By now you’ve heard that an unknown, self-published author is suing Joss Whedon over The Cabin In The Woods. What you may not have known is that his book, The Little White Trip, is also available on Scribd for free (hat tip to Nick Mamatas). I know what you’re thinking – you’re curious, aren’t you?
Part of you wants to start scanning it, is it good? Is it bad? Is it anything like The Cabin In The Woods?
Oh, be glad you have Dirge Magazine. I did it for you. The answers are, respectively: No, Yes, Not at all.
Peter Gallagher is a happy father-to-be that keeps bees with his girlfriend and makes candles from beeswax. They live in a small caravan compound making candles and harvesting honey. In the introduction to The Little White Trip, Gallagher calls this his “second, brighter life.” Gallagher and his partner (known only as Juwels) have faced copyright infringement before.
In a post titled “SHAME on you TARGET – an Etsy Rip Off… : (“ Gallagher and Juwels claim that Target stole their candle design and replicated it with inferior wax.
They were “the first” to think of pouring wax into antique bottles to make candles. The “mermaids” gave them the inspiration. No, I’m not making this up.
Their belief is that Target saw their candles on the one day Etsy featured their shop and stole this precious gift that had been bestowed upon them by the universe. And mermaids.
They didn’t sue Target, but they are suing Joss Whedon.
With a suit like this, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant had access to the work in question. The suit makes several points to “prove” the popularity of the novel, most of which are (perhaps conveniently) impossible to prove.
First, he claims that he sold 5,000 hard copies of his book by peddling it on the Venice Beach Boardwalk and in the Santa Monica Free Speech Zone. That’s 5,000 hard copies of a self-published book being hawked like seashell necklaces. It may be possible to find out how many he had printed, but I bet most of the sales were “cash transactions.”
Another dubious claim is that several “entertainment companies” “sought” Gallagher “out” to “talk” about “adaptation.” Not one is named.
Some of the claims are straight-up odd, but easy enough to prove or disprove. He claims the book was “discussed” on Goodreads, as though it is an indicator of success, but anyone can make any book available for discussion on the site.
He claims it was “for sale” at Amazon. It was never an ebook – he simply made his own paperbacks available for sale. Not a single review is from a verified buyer (in fact, most bear red flags for being completely fake).
[quote_center]Let’s start with the biggest and most obvious difference between Gallagher’s book and the movie: the movie was engaging and entertaining. The book was not.[/quote_center]
He claims that the Long Beach Gazette did a profile on him and the book on April 2, 2007. There is not a single instance of his name or his book appearing for all of April 2007 in their archives, which claim to have all articles that were published in print or online from January of 2001 on.
Another claim that comes across as an exaggeration is that Johnnie Cochran Jr. Middle School (which was in the middle of an overpopulation crisis at the time) sought him out, purchased 300 copies, and made the book required reading.
I couldn’t get an official comment from Cochran Middle School, but the California English teachers I spoke with confirmed that while an individual teacher may select books for the class that have not gone through the Board of Education, 300 copies seemed unlikely. Gallagher’s book is an even more unlikely choice for “required reading” given the subject matter.
Gallagher does have photos of himself in a classroom where the children have copies of his book on their desk, followed immediately by photos of packages addressed to journalists at the Los Angeles Times reading “BANNED LA PUBLIC SCHOOLS.” The photos seem at odds with each other and neither support the claim that the books were required reading, but let’s be real: unless Joss Whedon was attending junior high like some real-life Billy Madison, what does this prove?
None of the above matters unless The Cabin in the Woods actually resembles The Little White Trip. The differences abound but let’s start with the biggest and most obvious difference between Gallagher’s book and the movie: the movie was engaging and entertaining. The book was not.
It’s difficult to believe that any filmmaker would buy a book being hawked on the street, but for me to believe they stole the plot of said book, I’d have to believe they were interested enough in the book to read the 133 pages of food descriptions and pointless vignettes about the characters before they actually get to the cabin– and that’s where Gallagher’s case really falls apart. Fortunately for Gallagher, “the book stunk on ice” isn’t a legal defense.
Some highlights from the suit include:
If one of the main descriptors of your book is that it uses tropes, you can’t cite the use of tropes in another work as a “similarity” in this context. But sure, five friends, two couples and one odd man out, go to a cabin. This also occurs in roughly three million other horror movies (not an exact number) so we’ll move on.
How does The Cabin in the Woods differ? For one – we know from the beginning that the characters are being watched by a well-organized, nameless corporation. This is never made secret. What we discover at the end is not that they were being filmed, but why.
Why? Because the fate of the entire fucking world depends on these tropes working out exactly as they do. At the end of the film, the two characters left incite a carnage riot inside the corporation, the elder gods rise and we are left to assume that everyone dies. Not everyone in the movie – fucking everyone.
So it’s just a teeny bit different.
No, they aren’t.
Interesting! These are actually similar names.
Maybe Joss just stole all the names and slightly changed them. Also, tip for Gallagher’s lawyers, free of charge: Proofread your lawsuits.
Yes, that’s right. The game changer – the star of the movie looks like a movie star.
Holy fucking shit! They DRIVE to the cabin? In a VEHICLE?! Why didn’t you say so? This changes nothing!
Joss, you wiley bastard! You stole all those names and then covered your tracks by using different names! I can’t believe they figured you out, brah.
Welcome to every horror movie made since cell phones became ubiquitous.
Gallagher is going to sue the makers of every horror movie ever made and they, him. It will be spectacular!
The movie’s definition of a romantic scene: two sweet kisses. The book’s definition: BLLLLOOOOOOW JOOOOOB!
This is a similarity that isn’t also a trope! Well done!
These characters are not each other’s (alleged) counterparts. So the suit is counting the fact that not everyone died at the same time as a “similarity.”
Book definition of celebrating a job well done: A bunch of pissed off teenagers sit around a fancy party where the people who terrorized them for kicks get drunk. Movie definition: let’s party while this chick gets the fuck beat out of her!
The director in The Cabin in the Woods doesn’t show up until after Marty and Dana have incited a full-on mother fucking carnage fest and almost everyone who works for the unnamed corporation is dead. Then they decide to let EVERYBODY get dead. All of them. It’s the end of the world, baby!
By contrast, everybody in The Little White Trip becomes a millionaire, has everything they’ve ever wanted, all the couples couple forever, and absolutely no deeper thought, meaning, or satire is applied to the tropes referenced.
The lawsuit demands a jury trial, which means a jury will probably watch the movie and read the book (or at least portions of it) and see that this suit actually has less merit than Gallagher’s claim that he was the first person to put wax in a mason jar.
