You must log in or # to comment.
Notice how a lot of folks aren’t aware of the disgusting things Gaiman did, specifically BECAUSE he went quiet. Rowling doesn’t want to go quiet because she’s a crusader: discriminating against trans people is a goal for her.
Yeah its a deliberate strategy by Gaiman, while in the background he goes after his victims that settled previously for breaching NDAs. Even if he doesn’t win its money well spent to stop more accusations from coming out. He’s going to wait this out and try to rehabilitate himself in a few years.
I thought NDAs couldn’t be used to cover criminal behaviour?
yes, she sees herself as a kind of martyr and victim of a witch-hunt, which does change how she responds to the cultural backlash she receives for her behavior.
Yeah, Gaiman keeps a low profile because he wants people to forget what he did. Rowling is proud of being a hateful cunt and invests time and money in proliferating hate.
People got into Gaiman at an older age than they got into HP. So HP is more deeply ingrained
rowling is a transphobe, but gaiman is like weinstein a sex pest. she played it carefully for decades before coming out, when she had built a large amount of fans and support, much like lewis CK, the cancelling dint end his career so to speak, he moved all online before it got worst.
also transphobia has massive support from right wingers.
“Rowling is a transphobe AND Gaiman is like a Weinstein sex pest” Fixed it for you.
She’s actively pushing hard, with a large platform, against trans people and her product is not some necessary thing but rather just a book series. It is so easy to just drop her, especially if you’re now an adult/young adult with a higher reading level and can take in better content from better people.
People need to drop her, she’s a horrid lady with incredibly mid-to-decent books and there is no excuse for hanging onto her.
ok.
no need to play villain Olympics, they are both horrid in different ways.
but I think the differences is that more people will be grossed out by rapy acts, than being a bigot, because there are more bigots than rapists in the public
Rightwingers don’t like Rowling because she still considers herself a feminist and uses feminism as the basis of her transphobia.
I mean, I still love American Gods, Good omens and Neverwhere. I just stopped recommending them to people.
I still enjoy his writing, but I’m not sure how to engage now. I want to separate the artist from the art and let the legal system do its thing as a separate thing and I don’t know what ‘right’ looks like as a reader
I can’t separate artist and art. I feel guilty and angry. But I also don’t want to. Money to them is money to their deeds. Paying for anything Harry Potter is paying for anti-trans movements. Paying anything Gaiman goes to the “fix your image” firm he has hired. Then I start thinking that firm is probably out there with messaging convincing people to separate art from the artist.
Heres what you can do:
Encourage people to pirate his shit
Remind people what he did. In detail.
Start with me! I know he did… Some rapey shit? Pro ably wizard flavored?
Here’s the sanitized AP reporting: Woman’s lawsuits say sci-fi author Neil Gaiman repeatedly sexually assaulted her
Here’s the full account from the victim (ALL the trigger warnings): “There is no safe word” - Vulture
Wow that’s…
What strikes me is how boring the abuse was. Like, boiler plate horror. Maybe this does make me think less of him as an author, not just as a person.
Well I haven’t looked into the 8 other women. But at least one of the others was absolutely raped, and another was paid off in exchange for an NDA
Right but like ‘call me master’ DUDE
Fucking do better. Not even be less a piece of shit, but a more interesting piece of shit.
Like ‘i hired a PI to learn the song you had your first kiss to, then spent a week practicing, so just as the acid and molly kick in…’
Or, idk, a choir? Some chanting?
Am I going to get rid of his works that I own? No, probably not. I love them. Which is why it sucks so much to never recommend them again, but that’s the reality.
Shitty people can make good art. Death of the author.
Just never give them money.
Death of the author
People here keep using the term as basically a synonym of “separating art from artist” but I always thought death of the author was a different thing. Analyzing the meaning of a book while ignoring what the author says they meant.
My 2c tho, the Harry Potter novels legitimately suck. This has been my opinion of them since I was in 8th grade when the first one came out. At the time I described Sorcerer’s / Philosopher’s Stone as a failed attempt at ripping off Roald Dahl (British author who wrote mean-spirited children’s books that stereotyped characters with funny-sounding names based on their physical descriptions). I was frequently urged to and attempted to give the books a second chance, never got more than 20 pages back into any of them before I put them down in exasperation because to me they always felt very petty and derivative. I was not very surprised when JK started to peel off her mask to the public.
Supporting Gaiman is supporting a rapist; it will negatively impact a couple people directly.
Supporting Rowling is much worse.
“Being a rapist is better than being a transphobe”
lemmy.ml everyone
You have scope insensitivity. What’s worse, one person being raped or one million transgender people being denied civil rights? A typical bigot is less harmful than a typical rapist, but JK Rowling is not a typical transphobe; she’s many orders of magnitude worse.
Or maybe I just don’t agree with you
you seem like the kind of person who would let the trolley run over five people.
So you just take it as a given that there are obvious solutions to complicated moral issues?
If you’re going to be deontologist about it, I can understand why you’d think you don’t need to multiply the scope of JK Rowling’s impact. And I can understand why you’re ok with letting the trolley kill 4 more people than it needs to. Your morality is self-consistent, merely anathema to me. So, yeah, “I just don’t agree with you.”
But – maybe you don’t need to mock me as though my common and standard understanding of the trolley problem is somehow idiotic. “Lemmy.ml everyone! A place where they’d willingly choose to kill 1 person to save 5 others.”
I don’t mock your ethics, I mock your self righteousness
What did Gaiman do?
sexualized assault
I’m sorry, I know it’s a simple mistake and english might not be your first language (it’s not mine either), but sexualized assault really made me laugh for some reason
If anyone is looking for some
goodfucking amazing books by an awesome and genuinely fun and good natured dude, check out Jason Pargin, he is awesome and not problematic and his books are all bangers, and he also enabled and actively supports the careers of many other super awesome and creative people. Also, listen to Bigfeets.not problematic
I love the guy but I’m sure you could find an instance of him being problematic. Like his pen name, David Wong, is questionable given he’s not asian.
He stopped using it for that very reason, and took accountability. People are allowed to self correct, if he understands the problem with what he did and course corrected without being called out for it what would throwing more stones accomplish?
Edit: Also, not a big enough deal to say you shouldn’t read his books. Especially considering the narrative reason as to why he was using it.
I’m not throwing any stones, yo. I’m just pointing out you can’t exactly say he’s not problematic. I have a tolerance for problematicity so it’s of no bother to me.
The word problematic is kind of weasely used this way. The pen name had an in-universe rationale that made sense and was funny because of the incongruity. Merely alluding to the existence of ethnicity isn’t “problematic” in itself.
I’m not the on who brought the word problematic into this conversation. But I bet you if I put a poll on, say, tumblr, asking about different potentially problematic things, “pretending to be asian” would score highly on the problematic scale.
He wasn’t pretending to be asian, though, the book John Dies at The End makes that very clear and gives a silly in universe reason for the now dead pseudonym. It really was not problematic, even at the time of it being used.
Just a few comments up you said
He stopped using it for that very reason, and took accountability. People are allowed to self correct, if he understands the problem with what he did and course corrected
Now that you were pushed on it a bit you’re saying
It really was not problematic, even at the time of it being used.
Something about this interaction feels really dishonest.
Was there a problem he needed to take accountability for or not?
If he was still using the pseudonym and making excuses to keep using it, sure, but I’m of the opinion that once someone understands what they have done wrong and took the opportunity to learn from it and do better there is no more wrong doing. There are, of course, exceptions to this, but a pseudonym that someone came up with in their 20’s and had the wherewithal later to say, “That’s not ok, I need to stop doing that” and stopped doing that for the right reasons is pretty far from a reason to call them problematic, especially when it wasn’t a decision made under any form of duress and he has made no attempt at defending his choice to have used that pseudonym and stated it was not ok for him to have used that pseudonym.
Edit: Also, it was used in a narrative context of the main character trying to throw off his identity, if They’re looking for David Wong then they wouldn’t assume it’s the burnt out white dude.
I’ve heard him on a bunch of podcasts and keep meaning to try his books. I’ve got a copy of this book is full of spiders, I’ll have to give it a go.
Where’s a good place to start with his stuff?
John Dies At The End was his first book and where I started. It’s also neat to watch his writing style evolve. I’d say John Dies or Futuristic Violence and Fancy Suits, those are the first books for his two ongoing series, if you’re feeling more into horror or sci-fi.
What podcasts? Are you a Dog Zone 9000 fan by chance?
Great, cheers I’ll try John dies at the end.
I’ve heard him as a frequent guest on gamefully unemployed and small beans podcasts. They’re focused on movies, he’s full of interesting takes.
I’m so disappointed in Rowling. I loved Harry Potter and would’ve loved that videogame.
i told my kids they are free to enjoy it, not were never buying official merch, want merch but from artists. or when they wanted wands, i gave them a stick, a sharp knife and supervision and they made their own.
I hope you also explain to them that slavery isn’t good actually.
but what if the slaves are racially distinct and portrayed as weaklings and ugly?
also, it’s important for them to know who are those greedy long nosed bankers with the star of David in their building.
God, that franchise has so many red flags you might think it’s soviet propaganda
but what if the slaves are racially distinct and portrayed as weaklings and ugly?
Oh well that’s clearly different, especially if they are outspoken about how much they love serving their masters. I mean, it’s not like there is any way to magically manipulate how beings think in the Harry Potter universe.
Yay, abuse and conditioning is a form of magic, yay.
From what I’ve read, the game was a barebones RPG with a suspiciously racialized plot, anyway.
I played hundreds of hours of the GameCube chamber of secrets game just flying around the castle on a broom
If you’re an adult and you’re still a fan of Harry Potter, you should try reading some novels written for adults.
I know this sounds snarky, and I guess it kind of is, but it is true…
You’re obsessed with books written for literal children.
A) many harry potter adults are still proud that they read a book once when they were kids, they haven’t read much since.
B) “Kids” literature can be for everyone, just because they are kids, doesn’t mean it has to be shit. The Hobbit was written for kids and it is among my favourite books. And the little prince is still amazing and a must read for every adult who never read it.
I really hate when “Stuff made for kids” is an excuse to make shitty slop. kids deserve and need quality literature.
Ever since I can (abusive ex didn’t allow it), I’m reading my kids at night, and we’re reading good stuff, we done: The Hobbit, Psalm for the Wildbuilt (not aimed at kids, but I think everyone needs to read it, even children), the Wild Robot series… and they love it.
PS: I really hate when children are treated as a target for slop.
Why do people literally only say this about Harry potter lol. “Read an adult book!” OK sure but why aren’t we saying the same thing about the millions of Anime fans, bronies, Stephen Universe, Gravity Falls, or other kids cartoon fans? It’s just disingenuous
Harry Potter wasn’t very good, but if you read it as a kid and got invested in the setting it’s easy to forget that the writing was kinda shit. The argument that it’s “for children” is a (possibly unintentional) misdirection, but following it up with a recommendation to actually good fiction is valid and worthwhile.
Meanwhile, I’m a grown ass man and watched Gravity Falls a few weeks back, and it was fucking good. Good fiction is still good even if you’re not the target age range.
I think I’m agreeing with you.
I disagree, I liked harry potter a lot. I think they’re good books. I don’t think we have to pretend like this is about literary taste and not the author’s political views. I think people should be up front with what the real message is: “I think that the authors views are abhorrent and therefore you should not support her financially”. The age appropriateness of the books or their quality is just a disingenuous personal attack on the fans and is just childish
Put Marvel and most of Star Wars also in the same category.
Alan Moore agrees:
“I haven’t seen a superhero movie since the first Tim Burton ‘Batman’ film. They have blighted cinema, and also blighted culture to a degree,” Moore said. “Several years ago I said I thought it was a really worrying sign, that hundreds of thousands of adults were queuing up to see characters that were created 50 years ago to entertain 12-year-old boys. That seemed to speak to some kind of longing to escape from the complexities of the modern world, and go back to a nostalgic, remembered childhood. That seemed dangerous, it was infantilizing the population.”
Yeah, it’s not wrong. Escapism is a way to hide from reality, even if only for an evening.
I mean, I am. Bronies are an embarrassment.
