I've been plagiarized in a magazine! And I feel awful about it, because it is a lovely magazine.
Last year at the 14th St. Barnes & Noble bookstore, I found a copy of Flow's thick 5th anniversary special -- the Dutch & English edition. The Flow Book is a feast for the eyes: colorful pages filled with wrapping papers, stickers, postcards, stationery, a garland and even pop-up scenes. Gorgeous. People who love paper created a magical book for like-minded people.
So I was happy to find the magazine today (in the same bookstore). It has articles about slowing down and living the mindful life, and other stories about creative people and how they do what they do. There's a lovely little booklet insert about how to do hand lettering, with space for you to practice.
And... there's an article about paper dolls! Including paper dolls by contemporary artists!
But first, the article. It's not signed. I think it borrows liberally from things published elsewhere. Would have been nice if the anonymous author had cited sources.
It's hard to copy the entire thing because the 140-page magazine is so nicely bound:
I think this is an image from an auction website.
We all copy images from the web, so what's the big deal, right?
Oh look, a little story about Fluffy Ruffles...hey wait a minute, they took my research and used it without even giving me credit! Unless someone spent time as I did a few years back, researching old newspaper articles at the New York Historical Society. I doubt it. That insipid "bunny wabbit" line is not mine, but the research and analysis is all mine:
...I just realized they probably read this interview I gave to Collectors Weekly back in 2013. Ah well.
Check out their website, http://www.flowmagazine.com/
to see images from the latest issue.
Update: RLC is right, and there's no two ways about it!