This is exactly the kind of discourse we should be having. Practical, honest, logical. Gaiman was my favorite author for many years throughout college and my 20s, and his books remain important to me in many ways. I won’t be getting rid of any of his books that I already own because, honestly, my shelves are riddled with immoral and unethical authors. I WILL take action in the most effective way I can by making sure he doesn’t get any more of my money, removing him from my list of authors I recommend to friends, and by steering my daughters toward other authors. Discussions like this produce actual change over time, and I really appreciate your honest self-reflection and practical advice.
It's funny because as I've been contemplating what I want to do with my Gaiman books (they are all still sitting on my shelf), I recognized the hypocrisy in it - even if I get rid of them, how many other people are sitting on my shelf that "shouldn't be there"? It's why this topic is so complicated! It also seems easier to separate that stuff when the author (or artist, what have you) is dead. I volunteer and teach art in my kids' schools and a lot of our very famous artists had...less than stellar lives. Anyway this is a ramble. I appreciate your comment 🙏
@Bookborn But if you do that for one (which is loud right now), don’t you need to do that for all of them? The world is full of flawed individuals, many times disappointing, or even despicable. Do you study the life of every author? Or do you appreciate the book for what it is? If I did this for Hollywood, I probably would get rid of almost everything. Look how quickly the world forgives movie stars. It’s also worth noting these are allegations and we will most likely never know what happened. Often there is more to the story than we are feed on the internet. But still, we as a society are quick to condemn and slow to forgive. Thank goodness most people don’t know about our own misdeeds, shortcomings, and flaws!
I think what I admire the most is that this acknowledges complexity and contradictions. There is no right answer for what to do with old videos and books, but you can control future actions.
@@cfosburgin my view, it’s the shock of it all. I’m sure it’s mentioned but how many of us COULD HAVE EVER IMAGINED a guy like this, who encouraged us to dream and be okay with it, would EVER be like this. It’s only just starting to sink in, the unfathomable.
An idea for what to do with those Neil Gaiman videos: instead of demonetizing them, keep ads on but also donate the proceeds from them to RAINN. That way, those videos can do some good in the world to offset what he did.
It's always good to donate, but even if she doesn't, I don't see a problem with keeping existing videos monetized. His actions shouldn't destroy the work of others.
I would say don't delete them, if anything add a disclaimer to the description so people don't make assumptions. Another idea for future... situations: Don't demonetize those videos, but use whatever income you get from those to support a cause you feel comfortable with. Just ideas, don't mean to tell you what to do.
I think your conclusion that "I don't necessarily need to post/talk about it unless I'm actually willing to take some small action" is some of the wisest advice I've ever heard when it comes to how we act online. It adjusts perspective. I'm outraged? Yes! Or do I merely want to be perceived as appropriately outraged so that no one can accuse me of not caring? Or is there something (however small) that I can do? There may not always be something we can do, or maybe we don't have the bandwidth, but then we shouldn't feel compelled to loudly proclaim our alignments at every single controversy. Some random reader is not guilty by association till proven innocent
Having read all his work in comics, I really feel like he wasn't lying about his beliefs, but deluded himself into believing what he had done was fine. And i can't tell what's worse.
Wow, as someone who's basically sworn off social media completely at this point, I had completely missed this entire story. Gaiman's works were high on my TBR list, and I was even considering doing the same challenge you did after hearing how much you loved it. I'm a bit saddened that I won't get to enjoy those stories now, but I also know I wouldn’t be able to read them with the taint of what the author has done in my mind the entire time. Your take on how social media engagement can often feel hollow and unproductive is exactly why I left it. I just felt that it so often devolved into meaningless virtue signaling in echo chambers. However, I was honestly quite inspired by what you said about how actually doing something real and tangible about issues you care about made you feel better. I'm going to try to incorporate that attitude and approach into my life more! It might be silly, but I feel like writing positive comments to creators I love and respect is a small version of this. Even the small chance that my comment might, in some tiny way, help motivate creators like you to continue doing the fantastic work you do genuinely puts a smile on my face. Thank you for another insightful and genuinely inspiring video. Keep doing good!
Not silly AT ALL. One year I made it a new years goal to write a letter a week to someone I admired. It made a huge difference on how I saw things, and reminded me that talking positively and intentionally filling our life with the good is super important. I cut out almost all social media from my life except what I do for my book channel, and I cannot express how much happier it's made me lol. The last one I gave up was Reddit and I was literally shocked how less negative my life became 😅
This is such a breath of fresh air in the RUclips space. I already had a high opinion of you, but when you said you decided to always pair that social media activism with some real, tangible action, I appreciated you so much more. You don't pretend to have always been perfect, you don't virtue signal, you're honest and you explain your thought process so well. Thank you so much for this video, and the fundraiser and support you've given to the victims.
I have a lot to say about this! I just want to focus on a few points: -- It is important to remember that people are complex. (Hopefully this is a lesson we learn from the Stormlight Archive, the First Law series, Song of Ice and Fire, etc.) No one's character and being is defined by the worst thing they do, nor the best thing they do. A person can do horrible things in one context, in a certain mood, while in another context, in a different state of mind, they create or do something wonderful and beautiful and heroic. Thus, I think it's perfectly possible for someone like Gaiman, at one time, to write a beautiful, thoughtful, morally inspiring book or essay, and, at a later time, to commit an atrocious crime. That doesn't excuse what he did by any means (any more than seeing the fuller picture of Jaime Lannister excuses him throwing Bran out a window), but it also means that there isn't any reason to think that everything he writes must be horrible and corrupted with his sins. All people are a mix, and we can act very differently in different situations. -- This is why I object to labelling any person a "monster." It's the same error as elevating a person we don't know as a hero. It oversimplifies and suggests that the person is through and through evil and irredeemable, and that's just not true. -- I also object to the suggestion that people should go into reading guided by their pre-existing morality. On the contrary, I think the greatest works of literature are those that challenge presuppositions and force us to think about difficult questions. If we refused to read anything that challenged us, we would never learn or grow.
But him writing well doesn’t mean he isn’t a rapist. That’s a lot of ways to walk around the actual issue- that people are willing to ignore his evils because ‘you should never have worshipped anyone anyways’ is a slippery slope into saying we can ignore any HUGE faults that any ‘famous person’ does. Did you ignore the Me too movement as well?
@benjaminrider6351 i mean it's a lot of word soup and you sound really smart but you compare gaimen to only literary characters allowing you to other him and justify your choices, he hurt real people bran isn't real you can't wash your hands clean of it on the premise of challenging yourself or "everything is grey actually" you can continue to support him that's your choice but don't live in delusion own your decision.
@ To simplify: --What Gaiman did is an "atrocious crime" and not excusable (to quote my original post). I did NOT say I thought it was okay, nor did I say I supported him (I do not). I did not say "everything is grey" and there's no clear judgment to be made (I vehemently reject that idea). --But people are complex and it's perfectly possible for a person do a horrible thing at one time and to something admirable and worth considering at another time. It may feel good to oversimplify people to have villains we can attack, but it doesn't help us get any closer to grasping the realities of human psychology and life. --I gave literary examples because they are ones the audience of this channel is likely to be familiar with. And this kind of literature is valuable because it _does_ give us insight into the complexities of human beings and human psychology. Jaime is a great character because he's written to display that. If you think we should just dismiss anyone who commits a crime as an all-evil monster--lock 'em up, throw away the key--that's your right. Lots of people seem to think that way. But I think it's not true to reality.
I love every time you have a thought video like this. They ask very important questions. They express your humanity and you seem like an incredibly genuine person. I can't think of a single reason why anyone would disagree with the content you consistently put out. Thank you for being such a wholesome booktuber 📚
I wonder if the same people who said they didn't consume Harry Potter because they didn't want to give money to Rowling or because they didn't want to consume "prejudiced" material will stop consuming Neil Gaiman.
this was a breath of fresh air! I feel like social media and the internet have given us so much additional access to information about celebrities, artists, and people of note generally and there's an instinct to respond to and have an opinion of every little detail. but as you say when you get caught in a cycle of reading and posting about it it can really take a toll on your brain because it doesn't produce an effect, it's like flicking a light switch repeatedly without the light coming on. the responsible person/people likely aren't seeing your post, it won't affect them. There are times where it's important to speak up, but like you say I think that it's more important to do the reflection on your own and then find a way to react that actually has substance, and in a lot of cases the best thing you can do is to disengage, to not support the person's work, to not continue to add to a conversation that's giving them a platform, and in cases where their actions are an example of a wider issue to look at how you can act on that rather than on the person themselves. great video.
Exceptionally well said. I just watched Tori Talks' video on this topic as well and she recommend the speech by Jack Gleeson on celebrity culture, which really opened my eyes in ways I was never expecting. And if I didn't already admire you enough, I absolutely love the fact that you took actual steps to take action and back up the things you proclaim to believe in here. Thanks so much for being you 🤍
I still haven’t finished that last article. The story gets more and more disturbing as it unfolds. I love your stance about taking action! Thank you for donating this video’s ad revenue to RAIIN! ❤
I actually *do* and always have felt Gainan is a hack. But that’s not relevant to separating art from artist. The artist is irrelevant to the art. The idea that people can separate child slaves in cobalt mines from their smartphones, but suddenly when it’s a painting we find an ethical reaction. It’s all performative nonsense.
This, everyday we make the choice to turn a blind eye. We live in a world where most mainstream or societal norms stem from unethical practices that being directly or indirectly.
interesting takes, I respect your opinion on this topic. I think time and time again most humans fail to live up to their own idealogical standards. It's difficult to watch someone fall from the pedestal we put them on. For me, when the Bill Cosby stuff came out it changed my view on public figures. I realized they're just people, and it's really difficult to truly know someone. Makes me more appreciative of the good people I know in my own life.
I really appreciate this video, and especially the steps you are taking around this issue. Thank you. Gaiman's works meant a lot to me too. I think leaving your old videos up makes sense. Maybe one option could be to leave a pinned comment on those videos with a link to this video? That way new viewers will have something to balance out the praise for Gaiman's works?
I was deeply saddened to hear about this about NG. Thanks for this, Bookborn. I feel the same way about this and I appreciate your attention and handling of this issue. The questions you raise have been addressed by many thinkers across the ages, from Aristotle to more recent art critics. And of course there is the question of the connection between fictional works and the individual mind. Art and story can have a profound effect on us, but the effects are extremely complex. This applies not just to works of fiction but works of all kinds. Your dedication to honesty and moral action is admirable. Fantastic video. I wish I could "thumbs up" 100 times.
Fantastic video, thank you for sharing the unfortunately controversial take that sometimes bad people do good things and there’s no one way to feel about it 🧡
I always think of Lovecraft and Poe when this sort of thing happens. Poe was a groomer and Lovecraft was a horrifying racist, but we still revere and read their works today. Even Agetha Christie had racist shit in her books that has been removed in more modern editions to protect her reputation. If there's distance between the creator and the work due to time seems to make it more acceptable to like them.
Completely agree with this weird paradox where being “on the internet” as a creator/commentator/influencer/etc is weird because you are giving a part of yourself to the world that is authentic, but so much is still left out, especially regarding values, how they change, etc. It’s unintentionally parasocial. I think your approach makes sense, and it’s what I’ve been doing for a while now even as a private person- the fact of the matter is, I’m growing increasingly uncomfortable with the idea that allyship/solidarity is seen as an “identity” that is self identified and then enforced through signaling, posts, and engagement. I think especially in the times we’re living in, that just doesn’t cut it anymore- it’s about action, about those actions then shaping us, and having that speak for itself. Occasionally verbalizing that through social media when the time calls. But the context of our reality used to be such that we had more faith in one another to be honest about what we claimed to support. Neil Gaiman is such a good example of how this backfires- it’s not enough to claim that you’re a feminist ally and to “symbolically” show that through your words and company. You must actually do the work, and MAYBE the people who benefit from that work will decide to bestow that label on you (though, I do think Gaiman successfully blind sighted even those who knew him personally, which is devastating). I think it’s interesting how as a culture we continue to frame our engagement of art/media/literature as consumption. I’ve already said enough… BUT… I think this is a problem too- like you said, going back and purging content I once enjoyed (or in your case, feeling conflicted about whether or not to delete videos) feels weird because I had a relationship with that piece. I might not anymore, but to say I merely consumed it and didn’t have an active relationship is weird- it was a vehicle to ask certain questions, a container to contemplate certain themes that didn’t feel safe to me elsewhere, sometimes I pushed back as a reader when something was bullshit to me, and I discarded it. Is that consumption? I know it’s a given that a piece has multiple meanings, but I think “consumption” eliminates the possibility of a reader being in conflict with art, and ends the conversation prematurely.
Whenever I watch your videos, I'm always impressed by your capacity to share your thoughts in a way that addresses the many layers of nuance that come with life.
An author shouldn't have to show up in the story to explain something to the reader. An author should assume the readers are smart enough to understand not all the characters in a story represent the morals of the author. The worldview of an author almost always is part of the story at some level, but that doesn't mean he or she approves of all of their characters' actions.
You make such good points! I am sooo worried about this situation happening with one of my favorite authors because it would not just destroy the work they did for me but it would destroy the part of me that connected with that work. I am very emotionally attached to books and how they make me feel things I do not know how to otherwise express.
Totally. It's why I'm also not out here to like pass some judgement on someone who likes a book/series whatever in which they don't support the author but keep the work 🤷♀ Books have helped me through some of my toughest times in life and the idea of having to just completely remove those books from my life is difficult. It's an individual decision!
Incredible words, and work here. Thanks for sharing such deep and intricate thoughts. Interlaced in them is a deep truth... that action is the next logical step to counter our own feelings, as opposed to (exclusively) marinating in them. Thanks for pushing that out of me, and the way that I think about this with Gaiman, and others. Great work.
Thanks for the video, very much enjoyed reflecting on this and appreciate how thoughtful and conscientious you are. Regarding should authors have to be moral, I feel uneasy about the idea that someone who decides to take up a creative writing project is somehow automatically beholden to anyone who might read it. Morality varies so much from group to group. I think the onus is more on the publishers who decide to purchase and distribute a work rather than an author. It certainly gets fuzzier for established authors who know they have no barrier to getting published and have a large reach, but in general I've never considered creative people as public servants. As you say, it's on us as readers to be thoughtful about what art we support as we get new information. It's definitely complicated though, especially since moral standards within groups aren't static. I'll continue to reflect on this topic!
That's the thing right! The idea of choosing who can and can't make art and what they can or cannot make art about is really uncomfortable. It's why usually those in the book space all collectively are against banning books. However, it also doesn't always FEEL good when something comes out (or an author) that we are super morally opposed to?? honestly idk if there will ever be a concrete answer.
I read all of Neil's work in the summer of 2019, after watching his interview on the Tim Ferriss show and falling in love with the way he described his process. I called it 'The Summer of Neil' and have rarely had more fun reading an author's bibliography. I have had a very similar response to you, Bookborn, and I'm really grateful for your thoughtful approach to this. Thanks for taking the time - I'm sure this was not fun or easy.
I am worried for a lot of female fans of Neil Gaiman. I truly loved some of Gaimans books but I was also deeply disturbed by his portrayal of certain female characters. I was disappointed by the allegations, but I was not surprised. The sandman series Calliope is trapped by a male author to use her as a muse. Fear/Domination American gods - the African goddess who consumes victims through sex, that whole piece just didn’t really fit in with the story imo and really depicts some odd male/female power dynamics. I was not a fan of this book. In fact I would go so far as to say that Coraline may be the only female character he wrote that was developed and had depth and resilience. While he writes strong female characters, they are often to support the male protagonist and lack independence in their character. To tie this back to your argument about morality in art, I think the examples above depict that, but why was it missed until the allegations came out? Was it carefully crafted prose that hid this, because I think it was right there all along. Honestly those two examples above have stuck with me in a not good way. Moreover, have you reexamined the bibliography through this lens ? If so, is it your responsibility as a reader to point out the authors lack of responsibility in his prose? What are we going to do about it? That’s a really tough question, do we ban his books as he has depicted his fiction in reality therefore breaking his responsibility as an author to be moral? Is there a bigger issue here? Should male authors be allowed to write about or write female characters that suffer abuse at the hands of another male? Or moreover, should we start looking at all of these works of fiction with the lens of the authors reality? Some of the “greats” have this same issue, Hemingway, Salinger, Lovecraft. Also some not so greats (imo) bukowski, Ellis, Nabokov. All of them frequently wrote in their own problems with morality, and in many cases mirrored it in real life or vice versa. Great video love the discussion, it is a tough one. I feel pretty betrayed too. Not gonna lie would have loved to see the adaption of the graveyard book, I think that and ocean at the end of the lane and Coraline all sit outside this argument save the author.
Love your comments on this. So good. I agree with so much you said. I just recently finished Yumi and I thought this quote was particularly poignant from it. "Hope is a grand thing, and having heroes is essential to human aspiration. That is part of why I tell these stories. That said, you do need to learn to separate the story--and what it has done to you--from the individual who prompted it. Art--and all stories are art, even the ones about real people--is about what it does to you. The true hero is the one in your mind, the representation of an ideal that makes you a better person. The individual who inspired it, well, they're like the book on the table or the art on the wall. A vessel. A syringe full of transformational aspiration."
I never got to read any of Gaiman’s books. Now, with what has happened, I can’t and think I won’t be able to read any of it for a while. Hope the victims can have some closure.
The best art has always been made by the artists that you would not invite to sleep on your couch. Perhaps the best portrayal of an artist is Animal from The Muppet Show: Dedicated to his drumming - but kept in chains for the safety of everyone else around.
Thank you for making your video now. It's a really great addition to the conversation: what to actually do about this? "As humans, it is natural for us to admire people. It would be almost impossible for us to stop." THANK YOU! I do wish more people had made videos in July/August when the allegations first came out. There was so much doubt about them, and I wish more people had stood up. That's not on your specifically, just, idk, something I feel sad about.
Hi there. I wanted to say not only that this video didn’t ramble, but that it was the best and most nuanced I’ve seen so far on this topic. There are little points here and there that, if we were talking, I might want to discuss further, but your reaction on the whole is so mature, decent, and free of the lurid character of some other videos-because let’s face it, a famous person’s moral turpitude is, among other things, a great way to create content our trauma-drunk culture will click on-that it deserves special commendation. You didn’t do the clickbait-y, feeding-frenzy thing at all, and that in itself makes it a moral (as opposed to commercial) gesture. That you spoke for yourself and emphasized the importance of action in the real world (rather than preaching to a virtual choir or shouting into the void) was really important. That you will give the proceeds for the video to RAINN is absolutely wonderful. They are a great organization. Of all the videos of yours I’ve seen, I thought this one was the very best. It was deeply human and deeply humane. Thank you.
I've learned not to make heroes out of people whose work I admire - whether artistic or otherwise. Even if they're not sex monsters (most of them aren't), no one benefits from putting famous people on pedestels. Not them, not you, and not me. One way I try to maintain distance with celebrities is that I never refer to them by just their first names. It helps to remind me - this person is a stranger and I dont really know them.
This is a great video, thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. It's great to see people using their platform to educate while also encouraging people to make an impact in real life rather than yelling into a void. Great points, appreciate you!
Man I’ve seen a ton of headlines reviewing the laundry list of things he did but no one was out to make a statement and then put a thesis statement in the damn title. I am absolutely watching this when I get home Update: I watched it, it was wonderful and full of nuance in only the way you can provide. Thank you Bookborn. Great reminders and insights.
I don't think anyone who likes Gaiman's writing is a bad person. I have never been a fan. Besides fantasy, I read a LOT of ex-cult member memoirs, especially ex-scientologist memoirs. So before I read anything by Gaiman, I already knew he and his family were high-ranking scientologists in the past. This maybe colored my opinion of his writing because I didn't connect with the 2.5 books of his that I tried. (Except Good Omens.) I almost never keep up with any authors' personal lives. But scientology is evil, and that's just a personal line in the sand that I drew. I don't judge anyone who likes his books. I definitely feel justified in my dislike of him now, though. Lol.
I've always drawn the line at actual behavior. I think sometimes fandoms have lumped political stances with actual criminal behavior a lot of the time. I'm okay reading both Fleming or Le Guin but would shy away from reading Bradley for fun. I literally just finished Good Omens before the news came out and I'm not sure I'd read it again.
I am Catholic, and as such I hold very specific views about morality that those outside the Church have trouble understanding, let alone agreeing with or even following. If I based what fiction I consumed on those who agreed with me 100% I would be a lot more restricted in what I read and enjoyed. I’m a huge Brandon Sanderson fan despite the many theological disagreements I have with him and his denomination. I love Neil Gaiman’s work. American Gods is one of my favorite books despite all the blatant immorality to be found within its pages. It’s simply not worth it to restrict yourself to only reading those you agree with. You have to be able to understand the viewpoints of the author and understand that everyone has their own experiences, and sometimes those might not line up with what you believe to be “moral.” Do your “research” if you want, but don’t let the twitter mob prevent you from enjoying some quality storytelling because they said the author was mean
For further reading Monsters: A Fan’s Dilemma by Claire Dederer is a great nonfiction read on when great artists do horrible things. I think you said it best of doing small actionable changes instead of virtue signaling. Thanks for such a nuanced video ❤
Dang I knew you really liked his books after the Gaiman challenge you did, I'm shocked you actually went to post a video about this. Kudos to you - that's why this channel is so good.
Thanks for your openness and honesty, for being thought-provoking, as always, and for setting up the charity connection. I remember being gutted when the news about Marion Zimmer Bradley came out. Mists of Avalon had been a foundational book for me. Human beings are extremely complicated, and have definitely shown our species' capacity for being monstrous. Gaining the perspective to seek to sort through that complexity is one of the benefits of reading broadly. Unfortunately you're right that this is going to happen again. All we can do is act according to our own moral center and belief system when it does. And read on.
Hit the nail on the head, pretty much. Neverwhere was my favorite book. I quoted Gaiman in my wedding vows. His stories had a profound effect on me. And yeah, I feel icky about that now.
Celebrity obsession is such a crazy thing that I'll never get behind. I have favorite actors: I'll go to a new movie for them because I love their performances, but I do not give a single care in the world about who they are beyond the screen. I don't watch talkshows etc, hell if I walked passed one of them they'd get the same nod I give to everyone else and nothing more. So for me nothing changes whenever bad news comes out and I catch wind of it, I'll still read the books I want to read, watch the movies I want to watch etc. Hell, if I weren't watching book recommendation channels on RUclips I might never have known about Gaiman, he's not relevant enough to appear on the news here. "I don't care," kinda sounds wrong in this context, because I obviously care enough to want these kinds of people to get what they deserve and it's awful to know there's just another vile person that has victimized others, but beyond that.. nothing changes for me.
This is such an honest and thought-provoking video. The advice to take a small action whenever you post about a topic has really hit home. I get fed up of seeing lots of virtue signalling online with little actual action or change behind it, so I end up just ignoring it all. But your video feels a lot more meaningful and it's clearly already succeeding in its mission to raise donations. This is the first of your videos I've seen, but you've got yourself a new subscriber!
Thank you for taking the time to think and process instead of react. I also wrestle with the same questions about performative outrage versus constructive discourse.
You are the best RUclipsr and bookreader on social media out there. I always really appreciate your viewpoints and personal reflections. Keep doing a great job!
This is something I, myself have been thinking of recently, isn't it so, that they say you really shouldn't meet those who you idolise or even a celebrity, a stranger, you look up to, as they may turn out to be exactly what you didn't think they could be, someone who they are not. This is the exact kind of conversations we should be having, its nice to trust others, but those we don't know, we should always be vigilant when it comes to terms of morality. Keep your guard up, but appreciate art for what it is, sadly we see past that and we are educated by it, not always a negative, but we can learn for better because of it.
You definitely influenced me to buy his books, and I know you will continue to influence my book purchases in the future. Thank you for what you do, and in particular, what you have done in this video.
I grew up on the films of George C Scott. My favorite movie is The Exorcist III. And then one day I read Scott's biography and discovered he was a nightmare of a human being. An unhinged, violent drunk. It was a real shock to the system. I still watch his movies, but I do so knowing that in the real world he was a deeply flawed, sometimes awful human being.
The uproar over Gaiman and Rowling has definitely highlighted a bit of a fracture in the book community online that I never really noticed until recently. Any of us who were always into classical literature and history are well acquainted with the concept of separating the art from the artist. History is full of bastards writing fantastic works of art that has illuminated us over the centuries. Throwing out all their work just makes you, and the rest of the world, more stupid. You just learn all you can and use your head to place perspective on their works.
This is the first video of yours that I've watched; you are very well spoken. I enjoyed hearing your thought process and analysis. Additionally, the video is beautifully framed. I know that this is a very emotional topic, and I am in a similar boat to you after hearing about the situation. You handled everything very well.
That was a very thoughtful video on a difficult topic. I have loved Gaiman’s work for over a decade and now I feel awful about it based on what I’ve read. I wasn’t sure what to do with his books. For now I have removed all of them from open display and have tucked them away. I hate to make a snap decision but I’m leaning towards getting rid of them in time. It’s tough to even deal with them at the moment as I’m so disgusted with Gaiman. I feel terrible for the women he abused and I commend you for the donations you are making.
I buy mostly secondhand books so I don't need to worry about the author as I am not supporting them. I do find it difficult to support someone who I don't think is worthy of that support so secondhand is the easy way to avoid any guilt. Not always possible when they're new books but I'm patient, there are many books to read so I can wait. Great video, thanks for Aotearoa New Zealand :)
I appreciate the point you made about how people will dismiss the work of a terrible person as "always having been terrible" and "it was always this bad". I saw this with J. K. Rowling and Joss Whedon. And while I would never want to invalid anyone's genuine feelings about their work and how their actions effect your enjoyment of said work, like you said, it is disingenuous to say that their work was always terrible and there was nothing good about it. You don't get someone as huge as Harry Potter or Buffy the Vampire Slayer with a large devoted fanbase by being a terrible writer. Like you said in the video, it is an easy out to claim that terrible people made terrible art and dismiss any genuine good qualities of said art because of their terrible actions. But life isn't so easy and like life, such art is complex. It's possible for a terrible person to make great art and how you deal with that reality will depend on a case-by-case basis. For example, I'm more okay listening and enjoying works by problematic people who are dead (music by Michael Jackson, works by H.P. Lovecraft, etc.) but try to avoid works by living people who are still actively causing harm (i.e. not supporting any new HP stuff cus of J.K. Rowling's transphobia). It might not be much and I'm sure others will disagree but this was my little way of engaging with good work by problematic people while not forgetting to acknowledge the problematic aspects of them. Overall, a great video and I love the deep questions that this video brings up and makes us all ponder about.
Great exploration on consequentialism in the perspective of the Neil Gaiman controversy. It seems like any time an author or artist does something bad, people take meaningless steps to make themselves feel better for having enjoyed the art in the first place like say "it was never that good anyway." By looking for a more consequentialist approach to the situation, you're donations will likely do more than reposting an article for people who are already aware of the issue.
I am absolutely heartbroken by this situation. Neil Gaiman was such an inspiration to me and I am devastated that he wound up being a creep just like any other guy. I hope that non-disgusting people can take what he made and make something beautiful out of it. He doesn't own that style of creative writing and we can prove it
I used to proudly proclaim I was a feminist-inspired, in part, by people such as Joss Whedon and Neil Gaiman who liked to identify as such. Both were storytellers I greatly admired ("worshipped" might be a tad strong, but they definitely inspired me and shaped my career). However, now I realize that Whedon and Gaiman hid behind the word "feminist" as a way to justify their terrible actions. Now I just focus on being a decent human being. I'll let others worry about how to label me. Hopefully, by my actions, it's clear who I am and what I'm about.
If I like the work of a person, then most of the time I want to know what makes that particular individual tick - whether they be writer, sculptor, painter, archtect, scientist, whomever. I want to have as complete an understanding of how they got to the point where I am in awe of their work. I find this extremely rewarding most of the time and have a pretty comprehensive library of biographies. It's addictive. I think morality is down to the individual. There should not be golden rules regarding this ambiguous state of mind.
10:10 this seems to be a problem that used to be reserved for religious communities and their literature choices. It seems that the younger generation has substituted their political sense of right and wrong for the religious sense of right and wrong. It seems that modern day readers, specifically those younger than 30, have adopted the kind of moral tests and moral correctness that in previous generations were enforced down on them by authoritarian governments or institutions
@AustinBeeman It’s not authoritarian to decide that we don’t want to engage with works by a rapist or anyone else an individual has problems with 🤷♀️ That’s a tenous connection at best
So let’s narrow it down: art is its own entity and it can be inspirational to those looking to do the right thing. The message is free from the potential-criminal. The inspiration comes from the idea not the individual
The virtue signaling in the comment sections is probably the worst thing folks can do to "do" something about the issue. Really great video. I think talking about this sort of thing is really helpful and does a great deal of good in light of such terrible wrongs.
We must also hold in mind the case of Kevin Spacey, who was also accused of cimmitting crimes but was acquitted. So, I would prefer to stick to the presumption of innocence unless proven otherwise in court of law.
@MarkusBoodus just because someone was acquitted doesn’t mean they didn’t commit said crime. Must be easy to tie your ‘at fault’ reasoning to a very broken legal system that allows SA abusers & r*pists freedom all the time though, doesn’t it?
Thank god for this…thank you for putting this out into the world. Personally, I have tried not to revere celebrities, which has only brought little comfort when huge headlines drop that are disturbing. I’ve tried to even look past the actions of individuals in my own life. When it’s someone close to you, it becomes especially difficult to come to terms with. And this one hit somewhere in the middle. I actually felt betrayal. I have been wrestling with my feelings on this ever since the news dropped. I’ve asked so many of the same questions you raised in your video. To have this discussion open helps me immensely…it’s time for some inner reflection on my part again and, thanks to this, I feel there might actually be some tangible action I can take. Thank you.
It seems overwhelming to ask if a bad person can write a "good person", so I tend to switch the question around. Is a good person able to accurately write a "bad person"? I would say yes. So why can't the converse be true? Works I think of are Notes from the Underground or Lolita-- the author is writing about a bad person, but we don't necessarily assume the author agrees with the unreliable narrator they created. The message of the novel can be different than what many of the work's words actually say. Or anything in the genre of satire. Often times writing "immorally" can actually lead to a "moral" outcome. It often depends on the reader what they take away from the work. I agree with your point referencing past moral outrages that had worse outcomes than even the "good" intentions the movement had. And many would agree that the people were not wishing to cause bad things to happen. It is the paradox of having to entrust the definition of "morality" to humans, who, no matter how "good" they are, they will make mistakes that are sometimes very destructive. Additionally, I think of people that have bad intentions, but hide behind the diction of things that are "moral" (ex. companies who decided to make Pride month merch when it became profitable but would have been against it before. They know how to twist the "moral" words for their benefit). Or the commentors on your video that were accusing you of pardoning Gaiman, even though the time stamp was clearly before the news and they were only hungry for the adrenaline of feeling morally superior. Beyond any of that, however, it always confuses me when people are so shocked when someone with a lot of money and power ends up doing terrible things. A different rich and powerful person is "exposed" every month or so, so in general I do not trust people who are in this category. There was a time before Gaiman was famous and rich, and I don't know enough to know if he was always a predator, or if the ability to "get away with it" enabled him to change in a negative way. But either way, it is a correlation: are deceptive people more capable of achieving power, or does power change good people into bad people? We may never know, and it will always be a very complex context.
A lot of people suck. Celebrity just shines a light on it. I don't think many people would survive unscathed under an intense scrutiny. For this reason, I divorce art from the artist and try not to know much about the artists I enjoy., This is not put light on any allegations or not say they are atrocious. Now if their work condones or justifies such actions, then I should find the work reprehensible and no longer patronize their works. There's so much room for philosophical arguments for enjoying the art despite the artist as well as boycotting the art because of the artist. Personally, I don't think you should demonetize your Gaimen videos, but link their future revenue towards ongoing donations to RAINN or other similar charities.
Hero worship comes in tons of forms and is really dumb. Rarely does anyone have more than a faint idea of who they are worshiping. People should be more skeptical and less conspiratorial, we'd be way better off.
But my point in this video is that you don't always realize you are admiring people and that it is a completely normal human emotion. If you have never ever looked up to anyone in your life -whether that be a parent, a teacher, a friend, or indeed, a public figure with whom you enjoyed their works - I would have a hard time believing it. I certainly didn't worship Gaiman, but I did admire him.
@@Bookborn I take your point, but we should recognize that we need to take note of when we are admiring "people we know personally" versus "people we know only secondarily". It is too easy to really love an artist's work and from that impute goodness to the author, even when we don't actually have the personal experience that would allow us to draw that conclusion. (People do this all the time, with e.g. Keanu Reeves.) I think this is fundamentally similar to the lesson Jane Austen draws in Pride and Prejudice, where she shows that jumping to conclusions on the basis of personal feeling and too little evidence is dangerous -- and it is better to maintain caution and to adjust one's feelings to the actual evidence. We would be much better off if we tempered our admiration of artists with a dose of good sense -- and a recognition that they, too, are mortals.
Great job. Such a difficult and uncomfortable topic, but we need people to speak out about it, especially people like you who are rational and nuanced. Thank you. 👍
There’s also the Michael Jackson or Harvey Weinstein rule, which says “the greatness of the art is measured by how much evil the artist is permitted to get away with” If these people weren’t creating great art, no one would be fighting mentally for the ability to keep enjoying it
Thank you for this video! It was incredibly thoughtful and nuanced, and I think your reflection that when something occurs that we feel strongly about, we should take action, even if it's just a small one, was so insightful. Quick suggestion, you mentioned deleting the videos already made about Gaiman feels dishonest. Someone else made a suggestion to turn those videos into fundraisers, which I think is a great idea. I also think it might be worth adding a pinned comment or something to the description that summarizes your current thoughts could be helpful for anyone who missed the controversy to see.
Love this video. Very complex topic that you handled with nuance. I still haven't decided fully what I'm going to do with my Gaiman novels but I can't see myself ever reading them again.
Dude, if you already liked his past books then continue to re-read them. Purchasing his future books is optional. The previous books and it's contents are not Neil Gaiman. It's creative work. By this logic, I'm guessing you probably banned watching PULP FICTION as well, because Harvey Weinstein produced it?
@enlighten92 chill out, brother. Some things aren't logic. Dude is just gross, I can't imagine *wanting* to read his books again. It's not about supporting Gaiman or not. Any time I'd be reading his books, I'd be thinking of that article.
@enlighten92 Guess reading a rapists’ works don’t bother you at all eh? It would color everything I thought I felt about him and what he’s made. The OP can do and feel whatever he wants.
@@readbykyle3082 Yes, Neil Gaiman is gross but his works which you hitherto loved cannot be gross. You already love them. Like you said, some things aren’t logical, so you’ll continue to like them despite Neil’s infamy. You cannot deny that part of you which still loves them.
@@OkamiRose why would it bother me? I’m indifferent to the author; I don’t have any obligation to condemn Neil. He was already a rapist before these allegations came out (unless he’s proven innocent which is unlikely) , but because nobody knew about his actions we all read and loved his books. Only your perception changed , the books remained the same. Also, OP is not a child that needs defending. I just provided him an alternate school of thought which he is free to consider and ponder about.
Inmoral things happen in the world and books are a window to the world, so i think it is important they exist. I went through the 7 stages of grief with the Neil's scandal and it was a reminder that you can't put anyone on a pedestal. Why can't people just be good people, whatever their morals or beliefs?
On the topic of celebrity worship, you shouldn't worship celebrities. My opinion is based on a simple interaction. There was an elderly celebrity who bought a cottage in rural PEI, in Canada, who was seen in a little store in the middle of nowhere. The guy working behind the counter said, "are you this person?" And the celebrity said, "yes". The guy behind the counter said,"cool" and went on with his day. That's how you should treat celebrities with a cool and a later, beyond that is crazy. It does make you think though, I have "The Pianist" on my movie shelf and when I fell in love with it, I had no idea who the director was. I found out it was Roman Polanski, who is a monster, and I could not let it go. The story of Władysław Szpilman and his family means a lot to me and I will never let that go. I hope, however, the director tries to pet a polar bear. I don't know if I can let go of Sandman but I may forget who wrote it instead.
I think we need to get beyond categorizing people as wholly good or wholly bad. If a person who spends much of their life doing horrible things has a secret habit of donating to charity or rescuing animals, we tend not to dismiss all of the bad and label that person good. By the same token, a person is more than the worst things they have ever done, we each have the capacity for both - and the longer a person lives the more chances increase that they will find themselves in a situation where they behave in a way they never thought possible. I never really got into Gaiman, but I wouldn't assume that contradictory behavior means all of the positive attributes he put forth were just a fake mask. If anything (from what I've seen from an attempt to get into Sandman, and Silas in The Graveyard Book) his characters often seem to struggle with their nature as being less good than they'd like to be. So I definitely don't think you should feel guilty or duped for some of his work resonating with you. I still like other artworks by problematic people, sometimes the most gifted people are not the most moral (in whatever cultural or historical context) but if we are going to disengage from any interaction with people who fall short of a standard of morality, I think we're going to miss a big part of the human experience. And I totally agree it has to be a personal decision, everyone is going to have their line.
also the thing about this, is celebrities lecturing us, like they have the moral high ground. we have been lectured to by these celebs like they ar eon the moral high ground! especially neil gaiman, he kept lecturing us like he was on the moral high ground. he was such a great feminist, looking down on us evil plebs, he had such virtue! and then behind the scenes he was worse than the worst s**mbag I know. yet still these celebs keep lecturing us and looking down on us! so yeah serves him right!
Honestly what rattles me so much about this is not even that I am shocked a monster could write such wonderful books, this has been proven to be true so many times, its how much I enjoyed his non-fiction and interviews. His talks about story telling and art were always deeply moving to me and I would return to them when I felt I needed motivation. I might be able to reread his books in my collection one day and acknowledge his skills, but I will never be able to find him inspiring again.
First off wow! What a well thought out conversation absolutely amazing self reflection, and an incredible job of recognizing the complexity of all that you were talking about. And I’m saying this about the content of what you were saying and about how you went about it how you were thinking about it. It was absolutely beautiful and amazing. Thank you so much. You truly are an amazing human.
You keep surprising me. This was an excellent dialogue on complicated topics. I personally separate art from artists. I also have my own personal boundaries for objective content.
This is a wonderful video. I really appreciate your efforts to think deeply and logically about everything. I also got into the trap of feeling like I needed to share my thoughts on every topic that was making waves in the world back like 10 years ago. I had a day where I couldn't handle the anxiety it gave me anymore, and I just took a permanent step back. That will never be me again.
Thank you for this. You delved deeper into a subject I’ve wrestled with for a while, particularly since the Gaiman news surfaced. His works, specifically American Gods, are some of my favorite pieces of fiction and his self styled “ally” persona made me always place him in my own “one of the good ones” category. The news shocked me and has made me question my own morality and relation to art and role models. You put concise and articulate words to my thoughts. Thank you again
Great video, had me thinking about moral's and what I read in a way i have never really thought about before. Normally similar to you, i don't really know about the authors life, unless it becomes a big news story and the author is a person which works I admire. I have not read any Gaiman works, it was on my list of reads, but this will no longer be the case, he will not be receiving my money. I cant' think of (or I know of) an author that I have read that has had a similar scandal. However it did make me think of Kevin Spacey and the series the House of Cards. The house card being series full of immoral or morally grey characters, some of which was reflected in actual politics in society. Now prior to him being outed as the man he is, I admired him as actor in the House of Cards and loved the series. I was shocked when the news came out about him and as a consequence did not (and will not) finish the second last or last season. The series itself dealt with very immoral characters, some of this reflected in politics in real life, for this, the portrayal of the president by spacey i admired him as actor for his ability to portray such as immoral person. So it had me thinking was I immoral to for enjoying the series and the immoral characters? or was it just I felt there was some element of truth in politics that was represented in this so it spoke to me? Or do i just enjoy morally grey characters, such as what i enjoy in books such as grim dark genre? I will continue to ponder these questions. Anyway i guess maybe the content of the series, made it even made the allegations even more disturbing to me, due to me liking the series and the immoral characters in the series and then the Juxtaposition of things he did. Maybe something about me was immoral. Again thanks for the thought provoking video.
I don't know why this cropped up in my right hand column, but I'm glad it did. I've never read anything by Neil Gaiman and didn't know anything about him, but your video has universal application. I've seen JK Rowling described as a 'once loved children's author' (She's still loved if her book sales are anything to go by) and occasionally joined in the debate about her, but with similar feelings of futility. Then there's Cat Stevens. I was a big fan of his in my youth, but haven't been able to listen to his stuff since he supported the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. But I still listen to Wagner even though I know he wasn't one of the good guys. Then there's Rolf Harris; I still have some of his songs playing in my head. Funny how we can overlook certain offences and forgive certain people but not others.
In my opinion, you should keep the Neil Gaiman videos up. I agree it would be dishonest and it would make you look like you're hiding something - even if that isn't true. Perhaps, you could link those videos so this one. That way people would have a clear picture of your perspective on the matter. I don't know, just a thought.
Thank you for this. This is a really excellent discussion. It is easy and natural to feel dejected and powerless when these things happen, so the conclusions around taking action are particularly helpful. RAINN is a great organization, donating now.
![Seungmin "그렇게, 천천히, 우리(As we are)" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/kAzmhLHePqU/mqdefault.jpg)
This is exactly the kind of discourse we should be having. Practical, honest, logical. Gaiman was my favorite author for many years throughout college and my 20s, and his books remain important to me in many ways. I won’t be getting rid of any of his books that I already own because, honestly, my shelves are riddled with immoral and unethical authors. I WILL take action in the most effective way I can by making sure he doesn’t get any more of my money, removing him from my list of authors I recommend to friends, and by steering my daughters toward other authors. Discussions like this produce actual change over time, and I really appreciate your honest self-reflection and practical advice.
It's funny because as I've been contemplating what I want to do with my Gaiman books (they are all still sitting on my shelf), I recognized the hypocrisy in it - even if I get rid of them, how many other people are sitting on my shelf that "shouldn't be there"? It's why this topic is so complicated! It also seems easier to separate that stuff when the author (or artist, what have you) is dead. I volunteer and teach art in my kids' schools and a lot of our very famous artists had...less than stellar lives. Anyway this is a ramble. I appreciate your comment 🙏
@Bookborn But if you do that for one (which is loud right now), don’t you need to do that for all of them? The world is full of flawed individuals, many times disappointing, or even despicable. Do you study the life of every author? Or do you appreciate the book for what it is?
If I did this for Hollywood, I probably would get rid of almost everything. Look how quickly the world forgives movie stars.
It’s also worth noting these are allegations and we will most likely never know what happened. Often there is more to the story than we are feed on the internet. But still, we as a society are quick to condemn and slow to forgive. Thank goodness most people don’t know about our own misdeeds, shortcomings, and flaws!
I think what I admire the most is that this acknowledges complexity and contradictions. There is no right answer for what to do with old videos and books, but you can control future actions.
@@Bookborndidn’t feel like a ramble at all and as I said in my own comment, this is important, framed the way it is.
@@cfosburgin my view, it’s the shock of it all. I’m sure it’s mentioned but how many of us COULD HAVE EVER IMAGINED a guy like this, who encouraged us to dream and be okay with it, would EVER be like this.
It’s only just starting to sink in, the unfathomable.
An idea for what to do with those Neil Gaiman videos: instead of demonetizing them, keep ads on but also donate the proceeds from them to RAINN. That way, those videos can do some good in the world to offset what he did.
Great idea!
I mean, if he in fact did any of the things the allegations say he did.
this is the proper way
It's always good to donate, but even if she doesn't, I don't see a problem with keeping existing videos monetized. His actions shouldn't destroy the work of others.
I would say don't delete them, if anything add a disclaimer to the description so people don't make assumptions. Another idea for future... situations: Don't demonetize those videos, but use whatever income you get from those to support a cause you feel comfortable with. Just ideas, don't mean to tell you what to do.
Great comment.
I think your conclusion that "I don't necessarily need to post/talk about it unless I'm actually willing to take some small action" is some of the wisest advice I've ever heard when it comes to how we act online. It adjusts perspective. I'm outraged? Yes! Or do I merely want to be perceived as appropriately outraged so that no one can accuse me of not caring? Or is there something (however small) that I can do? There may not always be something we can do, or maybe we don't have the bandwidth, but then we shouldn't feel compelled to loudly proclaim our alignments at every single controversy. Some random reader is not guilty by association till proven innocent
Having read all his work in comics, I really feel like he wasn't lying about his beliefs, but deluded himself into believing what he had done was fine. And i can't tell what's worse.
Wow, as someone who's basically sworn off social media completely at this point, I had completely missed this entire story. Gaiman's works were high on my TBR list, and I was even considering doing the same challenge you did after hearing how much you loved it. I'm a bit saddened that I won't get to enjoy those stories now, but I also know I wouldn’t be able to read them with the taint of what the author has done in my mind the entire time.
Your take on how social media engagement can often feel hollow and unproductive is exactly why I left it. I just felt that it so often devolved into meaningless virtue signaling in echo chambers. However, I was honestly quite inspired by what you said about how actually doing something real and tangible about issues you care about made you feel better. I'm going to try to incorporate that attitude and approach into my life more!
It might be silly, but I feel like writing positive comments to creators I love and respect is a small version of this. Even the small chance that my comment might, in some tiny way, help motivate creators like you to continue doing the fantastic work you do genuinely puts a smile on my face.
Thank you for another insightful and genuinely inspiring video. Keep doing good!
Not silly AT ALL. One year I made it a new years goal to write a letter a week to someone I admired. It made a huge difference on how I saw things, and reminded me that talking positively and intentionally filling our life with the good is super important.
I cut out almost all social media from my life except what I do for my book channel, and I cannot express how much happier it's made me lol. The last one I gave up was Reddit and I was literally shocked how less negative my life became 😅
This is such a breath of fresh air in the RUclips space. I already had a high opinion of you, but when you said you decided to always pair that social media activism with some real, tangible action, I appreciated you so much more. You don't pretend to have always been perfect, you don't virtue signal, you're honest and you explain your thought process so well. Thank you so much for this video, and the fundraiser and support you've given to the victims.
I have a lot to say about this! I just want to focus on a few points:
-- It is important to remember that people are complex. (Hopefully this is a lesson we learn from the Stormlight Archive, the First Law series, Song of Ice and Fire, etc.) No one's character and being is defined by the worst thing they do, nor the best thing they do. A person can do horrible things in one context, in a certain mood, while in another context, in a different state of mind, they create or do something wonderful and beautiful and heroic.
Thus, I think it's perfectly possible for someone like Gaiman, at one time, to write a beautiful, thoughtful, morally inspiring book or essay, and, at a later time, to commit an atrocious crime. That doesn't excuse what he did by any means (any more than seeing the fuller picture of Jaime Lannister excuses him throwing Bran out a window), but it also means that there isn't any reason to think that everything he writes must be horrible and corrupted with his sins. All people are a mix, and we can act very differently in different situations.
-- This is why I object to labelling any person a "monster." It's the same error as elevating a person we don't know as a hero. It oversimplifies and suggests that the person is through and through evil and irredeemable, and that's just not true.
-- I also object to the suggestion that people should go into reading guided by their pre-existing morality. On the contrary, I think the greatest works of literature are those that challenge presuppositions and force us to think about difficult questions. If we refused to read anything that challenged us, we would never learn or grow.
Love your comment. Well said.
But him writing well doesn’t mean he isn’t a rapist. That’s a lot of ways to walk around the actual issue- that people are willing to ignore his evils because ‘you should never have worshipped anyone anyways’ is a slippery slope into saying we can ignore any HUGE faults that any ‘famous person’ does. Did you ignore the Me too movement as well?
@@OkamiRose Okay, that's not at all what I said.
@benjaminrider6351 i mean it's a lot of word soup and you sound really smart but you compare gaimen to only literary characters allowing you to other him and justify your choices, he hurt real people bran isn't real you can't wash your hands clean of it on the premise of challenging yourself or "everything is grey actually" you can continue to support him that's your choice but don't live in delusion own your decision.
@ To simplify:
--What Gaiman did is an "atrocious crime" and not excusable (to quote my original post). I did NOT say I thought it was okay, nor did I say I supported him (I do not). I did not say "everything is grey" and there's no clear judgment to be made (I vehemently reject that idea).
--But people are complex and it's perfectly possible for a person do a horrible thing at one time and to something admirable and worth considering at another time. It may feel good to oversimplify people to have villains we can attack, but it doesn't help us get any closer to grasping the realities of human psychology and life.
--I gave literary examples because they are ones the audience of this channel is likely to be familiar with. And this kind of literature is valuable because it _does_ give us insight into the complexities of human beings and human psychology. Jaime is a great character because he's written to display that.
If you think we should just dismiss anyone who commits a crime as an all-evil monster--lock 'em up, throw away the key--that's your right. Lots of people seem to think that way. But I think it's not true to reality.
Actionable steps help me too, I appreciate how vulnerable this video is. Thanks for posting it
I love every time you have a thought video like this. They ask very important questions. They express your humanity and you seem like an incredibly genuine person. I can't think of a single reason why anyone would disagree with the content you consistently put out. Thank you for being such a wholesome booktuber 📚
I wonder if the same people who said they didn't consume Harry Potter because they didn't want to give money to Rowling or because they didn't want to consume "prejudiced" material will stop consuming Neil Gaiman.
It sounds like you have a problem with them, but yes, I think they will clearly stop reading his work.
this was a breath of fresh air! I feel like social media and the internet have given us so much additional access to information about celebrities, artists, and people of note generally and there's an instinct to respond to and have an opinion of every little detail. but as you say when you get caught in a cycle of reading and posting about it it can really take a toll on your brain because it doesn't produce an effect, it's like flicking a light switch repeatedly without the light coming on.
the responsible person/people likely aren't seeing your post, it won't affect them. There are times where it's important to speak up, but like you say I think that it's more important to do the reflection on your own and then find a way to react that actually has substance, and in a lot of cases the best thing you can do is to disengage, to not support the person's work, to not continue to add to a conversation that's giving them a platform, and in cases where their actions are an example of a wider issue to look at how you can act on that rather than on the person themselves. great video.
Exceptionally well said. I just watched Tori Talks' video on this topic as well and she recommend the speech by Jack Gleeson on celebrity culture, which really opened my eyes in ways I was never expecting.
And if I didn't already admire you enough, I absolutely love the fact that you took actual steps to take action and back up the things you proclaim to believe in here. Thanks so much for being you 🤍
I still haven’t finished that last article. The story gets more and more disturbing as it unfolds. I love your stance about taking action! Thank you for donating this video’s ad revenue to RAIIN! ❤
I actually *do* and always have felt Gainan is a hack. But that’s not relevant to separating art from artist. The artist is irrelevant to the art.
The idea that people can separate child slaves in cobalt mines from their smartphones, but suddenly when it’s a painting we find an ethical reaction. It’s all performative nonsense.
This, everyday we make the choice to turn a blind eye. We live in a world where most mainstream or societal norms stem from unethical practices that being directly or indirectly.
👏👏👏👏
interesting takes, I respect your opinion on this topic. I think time and time again most humans fail to live up to their own idealogical standards. It's difficult to watch someone fall from the pedestal we put them on. For me, when the Bill Cosby stuff came out it changed my view on public figures. I realized they're just people, and it's really difficult to truly know someone. Makes me more appreciative of the good people I know in my own life.
I really appreciate this video, and especially the steps you are taking around this issue. Thank you. Gaiman's works meant a lot to me too.
I think leaving your old videos up makes sense. Maybe one option could be to leave a pinned comment on those videos with a link to this video? That way new viewers will have something to balance out the praise for Gaiman's works?
I was deeply saddened to hear about this about NG. Thanks for this, Bookborn. I feel the same way about this and I appreciate your attention and handling of this issue. The questions you raise have been addressed by many thinkers across the ages, from Aristotle to more recent art critics. And of course there is the question of the connection between fictional works and the individual mind. Art and story can have a profound effect on us, but the effects are extremely complex. This applies not just to works of fiction but works of all kinds. Your dedication to honesty and moral action is admirable. Fantastic video. I wish I could "thumbs up" 100 times.
Fantastic video, thank you for sharing the unfortunately controversial take that sometimes bad people do good things and there’s no one way to feel about it 🧡
I always think of Lovecraft and Poe when this sort of thing happens.
Poe was a groomer and Lovecraft was a horrifying racist, but we still revere and read their works today.
Even Agetha Christie had racist shit in her books that has been removed in more modern editions to protect her reputation.
If there's distance between the creator and the work due to time seems to make it more acceptable to like them.
Completely agree with this weird paradox where being “on the internet” as a creator/commentator/influencer/etc is weird because you are giving a part of yourself to the world that is authentic, but so much is still left out, especially regarding values, how they change, etc. It’s unintentionally parasocial.
I think your approach makes sense, and it’s what I’ve been doing for a while now even as a private person- the fact of the matter is, I’m growing increasingly uncomfortable with the idea that allyship/solidarity is seen as an “identity” that is self identified and then enforced through signaling, posts, and engagement. I think especially in the times we’re living in, that just doesn’t cut it anymore- it’s about action, about those actions then shaping us, and having that speak for itself. Occasionally verbalizing that through social media when the time calls. But the context of our reality used to be such that we had more faith in one another to be honest about what we claimed to support. Neil Gaiman is such a good example of how this backfires- it’s not enough to claim that you’re a feminist ally and to “symbolically” show that through your words and company. You must actually do the work, and MAYBE the people who benefit from that work will decide to bestow that label on you (though, I do think Gaiman successfully blind sighted even those who knew him personally, which is devastating).
I think it’s interesting how as a culture we continue to frame our engagement of art/media/literature as consumption. I’ve already said enough… BUT… I think this is a problem too- like you said, going back and purging content I once enjoyed (or in your case, feeling conflicted about whether or not to delete videos) feels weird because I had a relationship with that piece. I might not anymore, but to say I merely consumed it and didn’t have an active relationship is weird- it was a vehicle to ask certain questions, a container to contemplate certain themes that didn’t feel safe to me elsewhere, sometimes I pushed back as a reader when something was bullshit to me, and I discarded it. Is that consumption? I know it’s a given that a piece has multiple meanings, but I think “consumption” eliminates the possibility of a reader being in conflict with art, and ends the conversation prematurely.
Whenever I watch your videos, I'm always impressed by your capacity to share your thoughts in a way that addresses the many layers of nuance that come with life.
An author shouldn't have to show up in the story to explain something to the reader. An author should assume the readers are smart enough to understand not all the characters in a story represent the morals of the author. The worldview of an author almost always is part of the story at some level, but that doesn't mean he or she approves of all of their characters' actions.
You make such good points! I am sooo worried about this situation happening with one of my favorite authors because it would not just destroy the work they did for me but it would destroy the part of me that connected with that work. I am very emotionally attached to books and how they make me feel things I do not know how to otherwise express.
Totally. It's why I'm also not out here to like pass some judgement on someone who likes a book/series whatever in which they don't support the author but keep the work 🤷♀ Books have helped me through some of my toughest times in life and the idea of having to just completely remove those books from my life is difficult. It's an individual decision!
Incredible words, and work here. Thanks for sharing such deep and intricate thoughts. Interlaced in them is a deep truth... that action is the next logical step to counter our own feelings, as opposed to (exclusively) marinating in them. Thanks for pushing that out of me, and the way that I think about this with Gaiman, and others. Great work.
Thanks for the video, very much enjoyed reflecting on this and appreciate how thoughtful and conscientious you are. Regarding should authors have to be moral, I feel uneasy about the idea that someone who decides to take up a creative writing project is somehow automatically beholden to anyone who might read it. Morality varies so much from group to group. I think the onus is more on the publishers who decide to purchase and distribute a work rather than an author. It certainly gets fuzzier for established authors who know they have no barrier to getting published and have a large reach, but in general I've never considered creative people as public servants. As you say, it's on us as readers to be thoughtful about what art we support as we get new information. It's definitely complicated though, especially since moral standards within groups aren't static. I'll continue to reflect on this topic!
That's the thing right! The idea of choosing who can and can't make art and what they can or cannot make art about is really uncomfortable. It's why usually those in the book space all collectively are against banning books. However, it also doesn't always FEEL good when something comes out (or an author) that we are super morally opposed to?? honestly idk if there will ever be a concrete answer.
I read all of Neil's work in the summer of 2019, after watching his interview on the Tim Ferriss show and falling in love with the way he described his process. I called it 'The Summer of Neil' and have rarely had more fun reading an author's bibliography. I have had a very similar response to you, Bookborn, and I'm really grateful for your thoughtful approach to this. Thanks for taking the time - I'm sure this was not fun or easy.
I am worried for a lot of female fans of Neil Gaiman. I truly loved some of Gaimans books but I was also deeply disturbed by his portrayal of certain female characters. I was disappointed by the allegations, but I was not surprised.
The sandman series Calliope is trapped by a male author to use her as a muse. Fear/Domination
American gods - the African goddess who consumes victims through sex, that whole piece just didn’t really fit in with the story imo and really depicts some odd male/female power dynamics. I was not a fan of this book.
In fact I would go so far as to say that Coraline may be the only female character he wrote that was developed and had depth and resilience. While he writes strong female characters, they are often to support the male protagonist and lack independence in their character.
To tie this back to your argument about morality in art, I think the examples above depict that, but why was it missed until the allegations came out? Was it carefully crafted prose that hid this, because I think it was right there all along. Honestly those two examples above have stuck with me in a not good way. Moreover, have you reexamined the bibliography through this lens ? If so, is it your responsibility as a reader to point out the authors lack of responsibility in his prose?
What are we going to do about it? That’s a really tough question, do we ban his books as he has depicted his fiction in reality therefore breaking his responsibility as an author to be moral?
Is there a bigger issue here? Should male authors be allowed to write about or write female characters that suffer abuse at the hands of another male?
Or moreover, should we start looking at all of these works of fiction with the lens of the authors reality?
Some of the “greats” have this same issue, Hemingway, Salinger, Lovecraft. Also some not so greats (imo) bukowski, Ellis, Nabokov. All of them frequently wrote in their own problems with morality, and in many cases mirrored it in real life or vice versa. Great video love the discussion, it is a tough one. I feel pretty betrayed too. Not gonna lie would have loved to see the adaption of the graveyard book, I think that and ocean at the end of the lane and Coraline all sit outside this argument save the author.
I hadn't seen that collection of essays from Ursula K. Le Guin before! looks incredible
It's sooo good, and Ken Liu's introduction is fantastic (as usual!)
Love your comments on this. So good. I agree with so much you said. I just recently finished Yumi and I thought this quote was particularly poignant from it. "Hope is a grand thing, and having heroes is essential to human aspiration. That is part of why I tell these stories. That said, you do need to learn to separate the story--and what it has done to you--from the individual who prompted it. Art--and all stories are art, even the ones about real people--is about what it does to you. The true hero is the one in your mind, the representation of an ideal that makes you a better person. The individual who inspired it, well, they're like the book on the table or the art on the wall. A vessel. A syringe full of transformational aspiration."
I never got to read any of Gaiman’s books. Now, with what has happened, I can’t and think I won’t be able to read any of it for a while. Hope the victims can have some closure.
Thank you for using your platform to do some good
The best art has always been made by the artists that you would not invite to sleep on your couch.
Perhaps the best portrayal of an artist is Animal from The Muppet Show: Dedicated to his drumming - but kept in chains for the safety of everyone else around.
Thank you for making your video now. It's a really great addition to the conversation: what to actually do about this?
"As humans, it is natural for us to admire people. It would be almost impossible for us to stop." THANK YOU!
I do wish more people had made videos in July/August when the allegations first came out. There was so much doubt about them, and I wish more people had stood up. That's not on your specifically, just, idk, something I feel sad about.
Hi there. I wanted to say not only that this video didn’t ramble, but that it was the best and most nuanced I’ve seen so far on this topic. There are little points here and there that, if we were talking, I might want to discuss further, but your reaction on the whole is so mature, decent, and free of the lurid character of some other videos-because let’s face it, a famous person’s moral turpitude is, among other things, a great way to create content our trauma-drunk culture will click on-that it deserves special commendation. You didn’t do the clickbait-y, feeding-frenzy thing at all, and that in itself makes it a moral (as opposed to commercial) gesture. That you spoke for yourself and emphasized the importance of action in the real world (rather than preaching to a virtual choir or shouting into the void) was really important. That you will give the proceeds for the video to RAINN is absolutely wonderful. They are a great organization.
Of all the videos of yours I’ve seen, I thought this one was the very best. It was deeply human and deeply humane. Thank you.
I've learned not to make heroes out of people whose work I admire - whether artistic or otherwise. Even if they're not sex monsters (most of them aren't), no one benefits from putting famous people on pedestels. Not them, not you, and not me.
One way I try to maintain distance with celebrities is that I never refer to them by just their first names. It helps to remind me - this person is a stranger and I dont really know them.
This is a great video, thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. It's great to see people using their platform to educate while also encouraging people to make an impact in real life rather than yelling into a void. Great points, appreciate you!
Man I’ve seen a ton of headlines reviewing the laundry list of things he did but no one was out to make a statement and then put a thesis statement in the damn title.
I am absolutely watching this when I get home
Update: I watched it, it was wonderful and full of nuance in only the way you can provide. Thank you Bookborn. Great reminders and insights.
I don't think anyone who likes Gaiman's writing is a bad person. I have never been a fan. Besides fantasy, I read a LOT of ex-cult member memoirs, especially ex-scientologist memoirs. So before I read anything by Gaiman, I already knew he and his family were high-ranking scientologists in the past. This maybe colored my opinion of his writing because I didn't connect with the 2.5 books of his that I tried. (Except Good Omens.) I almost never keep up with any authors' personal lives. But scientology is evil, and that's just a personal line in the sand that I drew. I don't judge anyone who likes his books. I definitely feel justified in my dislike of him now, though. Lol.
I've always drawn the line at actual behavior. I think sometimes fandoms have lumped political stances with actual criminal behavior a lot of the time. I'm okay reading both Fleming or Le Guin but would shy away from reading Bradley for fun. I literally just finished Good Omens before the news came out and I'm not sure I'd read it again.
I am Catholic, and as such I hold very specific views about morality that those outside the Church have trouble understanding, let alone agreeing with or even following. If I based what fiction I consumed on those who agreed with me 100% I would be a lot more restricted in what I read and enjoyed. I’m a huge Brandon Sanderson fan despite the many theological disagreements I have with him and his denomination. I love Neil Gaiman’s work. American Gods is one of my favorite books despite all the blatant immorality to be found within its pages. It’s simply not worth it to restrict yourself to only reading those you agree with. You have to be able to understand the viewpoints of the author and understand that everyone has their own experiences, and sometimes those might not line up with what you believe to be “moral.” Do your “research” if you want, but don’t let the twitter mob prevent you from enjoying some quality storytelling because they said the author was mean
For further reading Monsters: A Fan’s Dilemma by Claire Dederer is a great nonfiction read on when great artists do horrible things.
I think you said it best of doing small actionable changes instead of virtue signaling. Thanks for such a nuanced video ❤
Dang I knew you really liked his books after the Gaiman challenge you did, I'm shocked you actually went to post a video about this. Kudos to you - that's why this channel is so good.
Thanks for your openness and honesty, for being thought-provoking, as always, and for setting up the charity connection. I remember being gutted when the news about Marion Zimmer Bradley came out. Mists of Avalon had been a foundational book for me. Human beings are extremely complicated, and have definitely shown our species' capacity for being monstrous. Gaining the perspective to seek to sort through that complexity is one of the benefits of reading broadly. Unfortunately you're right that this is going to happen again. All we can do is act according to our own moral center and belief system when it does. And read on.
Hit the nail on the head, pretty much. Neverwhere was my favorite book. I quoted Gaiman in my wedding vows. His stories had a profound effect on me. And yeah, I feel icky about that now.
It's not about you. You have nothing to feel guilty or icky over.
Celebrity obsession is such a crazy thing that I'll never get behind. I have favorite actors: I'll go to a new movie for them because I love their performances, but I do not give a single care in the world about who they are beyond the screen. I don't watch talkshows etc, hell if I walked passed one of them they'd get the same nod I give to everyone else and nothing more. So for me nothing changes whenever bad news comes out and I catch wind of it, I'll still read the books I want to read, watch the movies I want to watch etc. Hell, if I weren't watching book recommendation channels on RUclips I might never have known about Gaiman, he's not relevant enough to appear on the news here. "I don't care," kinda sounds wrong in this context, because I obviously care enough to want these kinds of people to get what they deserve and it's awful to know there's just another vile person that has victimized others, but beyond that.. nothing changes for me.
This is such an honest and thought-provoking video. The advice to take a small action whenever you post about a topic has really hit home. I get fed up of seeing lots of virtue signalling online with little actual action or change behind it, so I end up just ignoring it all. But your video feels a lot more meaningful and it's clearly already succeeding in its mission to raise donations. This is the first of your videos I've seen, but you've got yourself a new subscriber!
This is the most rational and level headed response I've heard on the topic. Great job
Thank you for taking the time to think and process instead of react. I also wrestle with the same questions about performative outrage versus constructive discourse.
You are the best RUclipsr and bookreader on social media out there. I always really appreciate your viewpoints and personal reflections. Keep doing a great job!
This is something I, myself have been thinking of recently, isn't it so, that they say you really shouldn't meet those who you idolise or even a celebrity, a stranger, you look up to, as they may turn out to be exactly what you didn't think they could be, someone who they are not. This is the exact kind of conversations we should be having, its nice to trust others, but those we don't know, we should always be vigilant when it comes to terms of morality. Keep your guard up, but appreciate art for what it is, sadly we see past that and we are educated by it, not always a negative, but we can learn for better because of it.
You definitely influenced me to buy his books, and I know you will continue to influence my book purchases in the future. Thank you for what you do, and in particular, what you have done in this video.
I have been grappling with all the intense feelings as well and I appreciated your video. We need discussions like these.
I grew up on the films of George C Scott. My favorite movie is The Exorcist III.
And then one day I read Scott's biography and discovered he was a nightmare of a human being. An unhinged, violent drunk. It was a real shock to the system.
I still watch his movies, but I do so knowing that in the real world he was a deeply flawed, sometimes awful human being.
The uproar over Gaiman and Rowling has definitely highlighted a bit of a fracture in the book community online that I never really noticed until recently. Any of us who were always into classical literature and history are well acquainted with the concept of separating the art from the artist. History is full of bastards writing fantastic works of art that has illuminated us over the centuries. Throwing out all their work just makes you, and the rest of the world, more stupid. You just learn all you can and use your head to place perspective on their works.
Don't you think lumping those two together is a bit of a false equivalency?
This is the first video of yours that I've watched; you are very well spoken. I enjoyed hearing your thought process and analysis. Additionally, the video is beautifully framed.
I know that this is a very emotional topic, and I am in a similar boat to you after hearing about the situation. You handled everything very well.
That was a very thoughtful video on a difficult topic. I have loved Gaiman’s work for over a decade and now I feel awful about it based on what I’ve read. I wasn’t sure what to do with his books. For now I have removed all of them from open display and have tucked them away. I hate to make a snap decision but I’m leaning towards getting rid of them in time. It’s tough to even deal with them at the moment as I’m so disgusted with Gaiman. I feel terrible for the women he abused and I commend you for the donations you are making.
I buy mostly secondhand books so I don't need to worry about the author as I am not supporting them. I do find it difficult to support someone who I don't think is worthy of that support so secondhand is the easy way to avoid any guilt. Not always possible when they're new books but I'm patient, there are many books to read so I can wait. Great video, thanks for Aotearoa New Zealand :)
Props to you for this video. There are too many cowards and parasocial creeps out there who ignore, deny, or excuse these topics.
I appreciate the point you made about how people will dismiss the work of a terrible person as "always having been terrible" and "it was always this bad". I saw this with J. K. Rowling and Joss Whedon. And while I would never want to invalid anyone's genuine feelings about their work and how their actions effect your enjoyment of said work, like you said, it is disingenuous to say that their work was always terrible and there was nothing good about it. You don't get someone as huge as Harry Potter or Buffy the Vampire Slayer with a large devoted fanbase by being a terrible writer. Like you said in the video, it is an easy out to claim that terrible people made terrible art and dismiss any genuine good qualities of said art because of their terrible actions. But life isn't so easy and like life, such art is complex. It's possible for a terrible person to make great art and how you deal with that reality will depend on a case-by-case basis. For example, I'm more okay listening and enjoying works by problematic people who are dead (music by Michael Jackson, works by H.P. Lovecraft, etc.) but try to avoid works by living people who are still actively causing harm (i.e. not supporting any new HP stuff cus of J.K. Rowling's transphobia). It might not be much and I'm sure others will disagree but this was my little way of engaging with good work by problematic people while not forgetting to acknowledge the problematic aspects of them. Overall, a great video and I love the deep questions that this video brings up and makes us all ponder about.
Great exploration on consequentialism in the perspective of the Neil Gaiman controversy. It seems like any time an author or artist does something bad, people take meaningless steps to make themselves feel better for having enjoyed the art in the first place like say "it was never that good anyway." By looking for a more consequentialist approach to the situation, you're donations will likely do more than reposting an article for people who are already aware of the issue.
I am absolutely heartbroken by this situation. Neil Gaiman was such an inspiration to me and I am devastated that he wound up being a creep just like any other guy. I hope that non-disgusting people can take what he made and make something beautiful out of it. He doesn't own that style of creative writing and we can prove it
I used to proudly proclaim I was a feminist-inspired, in part, by people such as Joss Whedon and Neil Gaiman who liked to identify as such. Both were storytellers I greatly admired ("worshipped" might be a tad strong, but they definitely inspired me and shaped my career). However, now I realize that Whedon and Gaiman hid behind the word "feminist" as a way to justify their terrible actions. Now I just focus on being a decent human being. I'll let others worry about how to label me. Hopefully, by my actions, it's clear who I am and what I'm about.
If I like the work of a person, then most of the time I want to know what makes that particular individual tick - whether they be writer, sculptor, painter, archtect, scientist, whomever. I want to have as complete an understanding of how they got to the point where I am in awe of their work. I find this extremely rewarding most of the time and have a pretty comprehensive library of biographies. It's addictive. I think morality is down to the individual. There should not be golden rules regarding this ambiguous state of mind.
10:10 this seems to be a problem that used to be reserved for religious communities and their literature choices. It seems that the younger generation has substituted their political sense of right and wrong for the religious sense of right and wrong. It seems that modern day readers, specifically those younger than 30, have adopted the kind of moral tests and moral correctness that in previous generations were enforced down on them by authoritarian governments or institutions
This is such a fascinating connection and I will absolutely be thinking about it more
Religion and politics are both part of morality. All social behaviors and views are part of morality
@AustinBeeman It’s not authoritarian to decide that we don’t want to engage with works by a rapist or anyone else an individual has problems with 🤷♀️ That’s a tenous connection at best
So let’s narrow it down: art is its own entity and it can be inspirational to those looking to do the right thing. The message is free from the potential-criminal. The inspiration comes from the idea not the individual
That Brittanica quote was so clear and elegant.
The virtue signaling in the comment sections is probably the worst thing folks can do to "do" something about the issue. Really great video. I think talking about this sort of thing is really helpful and does a great deal of good in light of such terrible wrongs.
Really appreciate your thoughtfulness on the matter, it’s very evident of your care and sincerity on these issues and the world writ large.
We must also hold in mind the case of Kevin Spacey, who was also accused of cimmitting crimes but was acquitted. So, I would prefer to stick to the presumption of innocence unless proven otherwise in court of law.
@MarkusBoodus just because someone was acquitted doesn’t mean they didn’t commit said crime. Must be easy to tie your ‘at fault’ reasoning to a very broken legal system that allows SA abusers & r*pists freedom all the time though, doesn’t it?
Thank god for this…thank you for putting this out into the world. Personally, I have tried not to revere celebrities, which has only brought little comfort when huge headlines drop that are disturbing. I’ve tried to even look past the actions of individuals in my own life. When it’s someone close to you, it becomes especially difficult to come to terms with. And this one hit somewhere in the middle. I actually felt betrayal. I have been wrestling with my feelings on this ever since the news dropped. I’ve asked so many of the same questions you raised in your video. To have this discussion open helps me immensely…it’s time for some inner reflection on my part again and, thanks to this, I feel there might actually be some tangible action I can take. Thank you.
It seems overwhelming to ask if a bad person can write a "good person", so I tend to switch the question around. Is a good person able to accurately write a "bad person"? I would say yes. So why can't the converse be true? Works I think of are Notes from the Underground or Lolita-- the author is writing about a bad person, but we don't necessarily assume the author agrees with the unreliable narrator they created. The message of the novel can be different than what many of the work's words actually say. Or anything in the genre of satire. Often times writing "immorally" can actually lead to a "moral" outcome. It often depends on the reader what they take away from the work.
I agree with your point referencing past moral outrages that had worse outcomes than even the "good" intentions the movement had. And many would agree that the people were not wishing to cause bad things to happen. It is the paradox of having to entrust the definition of "morality" to humans, who, no matter how "good" they are, they will make mistakes that are sometimes very destructive. Additionally, I think of people that have bad intentions, but hide behind the diction of things that are "moral" (ex. companies who decided to make Pride month merch when it became profitable but would have been against it before. They know how to twist the "moral" words for their benefit). Or the commentors on your video that were accusing you of pardoning Gaiman, even though the time stamp was clearly before the news and they were only hungry for the adrenaline of feeling morally superior.
Beyond any of that, however, it always confuses me when people are so shocked when someone with a lot of money and power ends up doing terrible things. A different rich and powerful person is "exposed" every month or so, so in general I do not trust people who are in this category. There was a time before Gaiman was famous and rich, and I don't know enough to know if he was always a predator, or if the ability to "get away with it" enabled him to change in a negative way. But either way, it is a correlation: are deceptive people more capable of achieving power, or does power change good people into bad people? We may never know, and it will always be a very complex context.
A lot of people suck. Celebrity just shines a light on it. I don't think many people would survive unscathed under an intense scrutiny. For this reason, I divorce art from the artist and try not to know much about the artists I enjoy., This is not put light on any allegations or not say they are atrocious. Now if their work condones or justifies such actions, then I should find the work reprehensible and no longer patronize their works. There's so much room for philosophical arguments for enjoying the art despite the artist as well as boycotting the art because of the artist.
Personally, I don't think you should demonetize your Gaimen videos, but link their future revenue towards ongoing donations to RAINN or other similar charities.
As George Orwell once said, all saints should be assumed guilty until proven otherwise.
Hero worship comes in tons of forms and is really dumb. Rarely does anyone have more than a faint idea of who they are worshiping. People should be more skeptical and less conspiratorial, we'd be way better off.
But my point in this video is that you don't always realize you are admiring people and that it is a completely normal human emotion. If you have never ever looked up to anyone in your life -whether that be a parent, a teacher, a friend, or indeed, a public figure with whom you enjoyed their works - I would have a hard time believing it. I certainly didn't worship Gaiman, but I did admire him.
@@Bookborn I take your point, but we should recognize that we need to take note of when we are admiring "people we know personally" versus "people we know only secondarily". It is too easy to really love an artist's work and from that impute goodness to the author, even when we don't actually have the personal experience that would allow us to draw that conclusion. (People do this all the time, with e.g. Keanu Reeves.) I think this is fundamentally similar to the lesson Jane Austen draws in Pride and Prejudice, where she shows that jumping to conclusions on the basis of personal feeling and too little evidence is dangerous -- and it is better to maintain caution and to adjust one's feelings to the actual evidence. We would be much better off if we tempered our admiration of artists with a dose of good sense -- and a recognition that they, too, are mortals.
Great job. Such a difficult and uncomfortable topic, but we need people to speak out about it, especially people like you who are rational and nuanced. Thank you. 👍
Thank you for your thoughts and transparency in this video Bookborn. And most of all thank you for your actions to help other victims of abuse ❤
Personally, I'll continue to read Gaiman's work, but he now goes on my "only buy second-hand" list.
There’s also the Michael Jackson or Harvey Weinstein rule, which says “the greatness of the art is measured by how much evil the artist is permitted to get away with”
If these people weren’t creating great art, no one would be fighting mentally for the ability to keep enjoying it
Thank you for this video! It was incredibly thoughtful and nuanced, and I think your reflection that when something occurs that we feel strongly about, we should take action, even if it's just a small one, was so insightful.
Quick suggestion, you mentioned deleting the videos already made about Gaiman feels dishonest. Someone else made a suggestion to turn those videos into fundraisers, which I think is a great idea. I also think it might be worth adding a pinned comment or something to the description that summarizes your current thoughts could be helpful for anyone who missed the controversy to see.
Thank you for opening conversations on this topic Bookborn.
Love this video. Very complex topic that you handled with nuance. I still haven't decided fully what I'm going to do with my Gaiman novels but I can't see myself ever reading them again.
Dude, if you already liked his past books then continue to re-read them. Purchasing his future books is optional. The previous books and it's contents are not Neil Gaiman. It's creative work.
By this logic, I'm guessing you probably banned watching PULP FICTION as well, because Harvey Weinstein produced it?
@enlighten92 chill out, brother. Some things aren't logic. Dude is just gross, I can't imagine *wanting* to read his books again. It's not about supporting Gaiman or not. Any time I'd be reading his books, I'd be thinking of that article.
@enlighten92 Guess reading a rapists’ works don’t bother you at all eh? It would color everything I thought I felt about him and what he’s made. The OP can do and feel whatever he wants.
@@readbykyle3082 Yes, Neil Gaiman is gross but his works which you hitherto loved cannot be gross. You already love them. Like you said, some things aren’t logical, so you’ll continue to like them despite Neil’s infamy. You cannot deny that part of you which still loves them.
@@OkamiRose why would it bother me? I’m indifferent to the author; I don’t have any obligation to condemn Neil. He was already a rapist before these allegations came out (unless he’s proven innocent which is unlikely) , but because nobody knew about his actions we all read and loved his books. Only your perception changed , the books remained the same.
Also, OP is not a child that needs defending. I just provided him an alternate school of thought which he is free to consider and ponder about.
A complex topic handled wonderfully … so incredibly thoughtful. Appreciate this video. ❤
Inmoral things happen in the world and books are a window to the world, so i think it is important they exist. I went through the 7 stages of grief with the Neil's scandal and it was a reminder that you can't put anyone on a pedestal. Why can't people just be good people, whatever their morals or beliefs?
On the topic of celebrity worship, you shouldn't worship celebrities. My opinion is based on a simple interaction. There was an elderly celebrity who bought a cottage in rural PEI, in Canada, who was seen in a little store in the middle of nowhere. The guy working behind the counter said, "are you this person?" And the celebrity said, "yes". The guy behind the counter said,"cool" and went on with his day. That's how you should treat celebrities with a cool and a later, beyond that is crazy. It does make you think though, I have "The Pianist" on my movie shelf and when I fell in love with it, I had no idea who the director was. I found out it was Roman Polanski, who is a monster, and I could not let it go. The story of Władysław Szpilman and his family means a lot to me and I will never let that go. I hope, however, the director tries to pet a polar bear. I don't know if I can let go of Sandman but I may forget who wrote it instead.
I think we need to get beyond categorizing people as wholly good or wholly bad. If a person who spends much of their life doing horrible things has a secret habit of donating to charity or rescuing animals, we tend not to dismiss all of the bad and label that person good. By the same token, a person is more than the worst things they have ever done, we each have the capacity for both - and the longer a person lives the more chances increase that they will find themselves in a situation where they behave in a way they never thought possible. I never really got into Gaiman, but I wouldn't assume that contradictory behavior means all of the positive attributes he put forth were just a fake mask. If anything (from what I've seen from an attempt to get into Sandman, and Silas in The Graveyard Book) his characters often seem to struggle with their nature as being less good than they'd like to be. So I definitely don't think you should feel guilty or duped for some of his work resonating with you. I still like other artworks by problematic people, sometimes the most gifted people are not the most moral (in whatever cultural or historical context) but if we are going to disengage from any interaction with people who fall short of a standard of morality, I think we're going to miss a big part of the human experience. And I totally agree it has to be a personal decision, everyone is going to have their line.
also the thing about this, is celebrities lecturing us, like they have the moral high ground. we have been lectured to by these celebs like they ar eon the moral high ground! especially neil gaiman, he kept lecturing us like he was on the moral high ground. he was such a great feminist, looking down on us evil plebs, he had such virtue! and then behind the scenes he was worse than the worst s**mbag I know. yet still these celebs keep lecturing us and looking down on us! so yeah serves him right!
Honestly what rattles me so much about this is not even that I am shocked a monster could write such wonderful books, this has been proven to be true so many times, its how much I enjoyed his non-fiction and interviews. His talks about story telling and art were always deeply moving to me and I would return to them when I felt I needed motivation. I might be able to reread his books in my collection one day and acknowledge his skills, but I will never be able to find him inspiring again.
First off wow! What a well thought out conversation absolutely amazing self reflection, and an incredible job of recognizing the complexity of all that you were talking about. And I’m saying this about the content of what you were saying and about how you went about it how you were thinking about it. It was absolutely beautiful and amazing. Thank you so much. You truly are an amazing human.
So glad you got to make this video. I hope it helps.
"I get it now. The goal is to not have heroes." --Diane Lockhart
You keep surprising me. This was an excellent dialogue on complicated topics.
I personally separate art from artists. I also have my own personal boundaries for objective content.
This is a wonderful video. I really appreciate your efforts to think deeply and logically about everything. I also got into the trap of feeling like I needed to share my thoughts on every topic that was making waves in the world back like 10 years ago. I had a day where I couldn't handle the anxiety it gave me anymore, and I just took a permanent step back. That will never be me again.
Thank you for this. You delved deeper into a subject I’ve wrestled with for a while, particularly since the Gaiman news surfaced. His works, specifically American Gods, are some of my favorite pieces of fiction and his self styled “ally” persona made me always place him in my own “one of the good ones” category. The news shocked me and has made me question my own morality and relation to art and role models. You put concise and articulate words to my thoughts. Thank you again
Thank you so much for making this wonderful, powerful, vulnerable video. You handled an extremely difficult subject with great humility and poise.
Excellent video. It comes down to words vs. actions. I feel for his fans/former fans a 'sorry for your loss' time, emotion.
Great video, had me thinking about moral's and what I read in a way i have never really thought about before. Normally similar to you, i don't really know about the authors life, unless it becomes a big news story and the author is a person which works I admire. I have not read any Gaiman works, it was on my list of reads, but this will no longer be the case, he will not be receiving my money.
I cant' think of (or I know of) an author that I have read that has had a similar scandal. However it did make me think of Kevin Spacey and the series the House of Cards. The house card being series full of immoral or morally grey characters, some of which was reflected in actual politics in society. Now prior to him being outed as the man he is, I admired him as actor in the House of Cards and loved the series. I was shocked when the news came out about him and as a consequence did not (and will not) finish the second last or last season.
The series itself dealt with very immoral characters, some of this reflected in politics in real life, for this, the portrayal of the president by spacey i admired him as actor for his ability to portray such as immoral person. So it had me thinking was I immoral to for enjoying the series and the immoral characters? or was it just I felt there was some element of truth in politics that was represented in this so it spoke to me? Or do i just enjoy morally grey characters, such as what i enjoy in books such as grim dark genre? I will continue to ponder these questions.
Anyway i guess maybe the content of the series, made it even made the allegations even more disturbing to me, due to me liking the series and the immoral characters in the series and then the Juxtaposition of things he did. Maybe something about me was immoral.
Again thanks for the thought provoking video.
This was such an honest and thoughtful video. Much respect for the charity bookborn. Every little action counts.
I don't know why this cropped up in my right hand column, but I'm glad it did. I've never read anything by Neil Gaiman and didn't know anything about him, but your video has universal application. I've seen JK Rowling described as a 'once loved children's author' (She's still loved if her book sales are anything to go by) and occasionally joined in the debate about her, but with similar feelings of futility. Then there's Cat Stevens. I was a big fan of his in my youth, but haven't been able to listen to his stuff since he supported the fatwa against Salman Rushdie. But I still listen to Wagner even though I know he wasn't one of the good guys. Then there's Rolf Harris; I still have some of his songs playing in my head. Funny how we can overlook certain offences and forgive certain people but not others.
In my opinion, you should keep the Neil Gaiman videos up. I agree it would be dishonest and it would make you look like you're hiding something - even if that isn't true. Perhaps, you could link those videos so this one. That way people would have a clear picture of your perspective on the matter. I don't know, just a thought.
Thank you for this. This is a really excellent discussion. It is easy and natural to feel dejected and powerless when these things happen, so the conclusions around taking action are particularly helpful. RAINN is a great organization, donating now.