There's a dozen years old and weak who choose to live in
suffering for the sake of saving money to contribute to a foundation. There is
also a family of deprivation but always lend money to everyone including to the
rich and do not mind if the money was not returned. Then there's the poor
laborers who after adopting orphans then become rich businessman owner of a
national company, unfortunately does not mention the company name. There is
also the story of a destitute teachers who give alms to beggars and got instead
when finding a lot of money on the road and a few years later he built his
economic well-established boarding school, again unfortunately not described in
detail the name of the teacher and boarding schools. Of the dozens of stories
that fill this book, almost entirely set in the generosity of someone like
that. For a while I believed the stories were really there.
My biggest question may be regarded as a protest against
this book is not on the content of the story that is presented but on
originality. When opening the bibliography in the back yard I was surprised to
see the variety of credit that is written there. Almost entirely derived from
the blog and one of the news articles on the site on line. Reading the
bibliography instantly my judgment on the book evolved. This maroon hardback
book probably should not be published.
First how accurate is the label "based on a true
story" that brought this book ??. Almost hard to trace the sources of the
truth of the story. Although I admit inspiring story as such does exist in our
environment. How does the author ensures that disadurnya story is a true story
if it is not the experience itself, or at least get the experience of the
direct perpetrators. Moreover if the referenced resource is
"google.com" and the TV shows that we know all the full engineering.
Without intending to prejudice, I also asked how the book is
organized like?. And what considerations print publishers graduated ?. This
book in my shallow glasses can be considered a product of plagiarism
Is the author of this book is also the original author of an
article that appeared in many of these blogs ?. Until finally finished reading
the book and check out a few links, I doubt it. If indeed the real stories of
real events indeed, even this book still leaves a big problem because the book
made by adapting and re-clipping stories from many sources is still
questionable originality even stronger indication of plagiarism.
Even if the stories are true, if the author and publisher of
this book have to get permission from the original author to use the article as
a material in the book ?. What surprised me and an indication that this book
could be considered to make up a sentence that plagiarism is a story and
editorial in this book is almost the same as that written in the form source.
At least I've checked some of the links mentioned and compared with a series of
sentences written in the book. In fact, an article published in detik.com also
moved into this book is no different with forms.
The things that makes this book to be very problematic in my
opinion. Although it can be classified as "common knowledge", but a
lot of stories in it hard to be traced to the truth because only sourced from
popular blog posts. The book is also organized in a strange way that the
downloading of copy and paste. So how can a book written in this way and doubt
can rise originality ?.
