Magnum Opus versus Plagiarized Magnum Opus: defaming, humiliating, and dehumanizing the term “Magnum Opus” in Indian Journalism or News Agency

 

Magnum Opus versus Plagiarized Magnum Opus: defaming, humiliating, and dehumanizing the term “Magnum Opus” in Indian Journalism or News Agency

I am just reading the definition of "magnum opus" in the Cambridge Dictionary, which says "the most important piece of work done by a writer or artist: for example, Picasso's Guernica is considered by many to be his magnum opus."

And another definition of the magnum opus in the Oxford dictionary defines it as "noun./mnt ps//mnm ps/[singular] (from Latin) a large and important work of art, literature, or music, especially one that people think is the best work ever produced by that artist, writer, etc."

This is the definition of a magnum opus. However, the Indian News Agency slandered the meaning by attributing it to every Indian movie or theory, even though India is notorious for its plagiarism work around the world.

Before going into details about the word that has been defamed by Indian journalism, I want to focus on how none of the Indian artistic works or theories have produced a magnum opus or met the criteria of the Cambridge Dictionary or Oxford Dictionary.

So let me explain the criteria for meeting Magnum Opus status in any aspect of art or theory.

1.     The first criteria of a magnum opus is original thinking, making, writing, or producing. It means that this is work that has never been done anywhere in the world. It stands as the original or first work to be called a masterpiece. For example, we can call John Rawls's "A Theory of Justice" a magnum opus because nobody had produced such a grand theory of justice before him. Hence, a theory of justice is called a magnum opus. The grand theory of justice has original concepts, ideas, thinking, writing, philosophy, theory, etc. The originality is called a "masterpiece." We won’t call any plagiarized works "magnum opus."

2.     In the film industry, Titanic by James Cameron has been called a magnum opus because of its original concept and work never produced before it. It has a strong historical background.

3.     Another criterion is historical ancestry. An artistic work or theory can't be considered a masterpiece or magnum opus if the film is fictitious and plagiarized.

4.The criteria for the elimination of any artistic work or theory from Magnus Opus is plagiarism or stealing ideas, concepts, stories, sets, arts, dresses, imitation, language, expressions, words, sentences, dialogues, etc.

5.     Another criterion is honesty, which no Asian, African, or Islamic society has ever upheld historically or mythologically. They never even meet the criteria to recite even the word "honesty." A dishonest society never produces any masterpieces in any field except violence, lethal forms of oppression, brutal ideologies, humiliation, social corruption, lies, cheating, manipulating, dehumanization, stealing or plagiarizing from honest-based societies such as white western societies.

 

Without a doubt, white western societies have built their way of life on a social contract based on truth, honesty, science, rationality, progress, originality, equality, nonviolence, democracy, fraternity, love, humanity, and so on. In this kind of society, a masterpiece or magnus opus is very much possible. Hence, we have produced tens of thousands of magnus opus in every field historically. They do not have any mythological history or folk stories from which to plagiarize ideas, concepts, or theories. Folk histories are built upon lies, glorification, etc.

These are the basic criteria for calling it a masterpiece or Magnus opus for any theory, artistic work, or movie. If a theory is plagiarized with concepts, ideas, expressions, contexts, content, words, words of imitation, body language, make-up, skills, talent, writings, and speeches, it is stealing original ideas. Plagiarism is never considered a factory of ideas in any sense of the word "Magnus opus."

Let me explain the mythological origin of plagiarism, lies, or stealing ideas, concepts, words, knowledge,  imitation, etc. in an Indian context. Of course, Asia, Africa, and Islamic societies have a long history of plagiarism. However, I am not going into details about Asia, Africa, and Islamic societies but focusing on India and its way of plagiarizing ideas, concepts, writings, speeches, artistic works, theories, etc. that have their origin in its mythological literature, gods, goddesses, ideology, culture, tradition, religion, way of life, and region.

Indian mythological heroes and heroines such as Ram, Krishna, Ganesha, Shiva, Bhagavad Gita, Puranas, Itihasas, Hindu literature, epics, Vedas, glorification, cow, food, dishonesty till contemporary literature, arts, films, expressions, talents, merit, etc have built upon lies, violence, rape, vertical hierarchies, humiliation, segregation, separation, purity, impurity, vulgarity, corruption, killings, cheating, exploitation, superior, inferior, dark, white, race, primitive, lethal or brutal ideologies, etc through which they constructed a society by deep-rooted lies, violence, plagiarism, rape, cheating, social corruption, expressions, words, naming, degradation, humiliation, etc as an authentic form of way of life.

These are a few criteria for producing any masterpiece or magnum opus. However, so-called Indian journalism continues to defame the term "Magnus opus" for every plagiarized work produced by Indian origins in every field.

The white western knowledge production should file a defamation case against the Indian News Agency or its journalism for attributing the precious word "Magnus Opus" to every plagiarized work produced by the Indians.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, "people think it is the best work." Now we're concentrating on Indians, who aren't even qualified to judge the word in every field. For example, to judge something, you should have met the criteria with Magnus opus skills. To judge something, you should have original creativity, not plagiarized creativity. In Indian content, millions of plagiarized creative works are seen in everyday life and are discovered by their original creators in Indian content. Since India is built on lies, Indians have developed a sense of plagiarized creativity. Plagiarized creativity can be seen in every piece of contemporary literature produced by people of Indian or South Asian origin, Asian origin, Islamic origin, or African origin. Copyrights are publicly violated by Indian plagiarized creativity. So an Indian never qualifies to judge whether something is a Magnus opus or not, since he or she or they have no historical background of originality. To judge something, you must have a history of social contract with above-average human values, or humans in their spirit can know whether something is a magnum opus or a masterpiece since they go with jingoism, casteism, racism, genocidal persecution, and lethal forms of oppressive lifestyle. With all of this background, the Indian lost his or her ability to judge the best or masterpiece of Magnus Opus.

Let me wind up by saying that Indians do not meet any of the above criteria defined by me or ever meet the definition of Oxford or Cambridge dictionaries to know or to judge or to appreciate something as a Magnus opus work.

A lie-based society never produces any masterpieces or Magnus opuses. Dr.Suryaraju Mattimlla