-righteous or embarrassing? Maybe. Is this a "first-world problems" thing? Maybe: I don't know because I don't know this woman and what 'abuse' she's even referring to. But either way its just...cruel and I don't understand how this could be defensible behavior.
I literally had to go pop popcorn for this video.
Dawn is nuts, yes. But in my opinion, Sonya so obviously sucks far more than Dawn. This isn't "inspiration" this is big chunks of Dawn's life/story plagiarized. As writers, yes, we can take snippets and echoes from our life and transport that into our fiction, but this was done so heavy handed. Frankly, no matter how good the short story may be, it shows a serious lack of skill on Sonya's part that she couldn't dissociate Dawn's story from hers.
It honestly just felt like Sonya felt empowered and entitled to borrow so heavy handed from Dawn's story because she assumed that, like she, others found her to be just as ridiculous. Regardless of how annoying someone is, it doesn't mean you can plagiarize them. And the gaslighting that came afterwards sort of just solidifies Sonya Larson as a not so great person.
The problem is that we more or less own our life story. If an author wants to write “based on true events/real life” it needs to be a public event (9/11, any of the wars, COVID). If an author wants to use someone else’s life, or a moment of their life, to inform their story that person must either be dead (thus nobody owns the right to their life story anymore) or you must have explicit permission.
To me, there’s a difference in taking an aspect of someone’s personality that you find intriguing and playing around with it as part of a larger more complex character and narrative (ie transformative work), and using your interpretation of an actual person and event in their life to form the plot and major character work in your story (essentially, stealing someone’s life story).
Any way you look at it, Dawn should be compensated.
Did Dawn do something socially embarrassing? Yes. The thing is, we don’t know her motivation or reasoning for making the Facebook group or thinking her friends would be more interested in her donation - Kidney donation is a major surgery after all. Also, when one is excited about something their friends also tend to be excited about it as well (because that’s how good friendship works). There are so many ways you can look at this where Dawn does the exact same things, but none of them are for attention. It was Larson’s assumption that Dawn was seeking attention. I think this may be more of a case of seeing in others your own flaws. At the end of the day, Dawns worst crime was being embarrassing (and possibly attention seeking). The Law suit, reaching out to people in the publishing industry etc, all of that was justified.
Larson, on the other hand, is an incredibly manipulative and two-faced person.
I get a summary of the NYT every morning. I saw the title of this article, was intrigued, but didn't click on it. Now it looks like I'll have to go back and read it. Thank you for this video.
Alexa!!!! This recap is GOLD!!! We need more content from you just like this. 😆
Seconded! (But not word for word because that would be... well, see above. 🤣)
@@melisosh 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The real moral of this story is log off and touch grass people