A few years ago, I wrote a blog here, Neil Gaiman and the Lie of Purity. This was mostly about how he, and I, have an ethos about adaptations that does not at all resemble being a ‘purist’, but it did start with the following passage, which has aged not merely like milk but like diseased milk painted onto a clown’s corpse:
Gaiman occupies an unusual place, to me. He’s a middle-aged white British celebrity, which these days puts him in a demographic practically guaranteed to be hostile, but by all accounts he’s a good guy. Like, properly a good guy, of the understands-his-privilege and now supports the liberation of all minorities…
Of course he fooled me. I’m pretty sure he fooled virtually everyone who wasn’t in the actual circles in which he traveled (eg. high up in the convention circuit), and a pretty good chunk of the ones who were. It’s been months since this all started coming out, and former fans are still trying to figure out how to deal with it; the new even more horrifying exposé that came out today has touched off a new round of soul-searching and cynicism, so let’s talk about the two questions I encountered today that seem to sum it up. [Read more…]

This is part of “The Descent of Man”,
This is part 4 of “Natural Selection”, 
Given where I’m trying to go with my career at this point, I’ve had to build up (what I hope is) a deep and nuanced understanding of media. What I think of a given book or film is going to be a detailed opinion, with a lot of ‘this worked, this didn’t, here’s perhaps why’ for anyone who is interested in those details. I’m sure most or all media critics say the same thing, but there is one thing I refuse to do like the stereotypical critic, and that is be snobbish.