The idea that we should be able to separate the artist and their art is an idealistic one, but I just read this exposé of Gaiman’s history of sexual abuse, and no, just no. Every gentle, thoughtful, open-minded word he ever wrote was a lie. The image he presented was a facade, while what was lurking behind his illusion of gentility was a rapist, a selfish brute, an ex-scientologist steeped in that privileged nonsense.
He deserves obscurity and contempt. Actually, what he deserves is a felony conviction and jail time. Unfortunately, we live in a time when the deserving don’t get what’s coming to them.
Honestly, I have to wonder if the detail in the article crosses the line from public interest to prurience. But I guess in a world where monsters suffer no consequences, we have to hope that retracing their monstrosities does something.
Yeah, I thought about quoting some of the stories in the article, but they filled me with such visceral disgust that I couldn’t bring myself to do it. Gaiman looks worse than Louis CK and Harvey Weinstein.
I go back and forth on this. There seems a correlation between being gifted and talented with also being a complete shit; examples are legion. Einstein was a misogynist who badly treated his wife; do we refuse to benefit from his discoveries in physics? Do we refuse to benefit from DNA because Crick or Watson (I can never remember which one) was a racist? Richard Dawkins has made significant contributions to evolutionary biology; does all that go out the window because of Dear Muslima?
I can separate the artist from the work to the extent that any honors given to the work are for the work and not for the person behind it. If Natanyahu discovered the cure for cancer, I would be fine with both giving him a Nobel Prize and also putting him on trial for war crimes; the two are not in conflict. I think the problem lies with ignoring either the benefit of the work or the shittiness of the person. It’s possible for two things to be true at the same time.
I saw the allegations against him a few months ago and stopped reading any of his stuff. Did new details come out?
Whenever something like this happens I always hear people saying “oh, well, you’re denying yourself the chance to read some really great literature” or the like.
The way I look at it, there’s far too much literature in the world for me to ever finish, so I’m not actually missing something if I choose to boycott authors who’ve done horrible things due to all the remaining non-horrible authors I can still read.
#3: I know the problem, and I’d usually say that we should dissociate art from artist. But now I can’t possibly read Coraline, sweet and harmless as it is, without remembering that story of Gaiman going to the kitchen to get a stick of butter to use as lube when he anally raped a young woman who had repeatedly said no. And afterwards told her to lick his penis clean and call him “Master.” I’m done with him.
Same thing with the films by Polanski, and the films where Kinski played a big role. And films produced by wossname. Louis C K is an asshole but not quite as bad as that british guy who was exposed some years ago.
I am willing to.make an exception for the music by Ten CC. Only one member was a pervo and he only joined late.
Well, fuck… I wasn’t expecting it to be that bad.
Yeah, me too, very much so, but… Fucking hell.
This is going to take some processing. I’ve got a shelf full of his work.
#8: I fully empathize! I was a fan for 30 years since I encountered Sandman while working in a comic shop. I had three full shelves of his work. I did my mourning earlier this summer, then got rid of everything.
Give yourself time to work through it, then do what you need to do.
@freeline #3:
Watson. I was at an event once where Watson was also present (he wasn’t speaking there). I saw him chatting with a couple of people, one of whom I knew. If I’d gone over there I know my colleague would have said, “Hi, Rich. Have you met Jim Watson?” and I would have had to say, “No, and I don’t want to. You know he’s a racist c-nt, don’t you?” On that day at least, it didn’t seem worth the inevitable hassle I’d get so I went and found a seat at the back.
All of this coming out about Gaiman adds a whole new layer to the Loncon 3 controversy with British ‘shock jock’ Jonathon Ross being asked to act as Master of Ceremonies for the 2014 Hugo Awards, since Gaiman was apparently the one who had originally pushed for his invitation. Gaiman also got really passive-aggressive afterwards about how Ross was ‘really a good guy once you got to know him’ when people started complaining about Ross being there due to Ross’ history of rather tasteless jokes at the expense of women.
(That said, Ross had also written comic books and done video game work, and his wife had co-written the screenplay for Stardust, so he wasn’t a priori a bad choice or someone coming in from outside the fandom.)
freeline: those are scientific and technical accomplishments you’re talking about. I really don’t think those are comparable to creative works in the arts or entertainment. The latter are more tied to the mind and character of their creators, and are thus less separable (in their readers’ minds at least) from their creators’ personal actions and character-flaws.
Jeez.
Bastards without shame.
‘Alina Habba Says Man Accused Of Rape And Trafficking Is “Just Like Trump!”
.https://youtube.com/watch?v=34R0UR4vVoo
Yes, it is Tate she is talking about. And his crimes have been widely publicised. I could dig up more examples of horrible people endorsing even worse people, but this example is my limit.
The late Terry Pratchett has done no evil. If his collaboration with Gaiman predated the rape their novel ‘Good Omens’ is not sullied. After all, Hamsun’s novels predated his time as supporter of Vidkun Quisling and the nazi occupation and they are still to be found in libraries.
What got me was his initial excuse. He described what he said he’d done – which were the actions of a super creepy sex pest AT BEST – and then said “see, no problem”. Yikes.
@12 Raging Bee — Where would a fundie like Kevin Sorbo fall? Unpopular opinion here, I know, but I rather enjoyed his portrayal of Hercules, enough that I bought the HLJ series on DVD (years ago). But in doing so, I was paying for the acting service provided by Sorbo and, more importantly, the rest of the production crew including the writers, of which Sorbo was not part. I mean, the manufacture and maintenance of my car likely involved input from social monsters somewhere along the line, but I still bought it, too. Even a subscription to Netflix continues to fund both Gaiman and Sorbo.
Denns K: generally speaking, both movies and cars are made by organized groups of people, not by lone individual creators. And organizations are generally considered responsible for hiring people who at least aren’t depraved criminals; and for preventing any employee’s evilness or bad character from affecting their products, their clients, or their reputation. So basically you’d have to judge each corporation’s people and products when you decide what to buy from whom. And you probably won’t be able to avoid buying from corporations that employ evil people, as easily as you can avoid buying creative works written by evil authors or artists.