I'm a big SF reader and I recently made a comment on GR that I ought to give the Altered Carbon series a go and someone who knows I'm trans suggested I google that author--I immediately knew what she was hinting at. So I googled his name with "TERF" and yep. My reply was "Fortunately the world is full of other books and stories." We're not lacking in that department.
Let me understand this, A 'woman' makes an allegation against this man, and several 'women' from previous incidents come forward to make similar claims, but never reported their 'rape' when it 'occurred'? None of the 'women' (and who is to say what a 'woman' is?) reported any coercion, nor rejected it, but instead 'submitted' to it. But now they can trash the guy's reputation because 'we believe all 'women'' and #meeto is a great reputation killer for women to wield? Do 'women' need to provide evidence for their allegations, or just men? Does the law 'presume innocence' or guilt? What I do understand is 'women' (whatever that is) now dominate the literary industry and they want to remove all men, so this is a perfectly reasonable way to not only destroy the man, but also his works. Good job, keep it up! Next is Brandon Sanderson, he's quite popular, isn't he? Where are the 'women' to speak out against him, or do you have something better?
Remember what Daniel Radcliffe told one reader: what’s between you and the books is sacred. Don’t allow the creator’s actions to taint your love of the creation. Great works have been created by not so great people. If something helped you through a hard time, that’s still valid. If it helped change your life for the better, that’s still good. It’s still sacred. 💞
And yet people still try to justify not engaging with media by using things about the writer to interpret the books in a bad light. I've even seen people do this to Neil Gaiman.
engage with media on your terms, yes. but also be aware of how your support enables or promotes harmful beliefs and actions. if you can enjoy something without financially supporting it--even better.
Dear fellow readers, please know: You supported someone for being an author who wrote stuff you loved to read. That's why you bought their books, and not because of stuff you did not and could not know. Much love and hugs to you all.
Same thing with Cosby. The reason the revelations were so devastating is we didn't know about them...for DECADES. Had we known...we wouldn't have supported him. And, now that some artists are dead or their profits are confiscated for restitution, it's okay to purchase them now.
This is so important thing to remember. Most of us have at some point unknowingly supported the art of someone that later turned out terrible person. Gaiman is just a particularly insidious example because he always had this aura of like "one of the good cishet men" around him
I'm a 56 year old woman who grew up listening to her mom's Bill Cosby comedy albums constantly. They got me through a lot of hard times. So I understand feeling horrified when you find out someone you admired is not the good guy you thought they were.
Same. The To Russel My Brother With Whom I Slept recording was pretty much a staple in my house when I was growing up -- a few of his others as well, but that one was the clear favorite in our house.
Good guys & bad guys are purely fictional ideas. Everyone is one shade or another of grey, even when others &/or they themselves don't see it. Every sinner has a future; every saint, a past.
While I understand they are currently allegations, the details are very damning. Either one or both of the women (I can’t recall) went to the police within 24 hours. His wife posted on social media that she and Gaiman separated around the same time as the NZ incident. They later divorced. The sickening part is how he projected in public that he was an ally for women’s rights, including to “believe women” about SA. That did not age well to say the least.💔
@@windy8544 he was abusive to them outside the sa, even if they consented to sex with him (as he claims - I feel the need to say I don't believe his claims). abuse is still bad even if there is no sa, he would still be an awful person if the only thing he did was abuse women instead of abuse AND sa women.
Gaiman travelled from New Zealand to Scotland during the Covid lockdown when he abruptly separated from his notoriously open-minded wife. At the time, that was difficult to understand. He could afford to have moved to a local hotel or air b&b. He apologised to locals but suffered no penalty. It seems now he was pursued by his guilty conscience. They may just be allegations but who would want to put themselves into the firing line by accusing a multimillionaire who makes his living making up very believable fiction? The public persecution of a relatively rich woman who defended herself from a mega-rich actors legal assault makes it clear what could happen.
Dead people are dead, there is no one to hold accountable and I won't give up their books because I found out something about them post mortem. I didn't know them, I didn't know when I read the book, I can't seek their perspective, so I have no reason to boycott a dead person's work. A person who is alive can be held accountable. I will always love the stories, nothing will change that but I always thought Neil himself was a little... off. I never wanted to meet him but his books got me through some really tough times. Controversial as the sentiment is, no one is just the horrible things they do. Every horrible person is still a person and all the weird mixed up crap that comes with that title. A horrible person can still write a wonderful story. I own the books and I won't get rid of them. The stories are written and out in the world and have been for decades. They have nothing to do with Neil now and everything to do with MY relationship with them. However, I will no longer support him going forward. I will form no new relationships with his work because those would be colored by the new knowledge I have that he is, at the very least extremely skeezey, if not exactly a predator. I don't have enough information to judge him beyond that. I don't feel guilty for still loving the stories that helped me till now, though. Those were never relationships with the author, anyway, but with the stories and how I felt reading them. Continued support of his work, however, is a choice I choose not to make. If you use your fame as leverage for intimate favors... yeah, you don't get to have it.
Well said!! This issue is complex and there is no one size fits all way to look at any of it. Multiple things can be true at the same time, and it’s up to the individual to decide how they want to deal with it. Everyone in their heart knows they can love what he has created and despise what he has done in his personal life. The books are the books, and Neil is Neil. They’re related, but separate, and feelings for one doesn’t inherently speak to feelings on the other.
You said all I was thinking. It's very complicated and there is no one-size fits all answer. We all have to find our own way through the quagmire that is this world.
Thank you. *this* is how I feel about it. I still benefit from the stories and find good things about them. I still enjoy the Netflix Sandman and want it to continue. Bad people can make beautiful works and vice versa. It sucks. But I don't think I should act like I'm ashamed of liking those works, like it means I support him or the bad things he's quite possibly done. I don't think I should have to have the conversation every time those works are brought up that I don't support an abuser or sexual assaulter or someone unethical. It's kinda exhausting. The works still provide value. It's sad to write them off because their source is broken.
@@frostfang1 A person's ability to pull inspiration from the ether doesn't guarantee that they are also going to be good at other things. In fact, some of the greatest artists in history were horrible people. I am reminded of King David in the Bible, who was a murderer and an adulterer, whose Psalms are read and sung in churches around the world. In some ways, poor character on the part of artists can serve to reinforce that in many ways they are just messengers who reflect society back to itself, giving us the opportunity to both celebrate who we are and make changes to become more who we want to be. To be clear, none of that in any way justifies bad behavior. Ultimately, David suffered consequences for his crimes in his lifetime; similarly, living artists should not be shielded from the consequences of their actions. Nevertheless, there is a fine line between supporting an artist and supporting an artist's bad behavior by buying their art and it behooves us to think critically and make careful decisions about doing so. [edited for clarity]
Neil Gaiman's work has been the singularly most influential art in my life as an illustrator and author. I had, until now, fully intended on building an illustrative art portfolio around the Stardust novel. I've spent most of my adult life emulating him, idolizing him, and striving to create worlds and stories as rich and beautiful as his. Now, in the aftermath of my grief, I no longer wish to emulate him. I will eclipse him. Now instead of following in his footsteps I'm determined to forge my own way and provide everyone stories with just as high of quality but with none of the abusive, disgusting, and phobic behavior exemplified by the authors I've loved.
Yes, this. I wasn't a huge fan of his work, I did (and still do) like some of it, but it's Him I fell for. His talks and interviews and general media presentation. And I knew you can't trust the persona famous people put on for the public, and yet I liked him, and I wanted to like him, because he seemed to be one of the good ones. Yeah, he's probably just as selfish as the rest of us, and weird and full of himself and probably a bit insufferable in person. Not... not this.
the fact that he tried to blame his autism for his monstrous acts, really makes me disgusted as an autistic woman. It gross me out so much. how dare he blame it on that as if neurodivergent community isn't already facing horrible sh!ts.
It also shows the misogyny that can exist within the neurodivergent community. Some autistic men will blame their neurodivergence for atrocious behaviour, while autistic women will be ostracized or written off because of their condition without doing anything wrong. It is a horrible double standard and it needs to stop.
I know, right? I feel like, as an autistic person, I spend most my time with all my people interactions making sure I saw, heard, respected, and didn't void anyone's boundaries. I may struggle with "normal" social queues, but I definitely understand "Yes" and "No" and I easily comprehend that others, just like me, want to be left alone and respected. He can't just explain away his heinous, disgusting acts against people as "Oops, my autism acted up".
@@fuindes_batwingsI am an autistic person too, and I was talking with my autist friends about this as well, as we ended up unanimously concurring that our lack of ability to read social cues makes us MORE cautious and OVERLY seeking clarification/consent, not less. For me, I don't want to ever unintentionally cause someone upset. Like any person, I have my own boundaries (e.g. sensory touch like shaking hands/hugs from people I don't really know). It is insulting and disgusting for him to attempt to use his diagnosis as a means of explanation. Don't lump our community in your personal crimes, Neil.
I'm autistic and I hadn't known he said that, or that he identifies as autistic (I have long found Gaiman to be pretty gross and creepy as a person so I largely have him and his superfans curated out of my social media). Anyhow, autistic people are by far more likely or be victims of grooming and sexual assault, so it's extremely bad for someone this high profile to make that kind of statement that will no doubt shape allistics' perceptions of us. Such selfishness on his part.
I’m not sure why people think that just because they enjoyed an artist’s work, that makes the artist a saint who could do no wrong. You don’t know them or their life. Only their work. Celebrity idolizing makes little sense to me.
Yeah I feel like these don't hit me as hard because I am here for the work, not the person. Not to say that it isn't frustrating to find out a creator sucks, and I understand not wanting to support someone who is abusive, but I feel like I've never been one to idolize or overly value a person I don't know, because...I don't know them. It's disappointing, to some degree, but not devastating. But I've never been one to idolize so maybe I just can't relate in general.
I just always think they are normal people not people that do reaky bad stuff. Like i try to see everyone befor i get zo know them. I do not like to expect the worst from everyone, that is way too dark fir me.
@@alien777 I don't think the argument here is to expect terrible things from anyone, but rather to just not put anyone on a pedestal and expect perfect behavior at all times. You can acknowledge humanity without thinking the worst of someone.
Rumours have been around for a while. The guys in Forbidden Planet in Newcastle used to say that if Neil was doing a signing you never left him alone with any female staff members as he was a little...over familiar. When if comes to problematic artists I'm of the opinion that if they are long dead it's ok, that's why I can still read H.P Lovecraft.
Wow, that’s disgusting! I generally feel similarly, but with the caveat that they can still do damage, depending on who they are and what they wrote. Yukio Mishima still inspires incel men, for example
@@WillowTalksBooks I get what you're saying but the only caveat there is that good and bad people can draw inspiration from art independently of the author's intent or personal beliefs - I've seen people use To Kill a Mockingbird to promote gaslighting rape victims for example where that really isn't the point or intent of the work at all - I guess the death of the author isn't always that simple even if the author is actually dead.
Lovecraft was a deeply troubled person whose explicit racism is very much a part of that damaged personality. That flaw is worthy of study without diminishing it's terribleness. However he was never accused of being any kind of predator. Making him him a differant case to Gaiman.
Lovecraft's mythos has also been used by so many other writers, often to subvert the very things that he believed in. If you haven't already, check out N.K. Jemisin's "Great Cities" books, a pair of thoroughly Lovecraftian novels by a brilliant Black woman who uses his ideas to utterly smash his ideals! Her use of The White Woman, an eldritch corporate white Karen, as an avatar of cosmic horror attempting to negate all life in every universe, is pure genius.
Hi WIllow, thanks for this video. I think what feels so heartbreaking about Neil Gaiman is the way he portrayed himself as a champion for women's rights and he always made himself very availble to fans, in person, on tumblr, etc. These traits that made him seem safe and relatable were actually fake and very predatory. I love your message that there is a practically infinate amount of brilliant literature out there to discover and makes me excited to go out there and find new favs instead.
@@elizabethgriffith8684 I heard about the tub club thing he had going where young women would post themselves reading his books in the bath and it sounded maybe a bit questionable.
I was just watching this video on Miranda Sings (who I never liked, but I'm old and she made stuff for teenagers) who also wanted to be "friends" with young people and ended up hurting some of her fans. It's sad, but it is not a good idea to try to get close to your idols because of the power imbalance, even if they are actually ok people and not trying to groom you. It can never be a healthy friendship.
@@sannalopperi-vihinen233she also sent someone else’s nude OnlyFans content to underage minors in a group chat to make fun of the creator. So… yeah. I think it’s safe to say that’s far more than just unhealthy.
It's so disappointing considering how much he seemingly talked about and respected Ursula K le Guin for her writing, and talked about how she'd 'taught him that women were people too' when he read her books as a child. Maybe he didn't learn enough. But really I think he's just got very good at paying lip service while behind the scenes he's doing the opposite.
I was so fucking angry about this. I've been a Gaiman fan for years, two decades at least, and his association with Pratchett gave me a lot of comfort because of his lovely stories about him and memories of him. All those tributes to him, with Neil on them, is soul destroying. But we need to believe victims, we need to believe those women. I hope they can heal now.
For me this exact feeling was Marion Zimmer Bradley. I read everything she ever wrote through high school and my twenties, and recommended her for twenty years. Ten years or so ago, allegations of her collusion in SA of her children and maybe some foster children? by her husband came out. The most disturbing part for me personally, after reading her daughter's statements, was looking back at some of her works, I could actually see it in the stories. I can't have her books in my house and some of them were my all time favorites.
Same, and you could say the same for Alice Munro. While she may have not committed any SA, she dismissed it as nothing and took the abuser's side over her own daughter. A monster in her own right, and also used it in her friggin' stories!
@@user-sr1kc6jj2b-p1q Yeah. I learned about it from John Scalzi who talked about it on his blog when it broke. Very reputable guy, and the daughter herself reluctantly talked about it eventually. It came out around 2012/2013, I think, but maybe as late as 2016. Kinda broke my heart.
I mean whenever that is called assault or not, from comments its clear he is a major creep abusing his power and, reportds seem to confirm he very creepy does take adventage, even young women at a con were warned to not be alone with him ominous. So he definitly did wrong things whatever aou call it.
@@Libertangoagrario I'm not the person you asked a proof from, but the fact that he did had sex with the nanny (and he did admit this part, saying it was consensual) is a big red flag, it's taking advantage. If really you have strong feelings for someone working for you, even if totally mutual, first you put an end to the power dynamic, and then you pursue this person in a less unbalanced setting. There is probably always some sort of power difference, but the nanny ? a young women you pay ?? "yes but they loved each other" ok, so help her find another job and wait until she doesn't need you to have a roof over her head ...
@@Libertangoagrario in this case what she wanted or liked didn't matter, it's not about that, but about the choices he made, how he dealt with a situation. Even if she did seduced him, he can make choices. And if someone depending on you is offering you sex, I think the right choice is to make it so that this offer can be really free and informed. Shoving a cake in a persons mouth is not ok : it can be, but it depends on how I did make sure that the person was on board, not on how good the cake tasted. But if they asked ? Still, you don't do something just because someone asked, you still get to ponder if it's a good idea. And if you don't think that fucking this young woman working for you in your home is a bad idea or a morally questionnable one, than you don't understand/care much about consent.
I recently found out, from a client (I'm a therapist) that Alice Miller, the deceased psychoanalyst that wrote the revered classic "Drama of the Gifted Child", was a sh*t mother as reported by her son. Her book is about the devastation caused by narcissistic mothers. It's a wonderfully empathic book that has helped thousands, so I don't know what to do about this hypocrisy. People are so compartmentalized!
For the most part a narcissist can empathise only with him/herself. You can see it in Jane Eyre. So while they know their own story intimately and with great compassion for themselves, they can change the grammar so it sounds like they’re empathising with others. They are not empathising with the reader. The reader is being asked to empathise with the author. I am sorry to hear this about Alice Miller. I’ll have to go look it up. I am cautious about believing the offspring of famous people though, because rampant misogyny and capitalism uses the maturing male’s need for a rite of passage as a wedge between boys and their mothers with consumerist assumptions about individualism and independence which themselves are quite narcissistic.
I agree with everything you said. Maybe this sounds too jaded, but even though I did really like a lot of Gaiman's work, this is a man who has essentially rockstar status in the book world, and is known to be a weird/creepy dude. I don't find any of this surprising. Sad state of things.
I'm writing an essay on "art monsters" and what to do with their art, and decided to start by speaking of my feelings about Marion Zimmer Bradley, whose Mists of Avalon I loved as a teen, and discovered later that she abused her children in horrific way. I still don't know what to do about her, or Neil Gaiman, or any of the others art monsters... but I like exploring these feelings around them
@@WillowTalksBooks I remember her. Back in the good old days when I was young I red a lot of her books. Mostly because she was one of the few female fantasy authors translated to my language. I was in my late teens when I stoped reading her because even my naive country bumpkin self felt something was off in her books. Don't get me wrong she was one of the first authors who had kind of gay representation in her books and thanks to her I knew about menstruation when I got my first period so I wasn't freaked out and didn't think I would die. Which makes thw betrayal I feel with her even worse. In hindsight there were hints even in her earlier books too but I was not experienced enought to catch it. Later a friend told me about a book were one of the characters were SAd by his father, forgave him and later fought their enemies with him or something. Was just a chat in passing and I was like wtf MZB!?! My friend totaly could told me trash but in that moment my sudden dislike of the books made sense and I never touched them again. Some time later what happend to her children came to light.
MZB's bestie and writing partner Diana Paxson just got kicked out of tne Troth and had ner clergy status revoked for enabling and covering up SA. Marion's daughter, Moira, wrote a book about the abuse. Both her brothers committed suicide due to the abuse. I disagree with her about many things, but I believe her and the other victims. "The Last Closet: the Dark Side of Avalon."
@@WillowTalksBooks She was a big fantasy-scifi author in the 70s and 80s, I'd say, big name in the community and helped a lot of other writers establish themselves. I knew her from the Avalon books, which my neighbour lent to me when I was 14 or so and I loved her feminist take on the Arthurian myths. Haven't read anything else by her, but finding out about what she did to her children sours the memory of enjoying her books. Same with Neil Gaiman and others, but it's still complicated.
@@leighharwood3886 The way I found about her was through an aunt's post on FB, an article with a title like "Feminist Legend Acused of Horrific Child Abuse", and I clicked because I felt I knew all the Feminist Legends and what sort of lurid lie they had invented about them. It was a very religious website, so I had to corroborate (though I do think that calling MZB a "feminist legend" is a bit of an overstatement). I was flabbergasted.
There's something I always find myself saying whenever a beloved writer/actor/whatever turns out to be a shit stain: All of the memories we have of their works, the personal meanings, the representation, and inspiration they awoke in us, and all the other stuff: that's not the author, that's what WE brought TO the authors work. Books are experienced, and we bring our experiences to them. Things resonate because of who WE are. And regardless of how shitty the author is, all that good stuff comes from us, not them, and it's not tainted by the fact that they unambiguously suck. Sandman, for example, was very inspiring for me as a non binary person. One of the first times ever that I'd seen a gender ambiguous character like Desire in media, and then Mason Alexander Park just killed it in the Netflix show. Gaiman can't take that away. I brought that shit. Even if we never support that author again, nobody can take the good stuff we brought to the work in the past away from us, because WE brought it. I find it helps me to separate that in my head. I hold on to the good experiences I had/brought, and then find someone who isn't a shit stain to read in the future.
I don't think is fair. The reader and fan(dom) experience is important, but artists still deserve credit for the work and thought they put in. The existence of artists who are personally morally wrong/dangerous doesn't negate the role of all artists. I'm not saying we should worship artists as lone Great Men, but antagonism towards artists is often part of larger anti-intellectualism trends that are also dangerous. I know separating art from artist is a flawed conception and I'm not really suggesting it, but what it more comes down to is that one can be immensely talented and a horrific person and acting like one can negate the other in any way is pointless to say the least.
I half agree with that. I personally think a person can be shitty/horrible while still making good art and/or being an inspiration, simply because human beings aren't black and white and can be many things at the same time. I'm still glad I read Neil Gaiman's books, because it inspired me as a wannabe author, but I won't support him after finding out about this. I still enjoy his work for what it is.
I'm not saying this as a way to defend him, it's just for the debate sake. But couldn't you turn that around and say that the experiences/feelings you got from the story, is because the author was so good at putting word to paper? If another author had come up with and written one of Gaiman's stories, who's to say it would have been just as much of a enjoyable/"emotionally rewarding" read, if their writing style regarding world and character building was completely different, and not as immersive/"intense"(when it comes to making the readers imagination fly while reading the story)?
@@1Katakana They're not denying that Gaiman is talented. They're saying that his misdeeds are now too associated with her talent to appreciate on its own (in this person's individual experience at least)
It's true that novels in many ways exists through the subjective way they affect our minds, but to claim that an author has to give all credit to their readers strikes me as naive and a bit presumptious. Unless I misread you completely.
J.K Rowling once said ‘Hogwarts will always be there waiting to welcome you home.’ Or something like that I can’t be bothered looking it up, but the point is that she never added unless you’re trans, or Jewish or part or any other group I don’t like. Authors don’t get to ruin books for us. I say buy books second hand so that the author doesn’t see any money from the transaction, but I’m not about to limit my reading because another author did a dumb. I read a lot of ‘controversial’ authors. I hate the idea that we shouldn’t read a book. It’s okay to move on if you’re just too hurt, but don’t let an author steal a work from you you love, just because they’re an idiot.
I'm inclined to agree with you. Buying second hand from charity shops, or reading from the library, support local economy and organisations without overly supporting the original author.
I was the biggest NG fan ever, and when I first heard the allegations, I was like 'no...Neil couldn't have done this.' Like he was a personal friend or something. But then I actually bothered to listen to the podcasts...and, as inept as they sometimes are and as much as I dislike Rachel Johnson, they have serious weight behind them. I believe the victims, especially that tearful lady who worked for him at his NY residence. Yes these are still allegations, but Gaiman's voice messages, his (paradoxical) silence since, these women's detailed accounts and Gaiman's NDAs and monies paid to silence them have left me both disgusted and disappointed with the man. But I'm mainly disappointed with myself; for keeping him on a ridiculously high pedestal for so long. The Sandman and The Graveyard Book are my favourite NG works, and both of these are now sullied...especially when one thinks of 'Calliope' in context of this (and then there's the Nada storyline), and hearing that Gaiman apparently assaulted one lady whilst he was in the process of writing The Graveyard Book. To be honest, his lack of writing anything new in now 11 years, and an increasing sense of smugness I detected about him was already putting me off. But this matter has been the final stake through the heart. As a transwoman myself, I don't want him being associated with us...even if he genuinely supports our community. As someone on the spectrum, I'm furious that he would use autism as an excuse for this behaviour, and as a fan, I disown him...even if I can just about separate some of his most cherished works from the man. Christ, after this, Rowling and today's election results, I'm ready to give up on humanity. Our gods (Gaiman, Rowling or Trump) only remain abusive powermongers when we keep them there. Thanks for this Willow. To add: I now also think he's a poor man's Clive Barker...who has a much greater imagination, is multi-talented, but is also sadly neglected these days. There's still a tiny part of me that hopes/wishes that none of this is true, but it sadly doesn't look likely. Sigh.
I absolutely know the feeling - Sandman in particular was a huge influence on me as a teenager. Personally the final nail in the coffin for me was his own words - even if you could discount what the women themselves had to say (and I absolutely do not) the way he himself described his behaviour may portray it in a way which is not criminal but it still describes the actions of an abusive creep - and that's from reading his side of it. When you bring the women's version of events into it on top of that - he's dead to me whether the courts put him away or not at this point.
@@elliewallace6370 ditto. I think he's also used his image of a 'male feminist' and trans supporter, etc, to further hide this behaviour. Much like Joss Whedon too. Even thinking that the writer of Coraline was also forcing female fans/employees into BDSM situations is sickening. I did his masterclass a few years back, and at one point he's telling this story about hornets or something, and how it inspired Coraline. He then talks about how female fans would later come up to him at signings, etc, and thank him for writing the book and how it got them through dark/abusive times...so that again is hugely crushing now. He likes to quote as regards Coraline, 'when you scared of something , but do it anyway, then that's brave'. Well these women were scared of coming forth about him, but they've done it anyway. They're brave in ways he's never been.
@@EmlynBoyle Oh my God I remember that class - I took it several years ago when I got a year's masterclass subscription as a present to myself after drafting my first novel. I remember way back then thinking it was the most useful class I'd ever taken trying to get my writing feet under me (Margaret Atwood's was entertaining but her brain works in too different a way from mine for many of her writing tips to be useful for me). Not so great feeling looking back on it .
@@elliewallace6370same. While it was useful at the time, I could never ever watch it again. I believe Brandon Sanderson has a similar course on RUclips. It’s free, just as useful and isn’t presented by a creep.
As someone in the BDSM community, when I first heard details of the charges, they had the ring of truth. It's exactly the kind of abuse that's common in the community. And I'm certain Gaiman believed he was doing nothing wrong and that it was all consensual. Because he failed to recognize the power differential (beyond the D/s aspect).
He apparently made remarks like "kiss me as if you mean it" and somesuch, insisting they show him they want what he's doing to them, which to me implies he realized they did NOT want it. His behaviour seems too calculated, manipulative and predatory for me to believe he was just terribly confused.
@@theanswerisowl That can be part of role-playing. But these things need to be agreed on beforehand, and as @thyge-bright said, power dynamics outside the D/s relationship need to be considered. In his defence, it's not easy to learn how to navigate these things without a supportive community - which he seems to not have had, possibly due to his celebrity status. I'm reading the situation as a clueless dom doing damage out of ignorance rather than active malice-I've been on the receiving end of that kind of thing myself. Mistakes happen, and if you are never confronted with those mistakes, you can't learn from them either. He still needs to take responsibility for his actions and do his best to make amends to the women he hurt.
@@TheSleepyowlet One of the women wrote to him and made it clear how violated she felt by his actions and he actually called and seemed genuinely remorseful to her, only to behave in the exact same manner rather seamlessly with Scarlett. As in, not much time passed between their conversation and his next violations. If he'd been truly unaware and took it seriously, that would've been unlikely to happen imo.
@@theanswerisowl Not if you're unaware that your personal power can keep someone from safewording. Also, the resources that we have now to learn about how to do kink responsibly and safely? They didn't exist 20 years ago. How do I know? 20 years ago I was in my 20s and made my first forays into the scene. I sure as fuck didn't know what I was doing, and neither did some of the people I encountered. And the only way to learn was to be lucky enough to run into people who knew their shit and were willing to teach you. I'm not discounting the possibility that he's a serial abuser. He might very well be. But he also might just be a dumbass. Autism doesn't make any of that better either, as I can tell you as an autistic woman. It's not an excuse, but it might be an explanation.
How can't people see that he's obviously manipulating the women. Many predators use the BDSM community to target and abuse specially women who don't know that much about BDSM.
After being heartbroken by so many creatives I asmired: Roald Dahl, Kevin Spacey, Joss Whedon, Louis CK, Bill Cosby, Marion Zimmer Bradley, JK Rowling, etc... I'm so tired. Just reacting to individual instances of abusive behavior feels like playing whack a mole. Abuse of power feels pervasive and systemic. I'm also kind of done trying to avoid media by problematic people. It feels futile and depressing after a while.
J.K. Rowling? what great crime has she commited (besides writing bland, mind-numbing "best-sellers"?) Last time I checked she was merely trolling alphabet people over at Xitter.
@j_shelby_damnwird She's been actively campaigning and using her vast wealth to remove access to trans health care in the UK. And she's been actively promoting people and movements with direct ties to neo-N@zi groups.
God it's kind of similar with alt bands as well. I hate feeling like I need to skim the internet to see if the new artist I found would like to hate crime me (it's even more frustrating with Polish fantasy writers bc I often need to check their social media since there is a lot of center right in this genre in my country)
Argh need to put Roald Dahl and JKR in a different naught list as the SAers ... I think Roald Dahl anti Jew statements were like what many people may say now after seeing the atrocities committed by Israel in Gaza .. I think his take was very black and white I see bad deeds therefore the nation of people doing them is bad .... Jkr is very damaging to trans But SA is another matter .... We have had a popular talk show Radio Host here in Australia arrested on SA charges ..... Ugh gross
I understand your deep disappointment. My favorite author used to be Sherman Alexie, an indigenous writer. Sexual allegations against him broke my heart. Years later I'm still troubled.
Dangit. Thanks for the addition to the list. It was always a series of miracles that Alexie did anything but drink himself to death - he had a start in life that most people could not have survived. But I did go to the Wiki article on him and am processing now. "Troubled" and "nuanced" and conversations like this one led by Willow ...
Those of you who've read Sandman will get this when I say Gaiman wrote himself into the character of Richard Madoc. Madoc was a writer who kept a Muse captive in his attic and...did worse than Gaiman...to her, in order to get inspiration. Then, at press conferences, he bragged about being a feminist.
I’ve always been uncomfortable with him since his father was the leading proponent of Scientology in the UK and he never seemed to distance himself from that. This behavior aligns with the bad behavior of high ranking Scientologists. Sounds like he’s the Danny Masterson of literature. Let’s hope that the legal system will sort this out appropriately.
Would you want to be a witness for the prosecution in the trial of a multimillionaire whose profession is believable lies and still has millions of dedicated fans? A recent legal circus made it clear how badly that can turn out.
Great video. So often people want someone to be the arbitrator for them, but we have to make our own choices informed by morals, perspectives, needs, etc. I enjoy Warhammer 40,000 and I am very aware and critical of the issues with Games Workshop, Black Library, and parts of the community. The works of Dali, Picasso, Lovecraft, Poe, etc. all hold value and meaning to me and I am also aware of their abhorrent views and/ or actions. They're also dead, so that helps. Making informed decisions and not be reactionary and holding arbitrary hypocritical positions is key. I appreciate the way you approached this ❤
I think my biggest issue is just that I found him so young. He gave me hope. I trusted him. He told stories that were important and showed empathy. And then this comes out and I'm just confused and devasted. I never thought he was God or anything. I noticed the amount of ex-wives he had and it always gave me pause. But then you would hear him talk and it was like "Oh, yeah. He cares. He actually cares." But he fucking doesn't. It didn't matter how he talked to people, how he would answer stupid questions I asked on twitter or tumblr. It doesn't matter that he wrote stories about women and queer people and made the universe feel like it has something wonderful in it. It doesn't matter that he has daughters. And just like with previous people who gave me hope and then shattered it, I'll put everything in a box until I can reconcile my hurt. I'll wait until I grow up a bit more and then I'll be an adult and do what needs to be done, whatever that might be.
Bar Good Omens (which I’ll just pretend Pratchett entirely wrote) I gave my Gaiman books to charity shops recently. I couldn’t face binning them, but at least some good might go to a charity from them going there. However marginally, try and cancel out the harm he’s likely done.
This is going to sound like a gotcha, but it's a genuine question. If there is some kind of moral fault with owning the books, isn't giving them to charity putting that moral wrong onto poor people? Unless you mean having them would just give bad memories personally.
@ it’s not a perfect solution. I’m not comfortable holding onto the books (plus I’ve got limited space in my flat) but I’m not willing to physically bin them. The only alternative is to give them away in some form. My work has a book exchange system, but I feel like if I donate them to charity, at least a charity can get some modicum of benefit from all this.
There's nothing wrong with owning the books you bought before you knew about who wrote them, but it is reasonable to want to be rid of them because they've been ruined by association in your mind. There's also nothing wrong, IMO, with buying the books secondhand or checking them out from the library because you're not going money to a bad person. As far as I'm concerned, it's only ever a problem if you're still buying new works (or new copies of old works) because at that point you're directly supporting a bad person and giving them your money. But that's just my line. Whatever you can reconcile is your line.
I gave away my signed copy of The Graveyard Book, my favourite NG book. I thought it might make me cry, then I remember that lady who worked for him in NY crying (on the podcast). Giving away a book, written by a creep, is nothing compared to the pain of SA.
Another thing is, in relation to Gaiman, is that during Covid, when everyone was meant to be sheltering in place, he left New Zealand, and travelled to the Isle of Skye, Scotland. The Scottish police did caution him. So, there does seem to be a high level of entitlement with Gaiman.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is a constraint on government, not on private citizens, just as government can't abridge free speech, but that doesn't mean a restaurant has to let a bloviator address the customers during dinner, and they have to listen.
Yeah, when there are 1 or 2 accusations, I say, innocent until proven guilty. Once you're talking numerous accusations, I feel comfortable with social consequences.
To a certain degree mob violence should be guarded against, but there's nothing that can be done against the court of public opinion (free speech if it's not hate speech or serious calls for violence). That being said, Gaiman has essentially confessed at this point.
No, "innocent until proven guilty" is not just about the state. It's about not being hasty on trusting someone to condemn someone else. But the thing a lot of peoples saying "innocent until proven guilty" forget is that it goes both ways. Accusing someone of lying/defaming when they claim to be victims (and acting on it by, for example, harassing them) is literally considering them to be guilty of lying before it being proven. "Trusting the victims" and helping them to go forward with the judicial process is part of "innocent until proven guilty". And for personally opinion, while we don't need to follow something as strict as "beyond reasonable doubt" of the justice system, we ought to give time and reflection to not judge peoples purely on what was claimed, and ought to be suspicious of anything that conveniently matches our vision of the world and want to be true without seeing any proof. (E.g. if you already hate the guts of the accused, don't immediately trust any accusation against them just because it confirms your opinion of them)
@@coneil72I agree. If it's just one or two im unsure if it's multiple over a long span of time with a pattern of behavior then he definitely did something
I stopped the video during the viewing (7:36). An honest video. What made me stop (to badly describe) was your thoughts about the one versus the many who react to a situation. My view is, you are the one who decides for you. You are the one that counts. If the many are on one side of the room, but you feel you cannot join them, don't. I have no doubt you have great courage and will always know the right thing to do. And that usually means stand your ground, firm in the belief you know what is best for you.
I am sad and very disoriented by a convicted SA man was just elected to be president. Don't expect any justice for SA in the US. An awful situation. I love Gaimans work. I will miss reading his stuff. So disappointed.
I have a similar issue with Roald Dahl in that I love his books and I do feel like they teach some great things to kids. But Roald Dahl himself, from what I've read, was not a good person. Something that I am trying to work with is that bad people have made good things. My way of moving forward is to buy his books second hand so none of the money goes directly towards whoever runs his affairs now.
Yup bad people make good things. Some of the most famous books were written by shitty people. Best movies by crappy people and actors. It feels like you're not allowed to enjoy anything for fear of supporting a bad person. I thought turning to books would help me disconnect from this stupid election thing but now book authors bad too. I don't have the energy to research to make sure every author is good or not. Honestly sometimes we just have to take the good the fun stories, the knowledge and throw the rest away.
Buying the books second hand seems like a good solution. As you said, that way the money does not go to support them but you can still read them and keep any good memories you may have of reading them at a younger age.
Oh he was so antisemitic... and it's right there in his stories. This is why it's ok that every generation retells stories how they want to. This is why someone telling a new version shouldn't be automatically escoriated for not being "original".
"Bad people make good things" is exactly right. We all get to make up our own mind if we want to reject someone's work or not. I still love lots of musicians who have problematic pasts. Yet I can't stomach listening to Nick Cave or Radiohead anymore. Each to their own.
Bad people can make good art. I’m trans and like, a lot of the authors on my shelf, now dead, would probably have hated my guts. They enslaved people and murdered and raped, callously. But most of those are old enough that the author is dead. That’s the distinction to me: it is not a sin to consume art made by a bad person. The only reason I’m going to boycott art is if supporting it lends aid to a materially harmful cause - so I’m not going to buy or promote Rowling books because that money goes directly to hurting trans people. Similarly, I wouldn’t buy or promote a book from an author who was dead but whose publisher was doing harmful stuff. If I buy a copy anyway, I’m going to do so used so the money doesn’t go back to the source, but I’m not going to throw away works I already own just because they were written by a terrible person. Of course if you feel differently that’s your business. Also: there are SO MANY MORE NAMES than Gaiman’s on the comics. Gaiman’s is the biggest, but the art is at least half of why I like Sandman, and he had nothing to do with that. Even if you are on the side of disposing of authors entirely, what do we do with THAT?
Both Morpheus and Crowley are clearly self-insert characters for Gaiman. That is what gives me the ick now. I will not be seeing the rump of either show, though I have been fans of both since they first appeared in print.
@@pattheplanter I remember reading somewhere that in an interview, Neil said Crowley wasn't self-insert, it was Terry mocking Neil's capital A *Aesthetic* because he felt Neil was taking his punk rock a bit too seriously. So every time I laugh at Crowley being Crowley, I think of Terry making fun of Neil. It helps. (It also helps that I've been a Pratchett fan since Day One, and knew Neil was a raging misogynist since Talking to Girls At Parties. idk who believed him when he said he was a feminist. He was plainly lying based on his own work. Stardust? Odd's mum being the world's happiest smex trafficking victim? People had to work very hard to think Neil's a good person.)
@@FunkyLittlePoptart Even so, affectionate mocking won't do it for me, unfortunately. Still inserted, whoever was responsible. A particular photoshoot comes to mind. I have been a Pratchett fan since book two of Discworld came out, when my friend gave me both together and told me I had to read them.
I recently got back into reading and have all his books on hold at my library. I adored The Graveyard and cried. Reading Norse Mythology currently. Ugh it all makes me sick. I love his works but this is something else. And this following these election results, I just have this deep pit of disappointment that idk what to do with. 😭
Thank you so much for sharing this. Today, I uploaded a re-edit of a video that initially featured Neil Gaiman prominently and no longer does. As I was writing my post explaining my decision, I saw your pop-up video and appreciated what you said.
Something that I've always wondered...does time have an impact on how we react to works written by awful people? Like, if a living author turns out to be a horrible person we might disown the works, but what about someone who lived 1000 years ago? Does time and culture of origin play a role? Does knowing that the author was a bad person from the start vs falling in love with their works and then finding out have an impact? Does genre/the kind of book matter?
To me it matters if my actions end up putting money in the hands of someone who was criminal/hateful or even worse continuing to commit crimes/hate. Once the author is literally dead, then enjoy the works without regard to the actions of the author. So for me, that means no more JKR, Orson Scott Card, Woody Allen. But Michael Jackson, maybe. I am still not sure if the people who enabled his own wrongdoing…and also contributed to his death…might still be profiting from his work. However, buying used copies or unauthorized work based on an IP might be okay if not used in a way that promotes the IP. Bad people can produce good things, just like good people can inadvertently produce bad things or even harmful things.
I enjoy reading a lot of classics from the turn of the century (19th - 20th) and early 20th century, especially the ones known to have queer and feminist themes/undertones. At the beginning, it was hard to understand and accept how most, if not all of these great writers had also very racist, sexist and homophobic parts to them and their stories, even if their works did have progressive elements that are especially impressive when considering the time they were written. It's easier said then done - to accept that people are multi-faceted, that these artists were simultaneously genius, talented, innovative, while also having some genuinely awful opinions that dont allign at all with my own morals. At times, these books are genuinely hard to read (lately I have especially struggled with the absolutely disgusting way so many of the books of that era refer to romani people. It's rough to get through at times). But after a while you start to learn how to "squeeze" the value out of even the worst passages. Most things that have been written (and especially all books that have become classics) have SOMETHING to offer, you just have to learn how to judge them for yourself. You develop a critical mind, one that is able to judge everything you are reading and be able to discern what is bullsh*t from what is not. You start accepting the fact that these artists are just people at the end of the day, and were absolutely molded by the time they were alive (just as we all are). This does not mean you should excuse all the awful opinions they expressed, or all the awful stuff they did throughout their life. It just means that you start being able to take each work for what it is - nothing more and nothing less. You don't ideolize any writer, and you keep a separation between their writing and who they were as a person. And most importantly, you start accepting that multiple things can be true at the same time - a book can be genuinely incredible in certain aspects while also having really bad ones. Same thing with the writers.
I have a tendency to forgive old artist more readily, because there's factors that stack against them. Like, book covers coloured with arsenic, lead in wall paint and water pipes, there were heavy metals everywhere which we now know fucks up a brain.
Do we give up Huck Finn, one of America's most important protests against bad parenting, slavery, and religious hypocrisy, because the culture of the time used ONE WORD that is now current, common, and limited? Yeah, for me it starts there. Nuance, limits, balance the hurt and the gain ... ask the victims ...
My best friend is a huge Neil Gaiman fan, she has all of his works and I havent dared to talk to her about this yet and have kinda avoided everything that talkes about him until Im mentally ready for tuat, I dont think she has really seen anything anout this yet, she doesnt really follow stuff like this, and if ahe heard it she probably didnt look too much into it, being scared of what thats gonna mean and I feel so bad for her. I did really love HP when I was younger and it broke my heart when Rowling showed her true colours but I wasnt nearly as invested in it as she is not his stories, ita gonna be tough on her but I hope shes gonna be okay.
Perhaps introduce your friend to Diane Duane and other potential substitutes that will allow some comfort. Before telling about the news. She will find out eventually.
I have Gaiman (and Rowling) in my book collection. Orson Scott Card, too. But at some point, I made the same decision you made to never spend money on them again. Do I get rid of my Sandman comics? I don't think so. It's a sunk cost fallacy and most of his projects are collaborations with other artists (Terry Pratchett, for one). The only author I've been purposeful about deleting from my collection is Marion Zimmer Bradley, who was a different kind of monster all together.
I’m so gutted by this - Coraline is one of my favourite childhood stories, and I have turned to it for comfort for years. I was just talking about it with a friend yesterday. It sucks how often we are disappointed by people we look up to. I think Gaiman will be joining JK Rowling in my attic until further notice. Thanks for making this video and talking about this, I had no idea about the allegations!
I don't get why people conflate "writes well" or "sees this part of reality the way I see it" with "must be a good person", what ideas about morality and/or human behaviour do you have? (general you, not specifically you, though if you want to answer, feel free.) Is it an identity thing where you identify with someone and you can't bear considering that you too are human enough to hurt others either through intent or as a result of self-deception?
@@bramvanduijn8086 this is an interesting question!! I think personally I just assume (maybe naively) that people are generally good. It's not a matter of conflating "writes well" with being a good person - it's just my baseline is assuming that people are good, and it's always disappointing when people I looked up to turn out to be not so great
@@bramvanduijn8086 it is GUTTING to be shaped by a work of art only to find out the artist has done awful things. You just want them to be good. You want everyone to be good.
Gaiman, just like Rowling, were my literary idols. I wanted to be like them. My writing was influenced by them, whether I like the fact currently or not. So yeah, I'm sad af that two of my most formative authors are pure sacks of crap. I'm not buying anything else from his works, old or new. But I think I'll keep my Absolute Sandman books on my shelf for now, at least for a while, if only for the monetary factor. They were HELLA expensive here in Brazil and I bought them all last year, I have to at least finish reading them before I decide to do something. What a place to live in, this Earth that we share, huh?
Technically that is not true, innocent until prooven guilty means that the person should be treated as innocent until there is enough proof of someone being guilty
If we talked about all the horrible and dirty things that any artist has done in their life, I think we would end up throwing away half of the world's art and throwing away billions of books from libraries. Today we can learn about these painful cases, and give ourselves the opportunity to judge what to do with their works. Should Neil Gaiman stand trial? ...Of course!!. I stay with what is written, that with his person they do what is right, I stay with the talent that he has left behind when writing stories.
Yup pretty much every rich person is bad. And honestly boycotting then don't do much they are already rich. And with the world literally on fire and my rights on the line I think I'm going to just enjoy whatever book I pick up without worrying too much about who wrote it. Of course I have limits. If it's supposed to be a factual book but it's got fascist ideology I'll probably throw it away. But for fun stories I don't care anymore. I'll still avoid giving money to Rowling tho because she is ACTUALLY attacking the trans community and won't stop. But I can't boycott every author every company every whatever or if have nothing
Thank you for making a video on this, Willow. This has been on my mind a lot because similarly to you, I also got into reading largely through his books and they were some of the things that got me through high school, pretty much. I also made the decision not to engage with his work/support him anymore, but I've noticed there's a part of me that feels oddly... guilty for having enjoyed the books in the first place? So I just need to keep reminding myself that at the time I had no reason NOT to support him but now that I do have one, I'm consciously making the decision not to engage. The circumstances have changed, but so has the way I'm approaching his work. That's the best we can do as his former fans right now.
You briefly touched on the conflict between "innocent until proven guilty" and "believe the woman". I watched this play out in a small group I'm part of, where two young women who were relatively new to the group made what initially seemed like credible accusations of inappropriate sexual behavior by an older man who had a long history and was well respected. Long story short, over the course of a few months it became clear that the women were (a) friends and (b) delusional about this matter along with many others. They lost all credibility, and left the group. But the damage was done. The man also mostly withdrew from participation. He was unable to shake off the feeling of betrayal resulting from how quickly we believed the women despite his years of rock-solid reputation with the group. I didn't know how to thread this needle. I think that 95% of the time believing the women is the right decision. But there's no good way to determine *which* 95%.
Allegations happened to an ex friend of mine. He was not the best person but the allegations were and are pretty insane. I basically watched this man loose his very sanity and had distrust in everyone trying to support him for years. Allegations ruin lives! On the other hand as a survivor myself I'm inclined to believe victims and I don't believe he was 100 percent innocent eather. Sometimes even if allegations are false there's a bit of Truth to them that's just very exaggerated. Other times the person is just very angry and wants to get revenge or something.
This is why “innocent until proven guilty” should apply to everyone, not just the accused or just the accusers, but both. Assume both parties are telling the truth until you can be sure who isn’t. If you choose to believe one side and demonize the other, you only turn up looking like an asshole if you’re proven wrong.
Another great, thoughtful video Willow! I never finished HP so never felt many conflicting emotions about JKR being horrible. This whole situation really messed with me though. I spent a lot of my teen years reading Gaiman's work to get through the tough times bought about by complex traumas. Speaking as a survivor of SA myself, books were (and still are) a safe haven for me, to have a previous favourite author behave in this way towards women and girls feels viscerally wrong to me. Glad to have channels like yours to recommend more diverse (and hopefully less ethically shitty) authors i should be reading instead.
Well this sucks. Thanks for making the video. I had somehow missed all of this. :/ I'm with you - we all need to figure out how we will react to something like this and live accordingly. I'm really disappointed right now, so quite a few books will be coming off my TBR. Thanks for reminding us also about the enormity of literature to devour. : )
It's sad to witness how people easily turn their love into hatred the exact moment someone tries to accuse their idol of being a 'bad person'. Or do it when their idols view of the world doesn't match theirs. Be there or be square, right? Men and women of art should not be judged by speculative accusations or their honest opinions.
Ugh I know, right?! Why do autonomous humans have to ruin themselves with morals and ethics when we could just glue our idols to pedestals and make sure they are completely untouchable? I hate when people are reasonable and savvy 😤😤😤
@@WillowTalksBooks Choosing to believe totally unproven allegations and gossip is hardly evidence of someone being "reasonable and savvy". Frankly, it seems more like someone trying to whip-up a handy bit of controversy for their RUclips channel.
Well said, Willow. 💜 A clear and compassionate message that includes healthy boundaries, with neither apathy nor rage. This video was comforting for me today. Cheers.
If someone claimed you had stolen from your employer, should you be sacked? If someone said you'd made a racist comment 20 years ago, should you be put in jail for a hate crime? Of course not. Not until the claims had been investigated. There's a process to be followed with Gaiman (I write as someone who's not particularly a fan), and decisions should be made in the light of its findings.
Hello Willow! This is my first time watching one of your videos, and I just wanted to commend you for your perspective on this topic. I’ll admit I haven’t seen much in-depth commentary on Neil Gaiman’s situation, possibly thanks to the algorithm gods (LOL). I’m naturally long-winded, but I’ll try to keep this as concise as possible (a difficult ask, given the complexity here). Your arguments about choice are compelling and well-reasoned. That said, choice is a double-edged sword-it’s most effective when informed. (And I don’t mean to imply you’re uninformed, just a general reflection on how essential it is to seek facts, especially in complex situations.) Think of all the poor choices we’ve made simply because we lacked experience or perspective-believe me, I could write a book about mine (no pun intended 😉). For someone like Gaiman, his public status exposes his choices, forcing us to reckon with the impact. And yet… is ignorance bliss? Simply because an artist hasn’t faced public scrutiny doesn’t mean they haven’t led a scandalous life. We may just be reveling in the absence of knowledge. Thus, should we avoid enjoying any artistic works at all if the specter of controversy is probable were we to look through someone’s life through a magnifying glass? The larger issue here, I think, is our tendency to speak in absolutes: “I’ll always do this,” or “I’ll never do that.” History shows these absolutes rarely hold up and often lead us astray. I agree with you-society still grapples with gender bias and related issues. Yet nuance remains elusive, as our recent political climate makes painfully clear (November 5th results, anyone?). May I propose an alternative? I think we can celebrate art that impacts us while acknowledging the flaws of its creators. Rather than “canceling” works, we can let them serve as vessels for two intertwined stories: the beauty they bring to our lives and the human imperfections behind them. We don’t need to enjoy artistry’s darker elements, but we can appreciate them, seeing art as both beautiful and ugly-and, therefore, sublime. For example, I once stood in awe at the Vatican, marveling at its beauty, tears streaming down my face. And yet, simultaneously, I felt disgust for the suffering and exploitation that enabled its construction. How many lives were ground into its marble? But I would never advocate for razing it to the ground. Destroying such structures would be fruitless-they’ve defined who we are in all our humanity, through the good, the bad, and, yes, the downright ugly. Similarly, I don’t think we gain by erasing flawed authors or works from our lives. Instead, we can use them to understand ourselves better and confront our own humanity-the creative genius and ignoble horrors that reside within us all. Let them serve as reminders of how we must continue to evolve in our understanding of humanity. Let’s use them to educate future generations about what we must all beware. I’m someone with strong opinions (as you may have gathered!), and one of these opinions falls like the “Great Eye of Mordor” on organized religion. Yet I can’t deny that Christianity helped lay the foundations of my moral standards. While I oppose organized religion today, its teachings remain part of my life, threads in my tapestry I cannot simply cut away. I’ve learned to judge myself and forgive myself, hoping to grow. “Let him who is without sin among you, cast the first stone at her.” I don’t need to be Christian to recognize the wisdom there, nor any faith to hold the axiom “Do unto others” as true. These ideas resonate even if their origins were shaped by flawed, fragile humans whose complexities, for better or worse, have impacted humanity for over one hundred and twenty-five thousand years. So, I say this: “A life led in absolutes shall absolutely lead us astray.” For what it’s worth, that’s my choice and my opinion. I hope that, agree or disagree, you might see it as grounded in the nuance I believe we all need to navigate a world that is rarely just “this” or “that.” Your video was insightful, and I wish you all the best. ❤
Many other writers might turn out to have done horrible things, which we don't know about yet. I don't assume someone is a good person or a bad person because I admire their work. I don't know them personally, so I only make the same assumptions about them as I do about most strangers. The idea of innocent until proven guilty can apply to the fans as well, in that we assume that our favourite authors must be good people, until they prove that they're guilty when something like this comes to light. I won't be getting rid of my copies of Gaiman's work, because I read him due to his skills as an author, not because I like him as a person. However, I respect other people's right to make the same choice for themselves.
This is heartbreaking for me. I was in university when The Sandman was first released, and I still have the original print of every single issue, carefully stored in individual bags with acid-free backing. Despite trying, I can’t separate the man from his creations. I deeply respect the courage of the women who have come forward, and my heart goes out to them for what they’ve endured, are enduring, and may continue to face. I also think about Maddy and his other children and the impact this will have on them. I’ve decided to pack his books away, honoring the inspiration and joy they brought me, but it’s time for me to say goodbye. I’m grateful for the memories, but I’ll let them go now.
I feel the same about JK Rowling and Roald Dahl. Loved their works as a child but now I have mixed feelings due to their horrible views/actions against others. Sad when a person you admire turns out to be the worst of humanity.
@@Euro.Patriot JK being transphobic and Roald Dahl was antisemitic. I still love Dahl's work but as a person he wasn't nice. As for JK she's ruined her work for me due to how much hate she spreads online regarding transgender people.
@phoebevaughan5095 Transphobia is not bad and I doubt Roald hated Semites. He might have hated Jews but not an entire ethnic group. Getting angry over hearing someone say only women have periods is an issue on your side, it means harden up... Well if you can harden up you're not a woman.
@@phoebegee54 I don't know anything about them other than JK made Harry Potter which sucks and Roald made Fantastic Mr. Fox, Matilda and BFG which were good.
This is one of the hardest things to deal with. We get so invested in these worlds created by people we don't know, and trying to put wondrous world building and fantastic stories next to people we find have done and believe deplorable things - it's ridiculously conflicting. I had this feeling with the accusations of Michael Jackson, too, that was my first experience of this. Then I found out about the author of Ender's game, Orson Scott Card and his bigoted anti-gay views, then there was J.K. Rowlings trans-nonsense, and trying to breathe through Johnny Depp's trial, and now Neil Gaiman. People I have listened/read/watched works of that I love, and is a part of my upbringing, my history, my personality - and the entire ground I'm not standing safely on is ripped away. I don't know how to deal with it. All I try to remember is that money talks, and while I in my ignorance have purchased and enjoyed works, now that I do know, I put my money elsewhere instead of the coffers of people who have brilliant creative minds, but rotten "souls".
I think the art is separate to the artist. I can't remove his old works as they are in a way now a small part of me. However, choosing to continue to support future works is something else entirely.
I have the same feelings, but then still, if you think about it - we are only now learning about it, he was apparently doing those awful things when he was creating some of those works :(
@@wiktoriatluvi He was. And that's going to be true for every similar instance, wether it is writers, actors, musicians, you name it. But noone can change the past, you can't unread books or unwatch films. We can only choose what we do with this information tomorrow.
I have been aware of this for quite some time and am dismayed that it has barely made the news. I have been a huge NG fan since I was 15, I went to signings and readings and devoured all his work. I was later so excited that he married one of my favourite musicians, Amanda Palmer and they collaborated on music and writing that I adored. Amanda had been giving quite cryptic messages as to what has been going on, I think she must’ve signed an NDA. You only need to listen to her last E.P ‘New Zealand Survival Songs’ particularly ‘Whakanewha’ and ‘The Man Who Ate Too Much’ to get a glimpse into the hell she has been through. My Sandman’s are on the bottom shelf of the bookcase, behind my chair - for now. Thanks for talking about it Willow. Xx
I definitely dodged the emotional rollercoaster on this one as someone who has read a few of Gaiman's works and not clicked with them (I feel he's an incredible idea person but fails on execution). For me, this one was painless. But I grew up as a Harry Potter kid - I was the same age as the main characters as the books came out. I remember the day I saw the first book at a Scholastic book fair, sitting with a car full of my friends and my mom at midnight as we waited outside bookshops for the newest releases. I have the newspaper clipping that announced the movies in a photo album somewhere because I went feral with excitement. I still have the wonder and joy of my childhood love for the world - she can't take that - but she won't get one more dime from me or one more moment of my engagement. That was the only choice I could make. And it's sad that she is only one example of dozens of musicians, directors, actors, and writers I have had to toss out of my life but, as you said, there is endless good art. I've chucked so much to the curb by now that it's gotten much easier. And there's so much out there to fill the void. More than I could consume in my lifetime anyway!
Good Omens was a book my brother and I shared via mail, back and forth for about 15 years. I got our battered copy signed by both Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett (shortly before he died) and gave it to my brother one Christmas. When my bother died 6 years ago, I inherited our book. It’s so precious to me, and I am so broken about these allegations. Harry Potter was a huge part of my kids’ childhood, and THAT was awful too. Hannah Gatsby in her Nanette special talks about what a horrible person Picasso was and how difficult it can be to separate the artist from the art when you find out the artist (or writer) is/was an absolute dick. I don’t have any easy answers, and I loved Neil’s work and have multiple books signed by him, and the Good Omens season 3 being changed to a 90 minute movie makes me want to cry. So, no answers, but I loved your video discussion about all the nuances.
thank you. I've been trying to gather the strength to get more information about the situation and I finally felt ready. I was so hurt about Good Omens and just... I felt deceived, even though obviously he's just some author who's stories I like. I feel ready to read up on everything now and you gave me a starting point. Thanks for presenting the way you did
I bought two Neil Gaiman novels at a yard sale over the weekend. Don't know if I'll read them now, so I'm just gonna focus on the fact that I helped out a neighbor by buying some stuff.
I was a fan of his books, too 😢 The one and only signing I went to put me off 1) the worship going on was jawdropping, people giving him gifts, a young woman (late teens) ahead of me in the signing line left him some artwork she'd made. 2) i met him, got my book signed and then asked my friend if she thought he wasn't a bit lechy toward the previous woman. When the allegations came out I remembered that night. I did get a weird vibe in person. Not from a distance though, initially when he was on stage he simply seemed just a great orator/storyteller.
I attended a talk he gave in Dublin years ago. It was a great evening, but when it came to the signings, he seemed to allow female fans to take photos , etc with him despite everyone being told to keep the queue moving. I got my own book signed and thought nothing of it at the time-as I was thrilled to have met him briefly. Years later and in context of all this, this was almost god-like worship, with said god giving more time to young female fans more than others.
I was in the midst of reading Coraline when the news dropped, and I've been struggling with what to do. I'm not only reading it for pleasure but for various research projects and essays. I've currently put it on pause, while I figure things out. I also haven't heard many people talking about this tbh (or maybe I've just been out of the loop) so it's good to hear someone who's consumed pretty much all of his work say something.
I see this kind of discussion on reddit: Do you separate the author from their works? I choose not to because it would feel like condoning their actions. I'd had Neil Gaiman on my TBR list for years with some vague intentions to get around to his books. That's on ice.
@@mandyschmidt7960 Buying used books makes a lot of sense both economically and environmentally, but that wasn't my point. It's about giving an author my time and the recognition that they deserve it. Just look at Marion Zimmer Bradley and Alice Munro, one of Canada's greats. It's about what acts they committed or were complicit in covering up (often for years) that make or break it.
Thank you for a very gentle update. Nuance and understanding is awesome. Describing your actions and reasons, without a call to action! Much more convincing that any strident call. You have likely convinced me. Which sucks, because I like a lot of their art.
I cant even begin to express how disappointed I am with this situation. If there was a person I would have never thought this of, that was him. I can't even read anything by him anymore.
For me the principle of innocent untill proven guilty, is sutch an important principle that no matter who, all deserves that and sutch principles should never be wavered because if those principles get challenged to hard we might loose them and never get them back.
It was hard to take in, but I did read the various writings on this, and the sources. Glad it's finally breaking past the suppression efforts. Devastating as someone who has LOVED his work. But not as devastating as being one of his victims.
As an American, he sounds like a deluded creep with disapointingly entitled frat boy and line stepping tendencies, not necessarily a criminal under US law (not what necessarilly applies). From the articles I read, it is not that I disbelieve the women, but I think a lot of detail would be needed that wasn't in what I read (it may be there, but I haven't read it). The closest we have to acknowledgment of an issue is the NDA, of which I haven't read or heard enough details to make sense and if what i heard is true, Gaiman should look into malpractice against the attorney who drafted it. I also think it is important to note, one of the things that was newsworthy was a "bad pass" he made at a woman in 1986 (39 years ago at age 25) and he stopped because he realized she wasn’t in to it. I think part of the issue is just that from his writing, his audience thought we knew him and expected him to be a different, better (non-skeevy) person. We thought what we knew was genuine and it is closer to a commercial brand. I still like the books, but I won't be buying anything new from him; however, if I were to see a copy of something at a used bookstore, I might pick it up if I was having trouble finding something else I wanted to read. I do wonder if he ever sits out in his awesome writing shed staring out the window and thinking about all the articles about how he is just another coercive rich villainous reason to choose the bear, shocked because "I thought they wanted me to do it because it made me happy, I am so cool and they were such big fans... not that they didn't want to and only tolerated it because I had money."
I am so torn. On the one hand, I never want to off-handedly deny an accusation of SA. On the other, he has always been a supporter of liberal ideology, and there have been many attacks and accusations from right-wing trolls trying to discredit those voices. I suppose all I can do is wait and hope these allegations are proven false.
"It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by being fundamentally people." - Good Omens Women are people too, no matter how much some would like to deny it.
Willow, sadly I envy your ability to choose. As a woman of color I do not always have the choice to disengage from those writers who view me as an adversary. As a writer my foremost reason for reading is the writing itself. I have been made better by reading the best of the worst. "To err is human..." Aren't we all?! ❤
I am delighted RUclips suggested this video to me. I appreciate your take on Gaiman, and your focus on reading diversely. I look forward to more of your videos.
Interesting video. Putting aside the Neil Gaiman cases while they go through court etc; separating the artist and the art is a challenging one. Many great artists / writers / composers have incredibly problematic elements to them - all the way along the spectrum. Not sure I would never want to listen to Wagner again...for example Maybe the line in the sand is, as you say, sticking to your principles about who you fund with your purchases today (i.e. people still around who benefit financially from our purchasing decisions)
There are so many problematic artists, living and dead. Cosby, Allen, and Spacey, Rowling, Lovecraft, and Wagner. One time I went on this quest to get to Anaheim to hear Gene Roddenberry speak. It was an awful fiasco, and when I finally entered the auditorium, I could hear in his voice that the man was dead drunk. Now Gaiman. My model of reality is that this is all one big school. We came into this world selfish, ignorant babies, and we're here to learn and to grow up. Some of us will graduate to more demanding classes, and judging by the latest election results a lot of us are gonna get sent back a grade. Our classmates are often awful, really awful, and it's hard to bear. I think we can all relate when Carlin says he's rooting for the comet. Folks, artists are people -- fallible, imperfect people like us, and the cult of celebrity we cherish is so very unhealthy. We can't expect celebrities or artists to be any better than the rest of us. Yes, hold them to account, hold us ALL to account; consequences help us grow! "Use every man after his deserts and who shall 'scape whipping?" Then bring on the whips! I am no better than you, whoever you are reading this. Nor is Gaiman. Write him a letter if you must, telling him how angry you are, how disappointed in him you are, and then let it go. Art endures. Art teaches us. Cherish the art, not the artist. Gaiman taught us, ""Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot." Well the same is true of the storytellers who told us those tales. To invert Shakespeare, "let the good men do live on, and bury the evil with the bones."
So do I, but you have to admit that in some of his stories, his racism and idiotic fear of another cultures is prevalent. That all said, I'm also a huge 'Dracula' fan, but the racism in some of Bram Stoker's work makes Lovecraft look like a civil rights champion.
But as far as we know, Lovecraft didn't ever hurt anyone. He "just" wrote racist comments, mostly in private letters, but it seems like he was a pretty harmless guy in person. Also almost every white guy in the US was racist back then, and Europe was worse. Gaiman is the opposite: he openly posts feminist contents, he criticizes other authors for their sexism... but it appears he's a very different person.
The thing I've found difficult through this is that a lot of the allegations against other celebs, politicians, etc, were people i barely knew and could easily jump on the "support survivors" bandwagon. But with Gaiman's allegations... it feels so much more grey and i didn't want to believe it. And in good consciousness, I don't think I can
This is why it is important to apply “innocent until proven guilty” to both accused and accuser. Assume that both accounts are true until one is proven false.
We must all conduct ourselves in alignment with our values and ethics to the best of our knowledge and ability. To me that includes my purchasing decisions because I don't want my small amount of money to go to support people/activities/practices that are counter to my values and ethics. Doing this will always attract trolling, anger and ire from others but I am the one that must be able to look in the mirror each day and be happy with the person I am. I support your take 100%.
I'm very glad to hear your take on this, as a former fan. The only people I've heard talk about this were not fans to begin with, and found it very easy to cut ties entirely. Which felt like they were being dismissive of how hard it was to confront the news of said allegations, as someone for whom these books were pivotal. So it's helpful to hear from someone with that same heaviness in their heart when looking at this. And I might believe that ONE allegation could be fabricated. Two makes me waver on that stance. When thereafter appears 3 and 4 and more, then I'm like "ohhh, no, it's over, that's a pattern." FCK what the courts say, someone's rich enough, they could hire lawyers to cover it up. When there's multiple allegations like that, across time and space, it DOES NOT matter what the courts find, that's a preponderance of evidence in my book. Hah. book :/ Welp, I guess it's used book shops for me if I ever want to read the entirety of Sandman - I never did get thru the entire run myself, and I do want to... Worst part about this is how, this is just one guy. ONE famous and powerful man getting accusations and finding public support among his fanbase waver. And yet, look who just got back in the white house :( It just really feels like punishing individual bad actors who take advantage of their power and money, like you mentioned, to take the low road and be sleezeballs and hedonists and criminals... It doesn't feel like enough. Like we should do something else than rely on the courts. Dismantle patriarchy? I don't know how to do that, do you? :/
If an author like Rowling openly takes a stand about a topic I deeply disagree with the decision is very clear - I don't support that person in any way. It is way more difficult if we only have accusations. Therefor I totally agree, the best way is to collect as much info as we can and then decide for ourselfs what we feel is right. And I think it also important to not only reflect on what persons we support but also what we consume in daily life (brands). I often feel we are so quick to decide to love or hate a person but we mindlessly consume and support brands that are also morally not at all in line with what we believe.
Thank you for your nuanced take, especially of the balance between accuser and accused. I've come to the following: 1) mercy demands we listen to the accusers and hear their pain; 2) justice demands we let legal proceedings run without prejudging; 3) legal guilt and "did he do it" are separate questions; and 4) no-one can tell you how to spend your reading dollars and time. Regardless of the outcome, this is tragic for all involved.
This is hard stuff to listen to, so i sometimes allow myself to get distracted by what a lovely outfit that is! The neckline/necklace/glasses chain combo is 🔥, i am pretty envious. Thank you for addressing a difficult topic on your channel, I'm off to dee what else you have to say.
An interesting topic to be sure about the separation of artist from their work. But I wonder if that holds up when it comes to other commodities? For example, how does one square the circle of not support JK Rowling becuse of her abusive rhetoric, whilst buying iPhones, fast fashion, even energy (climate change), etc. If we are going to stand on principle and reject an artist’s work due to their wrongdoing, why does that scarcely apply elsewhere? Maybe it gives us a chance to feel righteous whilest deluding ourselves to the brutal oppressive systems we maintain with our daily payments. Amazon buying, meat eating, tax paying…
@@macolof362 The systems are deeply, unfathomly messed up at their roots. We can do our best to get by, the more marginalized among us especially. We can also work to make change at various levels
I remember reading Amanda Palmer’s autobiography and feeling deeply deeply uncomfortable with his super creepy and abusive behavior (which she describes lovingly, like victims of abuse are wont to do).
The idea of “death of the author” (or separating the author’s works from the actual person) is something i understand people can do but it’s so hard when buying their books directly helps them... and even more it just feels wrong supporting someone like that. The cupboard trick is a good plan or keeping his books in box, I think you’re right about seeing what happens (in court) but it doesn’t seem good at all O_O
@@fatima_hrexactly. I always see it that way in case I happen to like some wort of work by an awful famous person - I'm gonna rip them off by not letting them get my money, so secondhand and other measures it is.
No. Death Of The Author is the theory that any individual audience member's interpretation of an artwork is as the valid as the artist's original intention.
My personal disappointment was that I had been looking for a used copy of American Gods for years. I was going on a camping trip and there was a huge used book store on the way and I finally found a copy and was so excited. Jump forward three days to when I had internet again and it was exactly when the allegations were starting to be addressed by creators on RUclips. The book has just sat in a bag ever since, I don’t really desire to read it right now. I’ve had my HP books since childhood and they’re currently all turned pages out so I can’t see the covers and being used to hold up a shelf since I don’t think I can get rid of them, there’s a lot of good personal memories attached to them. If I had the space they’d probably be boxed away but I don’t. I was a huge fan though and I had so much HP stuff and it was such a huge part of my life it really was hard to get it all out of my life. A couple years out I don’t find enjoyment in it anymore, I certainly won’t and haven’t continued to financially support her, but I can admit it was hard to erase 2+ decades worth of being a fan from my life, especially when some of it was my own artwork. I personally can’t separate her from her art, she’s too vocal, actively too hurtful and destructive, and a lot of people have been pointing out how her views are in her work and I can’t look past that as an adult. I almost feel icky in admitting it was hard but I view it now as kind of going through a bad breakup, you know now the person is trash but you still had some good times and memories with them and there’s a bit of a grieving period for what was but there’s absolutely no way that you want them to be a part of your future anymore so you move on.
I've also been a huge fan of Gaiman for yeeeears, his books were so dear to me. I am beyond disappointed. Honestly, I'm scared to call myself a 'fan' of anyone anymore because these very successful people keep turning up to be awful human beings... My NG books are also going away in a box next to hp so I don't have to look at them. Thank you for making this video!
I have no idea whether Gaiman is guilty or not, but until judgement has been passed - and my knowledge about these incidents is be clearer - I’ll be leaving my Gaiman books on the shelves, and I won’t be investing more money into his products. It’s awful to think that his power and money has been fed by our adulation of his skill as a writer, which in turn made the alleged abuse possible. It’s also hard to imagine the empathetic disconnect between his work and his actions. As many others surely feel, I hope these allegations are proven false, but until that happens, I won’t be propping up his reputation with my time or money.
Great video Willow, really well put. With any sexual abuse allegations like these where the behaviour happened years ago and the person being accused has so much more power and resources than their accusers/victims, it’s always so unlikely that legal action will result in a fair, accurate verdict, and a lot of the time fans will never know the ‘truth’. But I personally feel much more comfortable stopping my support of someone who might (but let’s real, probably isn’t) innocent, than continuing to support someone who is potentially an abuser.
"Life is short and there is so much great art in the world." ❤ Lovely. Thank you.
I'm a big SF reader and I recently made a comment on GR that I ought to give the Altered Carbon series a go and someone who knows I'm trans suggested I google that author--I immediately knew what she was hinting at. So I googled his name with "TERF" and yep. My reply was "Fortunately the world is full of other books and stories." We're not lacking in that department.
Here, here !
Let me understand this, A 'woman' makes an allegation against this man, and several 'women' from previous incidents come forward to make similar claims, but never reported their 'rape' when it 'occurred'? None of the 'women' (and who is to say what a 'woman' is?) reported any coercion, nor rejected it, but instead 'submitted' to it. But now they can trash the guy's reputation because 'we believe all 'women'' and #meeto is a great reputation killer for women to wield?
Do 'women' need to provide evidence for their allegations, or just men? Does the law 'presume innocence' or guilt?
What I do understand is 'women' (whatever that is) now dominate the literary industry and they want to remove all men, so this is a perfectly reasonable way to not only destroy the man, but also his works.
Good job, keep it up! Next is Brandon Sanderson, he's quite popular, isn't he? Where are the 'women' to speak out against him, or do you have something better?
@@petergostelow Finally, some sense!
Remember what Daniel Radcliffe told one reader: what’s between you and the books is sacred. Don’t allow the creator’s actions to taint your love of the creation. Great works have been created by not so great people. If something helped you through a hard time, that’s still valid. If it helped change your life for the better, that’s still good. It’s still sacred. 💞
The guy is a backstabbing asshole.
And yet people still try to justify not engaging with media by using things about the writer to interpret the books in a bad light. I've even seen people do this to Neil Gaiman.
engage with media on your terms, yes. but also be aware of how your support enables or promotes harmful beliefs and actions. if you can enjoy something without financially supporting it--even better.
Dear fellow readers, please know: You supported someone for being an author who wrote stuff you loved to read. That's why you bought their books, and not because of stuff you did not and could not know. Much love and hugs to you all.
Yes. We bought into the person they pretended to be, not the person we never knew about.
Thank you, that's helpful 😔
Same thing with Cosby. The reason the revelations were so devastating is we didn't know about them...for DECADES. Had we known...we wouldn't have supported him. And, now that some artists are dead or their profits are confiscated for restitution, it's okay to purchase them now.
This is so important thing to remember. Most of us have at some point unknowingly supported the art of someone that later turned out terrible person. Gaiman is just a particularly insidious example because he always had this aura of like "one of the good cishet men" around him
Yeah- how about that HP Lovecraft? Great author, but problematic views on class and race.
I'm a 56 year old woman who grew up listening to her mom's Bill Cosby comedy albums constantly. They got me through a lot of hard times. So I understand feeling horrified when you find out someone you admired is not the good guy you thought they were.
same
These men show one face to the public, but behind closed doors, they show their true face.
SAME! I got through high school quoting his stuff. Heartbreaking to find out how awful he truly is.
Same. The To Russel My Brother With Whom I Slept recording was pretty much a staple in my house when I was growing up -- a few of his others as well, but that one was the clear favorite in our house.
Good guys & bad guys are purely fictional ideas. Everyone is one shade or another of grey, even when others &/or they themselves don't see it. Every sinner has a future; every saint, a past.
While I understand they are currently allegations, the details are very damning. Either one or both of the women (I can’t recall) went to the police within 24 hours. His wife posted on social media that she and Gaiman separated around the same time as the NZ incident. They later divorced. The sickening part is how he projected in public that he was an ally for women’s rights, including to “believe women” about SA. That did not age well to say the least.💔
I'm pretty sure Gaiman confirmed the accounts but just tried to claim they were consensual (which wouldn't help his case if it was even true)
That reminds me of James Franco wearing a Me Too pin at some awards event, just before everything came out about his own awful behaviour.
@@sylph8005 what do you mean it wouldn't help if he didn't sa women
@@windy8544 he was abusive to them outside the sa, even if they consented to sex with him (as he claims - I feel the need to say I don't believe his claims). abuse is still bad even if there is no sa, he would still be an awful person if the only thing he did was abuse women instead of abuse AND sa women.
Gaiman travelled from New Zealand to Scotland during the Covid lockdown when he abruptly separated from his notoriously open-minded wife. At the time, that was difficult to understand. He could afford to have moved to a local hotel or air b&b. He apologised to locals but suffered no penalty. It seems now he was pursued by his guilty conscience. They may just be allegations but who would want to put themselves into the firing line by accusing a multimillionaire who makes his living making up very believable fiction? The public persecution of a relatively rich woman who defended herself from a mega-rich actors legal assault makes it clear what could happen.
Dead people are dead, there is no one to hold accountable and I won't give up their books because I found out something about them post mortem. I didn't know them, I didn't know when I read the book, I can't seek their perspective, so I have no reason to boycott a dead person's work.
A person who is alive can be held accountable. I will always love the stories, nothing will change that but I always thought Neil himself was a little... off. I never wanted to meet him but his books got me through some really tough times. Controversial as the sentiment is, no one is just the horrible things they do. Every horrible person is still a person and all the weird mixed up crap that comes with that title. A horrible person can still write a wonderful story.
I own the books and I won't get rid of them. The stories are written and out in the world and have been for decades. They have nothing to do with Neil now and everything to do with MY relationship with them. However, I will no longer support him going forward. I will form no new relationships with his work because those would be colored by the new knowledge I have that he is, at the very least extremely skeezey, if not exactly a predator. I don't have enough information to judge him beyond that. I don't feel guilty for still loving the stories that helped me till now, though. Those were never relationships with the author, anyway, but with the stories and how I felt reading them. Continued support of his work, however, is a choice I choose not to make. If you use your fame as leverage for intimate favors... yeah, you don't get to have it.
Well said!! This issue is complex and there is no one size fits all way to look at any of it. Multiple things can be true at the same time, and it’s up to the individual to decide how they want to deal with it. Everyone in their heart knows they can love what he has created and despise what he has done in his personal life. The books are the books, and Neil is Neil. They’re related, but separate, and feelings for one doesn’t inherently speak to feelings on the other.
I really appreciate this perspective
You said all I was thinking. It's very complicated and there is no one-size fits all answer. We all have to find our own way through the quagmire that is this world.
Thank you. *this* is how I feel about it. I still benefit from the stories and find good things about them. I still enjoy the Netflix Sandman and want it to continue. Bad people can make beautiful works and vice versa. It sucks. But I don't think I should act like I'm ashamed of liking those works, like it means I support him or the bad things he's quite possibly done. I don't think I should have to have the conversation every time those works are brought up that I don't support an abuser or sexual assaulter or someone unethical. It's kinda exhausting. The works still provide value. It's sad to write them off because their source is broken.
@@frostfang1 A person's ability to pull inspiration from the ether doesn't guarantee that they are also going to be good at other things. In fact, some of the greatest artists in history were horrible people. I am reminded of King David in the Bible, who was a murderer and an adulterer, whose Psalms are read and sung in churches around the world. In some ways, poor character on the part of artists can serve to reinforce that in many ways they are just messengers who reflect society back to itself, giving us the opportunity to both celebrate who we are and make changes to become more who we want to be. To be clear, none of that in any way justifies bad behavior. Ultimately, David suffered consequences for his crimes in his lifetime; similarly, living artists should not be shielded from the consequences of their actions. Nevertheless, there is a fine line between supporting an artist and supporting an artist's bad behavior by buying their art and it behooves us to think critically and make careful decisions about doing so. [edited for clarity]
Neil Gaiman's work has been the singularly most influential art in my life as an illustrator and author. I had, until now, fully intended on building an illustrative art portfolio around the Stardust novel. I've spent most of my adult life emulating him, idolizing him, and striving to create worlds and stories as rich and beautiful as his.
Now, in the aftermath of my grief, I no longer wish to emulate him. I will eclipse him.
Now instead of following in his footsteps I'm determined to forge my own way and provide everyone stories with just as high of quality but with none of the abusive, disgusting, and phobic behavior exemplified by the authors I've loved.
Do that with your bosses, too. Go get 'em, Tiger.
The danger of putting someone on a pedestal is that they will invariably let you down.
Yes, this. I wasn't a huge fan of his work, I did (and still do) like some of it, but it's Him I fell for. His talks and interviews and general media presentation. And I knew you can't trust the persona famous people put on for the public, and yet I liked him, and I wanted to like him, because he seemed to be one of the good ones. Yeah, he's probably just as selfish as the rest of us, and weird and full of himself and probably a bit insufferable in person. Not... not this.
Here lies a toppled god, we did but build their pedestal, tall and narrow.
the fact that he tried to blame his autism for his monstrous acts, really makes me disgusted as an autistic woman. It gross me out so much. how dare he blame it on that as if neurodivergent community isn't already facing horrible sh!ts.
It also shows the misogyny that can exist within the neurodivergent community. Some autistic men will blame their neurodivergence for atrocious behaviour, while autistic women will be ostracized or written off because of their condition without doing anything wrong. It is a horrible double standard and it needs to stop.
I echo your thoughts entirely.
I know, right? I feel like, as an autistic person, I spend most my time with all my people interactions making sure I saw, heard, respected, and didn't void anyone's boundaries. I may struggle with "normal" social queues, but I definitely understand "Yes" and "No" and I easily comprehend that others, just like me, want to be left alone and respected.
He can't just explain away his heinous, disgusting acts against people as "Oops, my autism acted up".
@@fuindes_batwingsI am an autistic person too, and I was talking with my autist friends about this as well, as we ended up unanimously concurring that our lack of ability to read social cues makes us MORE cautious and OVERLY seeking clarification/consent, not less. For me, I don't want to ever unintentionally cause someone upset. Like any person, I have my own boundaries (e.g. sensory touch like shaking hands/hugs from people I don't really know). It is insulting and disgusting for him to attempt to use his diagnosis as a means of explanation. Don't lump our community in your personal crimes, Neil.
I'm autistic and I hadn't known he said that, or that he identifies as autistic (I have long found Gaiman to be pretty gross and creepy as a person so I largely have him and his superfans curated out of my social media). Anyhow, autistic people are by far more likely or be victims of grooming and sexual assault, so it's extremely bad for someone this high profile to make that kind of statement that will no doubt shape allistics' perceptions of us. Such selfishness on his part.
I’m not sure why people think that just because they enjoyed an artist’s work, that makes the artist a saint who could do no wrong. You don’t know them or their life. Only their work. Celebrity idolizing makes little sense to me.
Yeah I feel like these don't hit me as hard because I am here for the work, not the person. Not to say that it isn't frustrating to find out a creator sucks, and I understand not wanting to support someone who is abusive, but I feel like I've never been one to idolize or overly value a person I don't know, because...I don't know them. It's disappointing, to some degree, but not devastating. But I've never been one to idolize so maybe I just can't relate in general.
I just always think they are normal people not people that do reaky bad stuff. Like i try to see everyone befor i get zo know them. I do not like to expect the worst from everyone, that is way too dark fir me.
@@alien777 I don't think the argument here is to expect terrible things from anyone, but rather to just not put anyone on a pedestal and expect perfect behavior at all times. You can acknowledge humanity without thinking the worst of someone.
Rumours have been around for a while.
The guys in Forbidden Planet in Newcastle used to say that if Neil was doing a signing you never left him alone with any female staff members as he was a little...over familiar.
When if comes to problematic artists I'm of the opinion that if they are long dead it's ok, that's why I can still read H.P Lovecraft.
Wow, that’s disgusting!
I generally feel similarly, but with the caveat that they can still do damage, depending on who they are and what they wrote. Yukio Mishima still inspires incel men, for example
@@WillowTalksBooks I get what you're saying but the only caveat there is that good and bad people can draw inspiration from art independently of the author's intent or personal beliefs - I've seen people use To Kill a Mockingbird to promote gaslighting rape victims for example where that really isn't the point or intent of the work at all - I guess the death of the author isn't always that simple even if the author is actually dead.
Lovecraft was a deeply troubled person whose explicit racism is very much a part of that damaged personality. That flaw is worthy of study without diminishing it's terribleness. However he was never accused of being any kind of predator. Making him him a differant case to Gaiman.
@@phillipayriss3608 That's true. I just use Lovecraft as an example of a deeply problematic artist.
Lovecraft's mythos has also been used by so many other writers, often to subvert the very things that he believed in. If you haven't already, check out N.K. Jemisin's "Great Cities" books, a pair of thoroughly Lovecraftian novels by a brilliant Black woman who uses his ideas to utterly smash his ideals! Her use of The White Woman, an eldritch corporate white Karen, as an avatar of cosmic horror attempting to negate all life in every universe, is pure genius.
Hi WIllow, thanks for this video. I think what feels so heartbreaking about Neil Gaiman is the way he portrayed himself as a champion for women's rights and he always made himself very availble to fans, in person, on tumblr, etc. These traits that made him seem safe and relatable were actually fake and very predatory.
I love your message that there is a practically infinate amount of brilliant literature out there to discover and makes me excited to go out there and find new favs instead.
This is exactly it. I thought he was one of the good ones. And to find out he's actually one of the awful ones is heartbreaking.
@@elizabethgriffith8684 I heard about the tub club thing he had going where young women would post themselves reading his books in the bath and it sounded maybe a bit questionable.
All woke people are fake.
I was just watching this video on Miranda Sings (who I never liked, but I'm old and she made stuff for teenagers) who also wanted to be "friends" with young people and ended up hurting some of her fans. It's sad, but it is not a good idea to try to get close to your idols because of the power imbalance, even if they are actually ok people and not trying to groom you. It can never be a healthy friendship.
@@sannalopperi-vihinen233she also sent someone else’s nude OnlyFans content to underage minors in a group chat to make fun of the creator. So… yeah. I think it’s safe to say that’s far more than just unhealthy.
It's so disappointing considering how much he seemingly talked about and respected Ursula K le Guin for her writing, and talked about how she'd 'taught him that women were people too' when he read her books as a child. Maybe he didn't learn enough. But really I think he's just got very good at paying lip service while behind the scenes he's doing the opposite.
Similar to Joss Whedon.
It’s frustrating that people have to learn that “women are people too”. Ever admitting to believing the opposite gives me the ick
@@oneilprovost2287 which daughter. i tried looking it up and couldnt find anything, and also she has two daughters so again which one
@@oneilprovost2287 what? Are you sure you’re not confusing her with Alice Munro?
@@oneilprovost2287 Marion Zimmer Bradley was the one who sexually abused her daughter.
I was so fucking angry about this. I've been a Gaiman fan for years, two decades at least, and his association with Pratchett gave me a lot of comfort because of his lovely stories about him and memories of him. All those tributes to him, with Neil on them, is soul destroying.
But we need to believe victims, we need to believe those women. I hope they can heal now.
For me this exact feeling was Marion Zimmer Bradley. I read everything she ever wrote through high school and my twenties, and recommended her for twenty years. Ten years or so ago, allegations of her collusion in SA of her children and maybe some foster children? by her husband came out. The most disturbing part for me personally, after reading her daughter's statements, was looking back at some of her works, I could actually see it in the stories. I can't have her books in my house and some of them were my all time favorites.
Same, and you could say the same for Alice Munro. While she may have not committed any SA, she dismissed it as nothing and took the abuser's side over her own daughter. A monster in her own right, and also used it in her friggin' stories!
What is this?? Not her too!!!
@@user-sr1kc6jj2b-p1q Yeah. I learned about it from John Scalzi who talked about it on his blog when it broke. Very reputable guy, and the daughter herself reluctantly talked about it eventually. It came out around 2012/2013, I think, but maybe as late as 2016. Kinda broke my heart.
@@user-sr1kc6jj2b-p1q The Guardian wrote an article in 2014 so that's roughly when.
Yes. Her books creeped me out.
I mean whenever that is called assault or not, from comments its clear he is a major creep abusing his power and, reportds seem to confirm he very creepy does take adventage, even young women at a con were warned to not be alone with him ominous. So he definitly did wrong things whatever aou call it.
Ugh that’s revolting!
proff?
@@Libertangoagrario I'm not the person you asked a proof from, but the fact that he did had sex with the nanny (and he did admit this part, saying it was consensual) is a big red flag, it's taking advantage. If really you have strong feelings for someone working for you, even if totally mutual, first you put an end to the power dynamic, and then you pursue this person in a less unbalanced setting. There is probably always some sort of power difference, but the nanny ? a young women you pay ?? "yes but they loved each other" ok, so help her find another job and wait until she doesn't need you to have a roof over her head ...
@estelle8457 AND she liked it AND wanted it AND lookednfornit
@@Libertangoagrario in this case what she wanted or liked didn't matter, it's not about that, but about the choices he made, how he dealt with a situation. Even if she did seduced him, he can make choices. And if someone depending on you is offering you sex, I think the right choice is to make it so that this offer can be really free and informed. Shoving a cake in a persons mouth is not ok : it can be, but it depends on how I did make sure that the person was on board, not on how good the cake tasted. But if they asked ? Still, you don't do something just because someone asked, you still get to ponder if it's a good idea. And if you don't think that fucking this young woman working for you in your home is a bad idea or a morally questionnable one, than you don't understand/care much about consent.
Have you read Monsters: A fan's dilemma by Claire Dederer? It discusses the issue we have with enjoying art by problematic figures
I haven’t but that sounds excellent! Thanks!
@@WillowTalksBooks I second that recommendation. It's a really good and nuanced discussion.
Interesting!
Thanks for the recommendation; just grabbed it:)
Is it a book? Can I get it in e book?
I recently found out, from a client (I'm a therapist) that Alice Miller, the deceased psychoanalyst that wrote the revered classic "Drama of the Gifted Child", was a sh*t mother as reported by her son. Her book is about the devastation caused by narcissistic mothers. It's a wonderfully empathic book that has helped thousands, so I don't know what to do about this hypocrisy. People are so compartmentalized!
For the most part a narcissist can empathise only with him/herself. You can see it in Jane Eyre. So while they know their own story intimately and with great compassion for themselves, they can change the grammar so it sounds like they’re empathising with others. They are not empathising with the reader. The reader is being asked to empathise with the author. I am sorry to hear this about Alice Miller. I’ll have to go look it up. I am cautious about believing the offspring of famous people though, because rampant misogyny and capitalism uses the maturing male’s need for a rite of passage as a wedge between boys and their mothers with consumerist assumptions about individualism and independence which themselves are quite narcissistic.
I agree with everything you said. Maybe this sounds too jaded, but even though I did really like a lot of Gaiman's work, this is a man who has essentially rockstar status in the book world, and is known to be a weird/creepy dude. I don't find any of this surprising. Sad state of things.
I'm writing an essay on "art monsters" and what to do with their art, and decided to start by speaking of my feelings about Marion Zimmer Bradley, whose Mists of Avalon I loved as a teen, and discovered later that she abused her children in horrific way. I still don't know what to do about her, or Neil Gaiman, or any of the others art monsters... but I like exploring these feelings around them
She what?? I’ve never read her but wow, oh my god
@@WillowTalksBooks I remember her. Back in the good old days when I was young I red a lot of her books. Mostly because she was one of the few female fantasy authors translated to my language. I was in my late teens when I stoped reading her because even my naive country bumpkin self felt something was off in her books.
Don't get me wrong she was one of the first authors who had kind of gay representation in her books and thanks to her I knew about menstruation when I got my first period so I wasn't freaked out and didn't think I would die. Which makes thw betrayal I feel with her even worse.
In hindsight there were hints even in her earlier books too but I was not experienced enought to catch it. Later a friend told me about a book were one of the characters were SAd by his father, forgave him and later fought their enemies with him or something. Was just a chat in passing and I was like wtf MZB!?! My friend totaly could told me trash but in that moment my sudden dislike of the books made sense and I never touched them again.
Some time later what happend to her children came to light.
MZB's bestie and writing partner Diana Paxson just got kicked out of tne Troth and had ner clergy status revoked for enabling and covering up SA. Marion's daughter, Moira, wrote a book about the abuse. Both her brothers committed suicide due to the abuse. I disagree with her about many things, but I believe her and the other victims. "The Last Closet: the Dark Side of Avalon."
@@WillowTalksBooks She was a big fantasy-scifi author in the 70s and 80s, I'd say, big name in the community and helped a lot of other writers establish themselves. I knew her from the Avalon books, which my neighbour lent to me when I was 14 or so and I loved her feminist take on the Arthurian myths. Haven't read anything else by her, but finding out about what she did to her children sours the memory of enjoying her books. Same with Neil Gaiman and others, but it's still complicated.
@@leighharwood3886 The way I found about her was through an aunt's post on FB, an article with a title like "Feminist Legend Acused of Horrific Child Abuse", and I clicked because I felt I knew all the Feminist Legends and what sort of lurid lie they had invented about them. It was a very religious website, so I had to corroborate (though I do think that calling MZB a "feminist legend" is a bit of an overstatement). I was flabbergasted.
There's something I always find myself saying whenever a beloved writer/actor/whatever turns out to be a shit stain:
All of the memories we have of their works, the personal meanings, the representation, and inspiration they awoke in us, and all the other stuff: that's not the author, that's what WE brought TO the authors work. Books are experienced, and we bring our experiences to them. Things resonate because of who WE are. And regardless of how shitty the author is, all that good stuff comes from us, not them, and it's not tainted by the fact that they unambiguously suck. Sandman, for example, was very inspiring for me as a non binary person. One of the first times ever that I'd seen a gender ambiguous character like Desire in media, and then Mason Alexander Park just killed it in the Netflix show. Gaiman can't take that away. I brought that shit.
Even if we never support that author again, nobody can take the good stuff we brought to the work in the past away from us, because WE brought it. I find it helps me to separate that in my head. I hold on to the good experiences I had/brought, and then find someone who isn't a shit stain to read in the future.
I don't think is fair. The reader and fan(dom) experience is important, but artists still deserve credit for the work and thought they put in. The existence of artists who are personally morally wrong/dangerous doesn't negate the role of all artists. I'm not saying we should worship artists as lone Great Men, but antagonism towards artists is often part of larger anti-intellectualism trends that are also dangerous. I know separating art from artist is a flawed conception and I'm not really suggesting it, but what it more comes down to is that one can be immensely talented and a horrific person and acting like one can negate the other in any way is pointless to say the least.
I half agree with that. I personally think a person can be shitty/horrible while still making good art and/or being an inspiration, simply because human beings aren't black and white and can be many things at the same time.
I'm still glad I read Neil Gaiman's books, because it inspired me as a wannabe author, but I won't support him after finding out about this. I still enjoy his work for what it is.
I'm not saying this as a way to defend him, it's just for the debate sake. But couldn't you turn that around and say that the experiences/feelings you got from the story, is because the author was so good at putting word to paper? If another author had come up with and written one of Gaiman's stories, who's to say it would have been just as much of a enjoyable/"emotionally rewarding" read, if their writing style regarding world and character building was completely different, and not as immersive/"intense"(when it comes to making the readers imagination fly while reading the story)?
@@1Katakana They're not denying that Gaiman is talented. They're saying that his misdeeds are now too associated with her talent to appreciate on its own (in this person's individual experience at least)
It's true that novels in many ways exists through the subjective way they affect our minds, but to claim that an author has to give all credit to their readers strikes me as naive and a bit presumptious. Unless I misread you completely.
J.K Rowling once said ‘Hogwarts will always be there waiting to welcome you home.’ Or something like that I can’t be bothered looking it up, but the point is that she never added unless you’re trans, or Jewish or part or any other group I don’t like. Authors don’t get to ruin books for us. I say buy books second hand so that the author doesn’t see any money from the transaction, but I’m not about to limit my reading because another author did a dumb. I read a lot of ‘controversial’ authors. I hate the idea that we shouldn’t read a book. It’s okay to move on if you’re just too hurt, but don’t let an author steal a work from you you love, just because they’re an idiot.
Never heard J.K being anti-Semitic. Do you have a link, please?
I'm inclined to agree with you. Buying second hand from charity shops, or reading from the library, support local economy and organisations without overly supporting the original author.
Cringe
Don't mind me, just listening to "Bump n' Grind" by R. Kelly
I was the biggest NG fan ever, and when I first heard the allegations, I was like 'no...Neil couldn't have done this.' Like he was a personal friend or something. But then I actually bothered to listen to the podcasts...and, as inept as they sometimes are and as much as I dislike Rachel Johnson, they have serious weight behind them. I believe the victims, especially that tearful lady who worked for him at his NY residence. Yes these are still allegations, but Gaiman's voice messages, his (paradoxical) silence since, these women's detailed accounts and Gaiman's NDAs and monies paid to silence them have left me both disgusted and disappointed with the man.
But I'm mainly disappointed with myself; for keeping him on a ridiculously high pedestal for so long. The Sandman and The Graveyard Book are my favourite NG works, and both of these are now sullied...especially when one thinks of 'Calliope' in context of this (and then there's the Nada storyline), and hearing that Gaiman apparently assaulted one lady whilst he was in the process of writing The Graveyard Book. To be honest, his lack of writing anything new in now 11 years, and an increasing sense of smugness I detected about him was already putting me off. But this matter has been the final stake through the heart. As a transwoman myself, I don't want him being associated with us...even if he genuinely supports our community. As someone on the spectrum, I'm furious that he would use autism as an excuse for this behaviour, and as a fan, I disown him...even if I can just about separate some of his most cherished works from the man. Christ, after this, Rowling and today's election results, I'm ready to give up on humanity. Our gods (Gaiman, Rowling or Trump) only remain abusive powermongers when we keep them there. Thanks for this Willow.
To add: I now also think he's a poor man's Clive Barker...who has a much greater imagination, is multi-talented, but is also sadly neglected these days.
There's still a tiny part of me that hopes/wishes that none of this is true, but it sadly doesn't look likely. Sigh.
I absolutely know the feeling - Sandman in particular was a huge influence on me as a teenager. Personally the final nail in the coffin for me was his own words - even if you could discount what the women themselves had to say (and I absolutely do not) the way he himself described his behaviour may portray it in a way which is not criminal but it still describes the actions of an abusive creep - and that's from reading his side of it. When you bring the women's version of events into it on top of that - he's dead to me whether the courts put him away or not at this point.
@@elliewallace6370 ditto. I think he's also used his image of a 'male feminist' and trans supporter, etc, to further hide this behaviour. Much like Joss Whedon too. Even thinking that the writer of Coraline was also forcing female fans/employees into BDSM situations is sickening. I did his masterclass a few years back, and at one point he's telling this story about hornets or something, and how it inspired Coraline. He then talks about how female fans would later come up to him at signings, etc, and thank him for writing the book and how it got them through dark/abusive times...so that again is hugely crushing now. He likes to quote as regards Coraline, 'when you scared of something , but do it anyway, then that's brave'. Well these women were scared of coming forth about him, but they've done it anyway. They're brave in ways he's never been.
@@EmlynBoyle Oh my God I remember that class - I took it several years ago when I got a year's masterclass subscription as a present to myself after drafting my first novel. I remember way back then thinking it was the most useful class I'd ever taken trying to get my writing feet under me (Margaret Atwood's was entertaining but her brain works in too different a way from mine for many of her writing tips to be useful for me). Not so great feeling looking back on it .
@@elliewallace6370same. While it was useful at the time, I could never ever watch it again. I believe Brandon Sanderson has a similar course on RUclips. It’s free, just as useful and isn’t presented by a creep.
the autism comments were insane and made me so angry! I get it
As someone in the BDSM community, when I first heard details of the charges, they had the ring of truth. It's exactly the kind of abuse that's common in the community. And I'm certain Gaiman believed he was doing nothing wrong and that it was all consensual. Because he failed to recognize the power differential (beyond the D/s aspect).
He apparently made remarks like "kiss me as if you mean it" and somesuch, insisting they show him they want what he's doing to them, which to me implies he realized they did NOT want it. His behaviour seems too calculated, manipulative and predatory for me to believe he was just terribly confused.
@@theanswerisowl That can be part of role-playing. But these things need to be agreed on beforehand, and as @thyge-bright said, power dynamics outside the D/s relationship need to be considered. In his defence, it's not easy to learn how to navigate these things without a supportive community - which he seems to not have had, possibly due to his celebrity status.
I'm reading the situation as a clueless dom doing damage out of ignorance rather than active malice-I've been on the receiving end of that kind of thing myself. Mistakes happen, and if you are never confronted with those mistakes, you can't learn from them either.
He still needs to take responsibility for his actions and do his best to make amends to the women he hurt.
@@TheSleepyowlet One of the women wrote to him and made it clear how violated she felt by his actions and he actually called and seemed genuinely remorseful to her, only to behave in the exact same manner rather seamlessly with Scarlett. As in, not much time passed between their conversation and his next violations.
If he'd been truly unaware and took it seriously, that would've been unlikely to happen imo.
@@theanswerisowl Not if you're unaware that your personal power can keep someone from safewording. Also, the resources that we have now to learn about how to do kink responsibly and safely? They didn't exist 20 years ago.
How do I know? 20 years ago I was in my 20s and made my first forays into the scene. I sure as fuck didn't know what I was doing, and neither did some of the people I encountered. And the only way to learn was to be lucky enough to run into people who knew their shit and were willing to teach you.
I'm not discounting the possibility that he's a serial abuser. He might very well be. But he also might just be a dumbass.
Autism doesn't make any of that better either, as I can tell you as an autistic woman. It's not an excuse, but it might be an explanation.
How can't people see that he's obviously manipulating the women. Many predators use the BDSM community to target and abuse specially women who don't know that much about BDSM.
After being heartbroken by so many creatives I asmired: Roald Dahl, Kevin Spacey, Joss Whedon, Louis CK, Bill Cosby, Marion Zimmer Bradley, JK Rowling, etc... I'm so tired.
Just reacting to individual instances of abusive behavior feels like playing whack a mole.
Abuse of power feels pervasive and systemic. I'm also kind of done trying to avoid media by problematic people. It feels futile and depressing after a while.
J.K. Rowling? what great crime has she commited (besides writing bland, mind-numbing "best-sellers"?) Last time I checked she was merely trolling alphabet people over at Xitter.
@j_shelby_damnwird She's been actively campaigning and using her vast wealth to remove access to trans health care in the UK. And she's been actively promoting people and movements with direct ties to neo-N@zi groups.
God it's kind of similar with alt bands as well. I hate feeling like I need to skim the internet to see if the new artist I found would like to hate crime me (it's even more frustrating with Polish fantasy writers bc I often need to check their social media since there is a lot of center right in this genre in my country)
@lazynoodle6739 yeah. I hear you!
Argh need to put Roald Dahl and JKR in a different naught list as the SAers ...
I think Roald Dahl anti Jew statements were like what many people may say now after seeing the atrocities committed by Israel in Gaza .. I think his take was very black and white I see bad deeds therefore the nation of people doing them is bad ....
Jkr is very damaging to trans
But SA is another matter .... We have had a popular talk show Radio Host here in Australia arrested on SA charges ..... Ugh gross
I understand your deep disappointment. My favorite author used to be Sherman Alexie, an indigenous writer. Sexual allegations against him broke my heart. Years later I'm still troubled.
Oh no, I hadn't heard about Sherman Alexie! Looks like he was another one of the bad ones 😢
Dangit. Thanks for the addition to the list. It was always a series of miracles that Alexie did anything but drink himself to death - he had a start in life that most people could not have survived. But I did go to the Wiki article on him and am processing now. "Troubled" and "nuanced" and conversations like this one led by Willow ...
Those of you who've read Sandman will get this when I say Gaiman wrote himself into the character of Richard Madoc. Madoc was a writer who kept a Muse captive in his attic and...did worse than Gaiman...to her, in order to get inspiration. Then, at press conferences, he bragged about being a feminist.
I just miss the days when I didn't know anything about the personal lives of my favourite authors or media personalities.
I’ve always been uncomfortable with him since his father was the leading proponent of Scientology in the UK and he never seemed to distance himself from that. This behavior aligns with the bad behavior of high ranking Scientologists. Sounds like he’s the Danny Masterson of literature. Let’s hope that the legal system will sort this out appropriately.
Would you want to be a witness for the prosecution in the trial of a multimillionaire whose profession is believable lies and still has millions of dedicated fans? A recent legal circus made it clear how badly that can turn out.
Great video. So often people want someone to be the arbitrator for them, but we have to make our own choices informed by morals, perspectives, needs, etc. I enjoy Warhammer 40,000 and I am very aware and critical of the issues with Games Workshop, Black Library, and parts of the community. The works of Dali, Picasso, Lovecraft, Poe, etc. all hold value and meaning to me and I am also aware of their abhorrent views and/ or actions. They're also dead, so that helps.
Making informed decisions and not be reactionary and holding arbitrary hypocritical positions is key. I appreciate the way you approached this ❤
I think my biggest issue is just that I found him so young. He gave me hope. I trusted him. He told stories that were important and showed empathy. And then this comes out and I'm just confused and devasted. I never thought he was God or anything. I noticed the amount of ex-wives he had and it always gave me pause. But then you would hear him talk and it was like "Oh, yeah. He cares. He actually cares." But he fucking doesn't. It didn't matter how he talked to people, how he would answer stupid questions I asked on twitter or tumblr. It doesn't matter that he wrote stories about women and queer people and made the universe feel like it has something wonderful in it. It doesn't matter that he has daughters. And just like with previous people who gave me hope and then shattered it, I'll put everything in a box until I can reconcile my hurt. I'll wait until I grow up a bit more and then I'll be an adult and do what needs to be done, whatever that might be.
It's like that old saying, of course I love women, I have a wife and daughter. In other words two women I personally own
Bar Good Omens (which I’ll just pretend Pratchett entirely wrote) I gave my Gaiman books to charity shops recently. I couldn’t face binning them, but at least some good might go to a charity from them going there. However marginally, try and cancel out the harm he’s likely done.
Good Omens is the only one I kept, too.
This is going to sound like a gotcha, but it's a genuine question. If there is some kind of moral fault with owning the books, isn't giving them to charity putting that moral wrong onto poor people? Unless you mean having them would just give bad memories personally.
@ it’s not a perfect solution. I’m not comfortable holding onto the books (plus I’ve got limited space in my flat) but I’m not willing to physically bin them. The only alternative is to give them away in some form. My work has a book exchange system, but I feel like if I donate them to charity, at least a charity can get some modicum of benefit from all this.
There's nothing wrong with owning the books you bought before you knew about who wrote them, but it is reasonable to want to be rid of them because they've been ruined by association in your mind.
There's also nothing wrong, IMO, with buying the books secondhand or checking them out from the library because you're not going money to a bad person.
As far as I'm concerned, it's only ever a problem if you're still buying new works (or new copies of old works) because at that point you're directly supporting a bad person and giving them your money.
But that's just my line. Whatever you can reconcile is your line.
I gave away my signed copy of The Graveyard Book, my favourite NG book. I thought it might make me cry, then I remember that lady who worked for him in NY crying (on the podcast). Giving away a book, written by a creep, is nothing compared to the pain of SA.
Another thing is, in relation to Gaiman, is that during Covid, when everyone was meant to be sheltering in place, he left New Zealand, and travelled to the Isle of Skye, Scotland. The Scottish police did caution him. So, there does seem to be a high level of entitlement with Gaiman.
He was fleeing his famously open-minded wife and very young child immediately after the "alleged" assaults in their home.
@@pattheplanter That explains a lot.
Yep, as a former huge fan, that irked the hell out of me then.
@@EmlynBoyle I've still got his books that he had published before then, but I won't be buying any more of his work. That's for sure.
Disassociating after election results with your videos
Same.
Sorry I didn’t make a more positive one!
Exactly what I am here for :(
Same 😢
@@WillowTalksBookssomehow, hearing you talk even about a negative topic is helping to cheer me up haha
"Innocent until proven guilty" is a constraint on government, not on private citizens, just as government can't abridge free speech, but that doesn't mean a restaurant has to let a bloviator address the customers during dinner, and they have to listen.
Yeah, when there are 1 or 2 accusations, I say, innocent until proven guilty. Once you're talking numerous accusations, I feel comfortable with social consequences.
To a certain degree mob violence should be guarded against, but there's nothing that can be done against the court of public opinion (free speech if it's not hate speech or serious calls for violence). That being said, Gaiman has essentially confessed at this point.
No, "innocent until proven guilty" is not just about the state. It's about not being hasty on trusting someone to condemn someone else.
But the thing a lot of peoples saying "innocent until proven guilty" forget is that it goes both ways.
Accusing someone of lying/defaming when they claim to be victims (and acting on it by, for example, harassing them) is literally considering them to be guilty of lying before it being proven. "Trusting the victims" and helping them to go forward with the judicial process is part of "innocent until proven guilty".
And for personally opinion, while we don't need to follow something as strict as "beyond reasonable doubt" of the justice system, we ought to give time and reflection to not judge peoples purely on what was claimed, and ought to be suspicious of anything that conveniently matches our vision of the world and want to be true without seeing any proof.
(E.g. if you already hate the guts of the accused, don't immediately trust any accusation against them just because it confirms your opinion of them)
@@MoiMagnus1er This is a really good way to look at it. Thank you.
@@coneil72I agree. If it's just one or two im unsure if it's multiple over a long span of time with a pattern of behavior then he definitely did something
I stopped the video during the viewing (7:36). An honest video. What made me stop (to badly describe) was your thoughts about the one versus the many who react to a situation. My view is, you are the one who decides for you. You are the one that counts. If the many are on one side of the room, but you feel you cannot join them, don't. I have no doubt you have great courage and will always know the right thing to do. And that usually means stand your ground, firm in the belief you know what is best for you.
I am sad and very disoriented by a convicted SA man was just elected to be president. Don't expect any justice for SA in the US. An awful situation. I love Gaimans work. I will miss reading his stuff. So disappointed.
I have a similar issue with Roald Dahl in that I love his books and I do feel like they teach some great things to kids. But Roald Dahl himself, from what I've read, was not a good person. Something that I am trying to work with is that bad people have made good things. My way of moving forward is to buy his books second hand so none of the money goes directly towards whoever runs his affairs now.
Yup bad people make good things. Some of the most famous books were written by shitty people. Best movies by crappy people and actors. It feels like you're not allowed to enjoy anything for fear of supporting a bad person. I thought turning to books would help me disconnect from this stupid election thing but now book authors bad too. I don't have the energy to research to make sure every author is good or not. Honestly sometimes we just have to take the good the fun stories, the knowledge and throw the rest away.
Buying the books second hand seems like a good solution. As you said, that way the money does not go to support them but you can still read them and keep any good memories you may have of reading them at a younger age.
Oh he was so antisemitic... and it's right there in his stories. This is why it's ok that every generation retells stories how they want to. This is why someone telling a new version shouldn't be automatically escoriated for not being "original".
"Bad people make good things" is exactly right. We all get to make up our own mind if we want to reject someone's work or not. I still love lots of musicians who have problematic pasts. Yet I can't stomach listening to Nick Cave or Radiohead anymore. Each to their own.
@@SplatterInkerWhoah, which books of his were antisemitic and how? I knew he said some less than tolerant things in private but this is news to me.
Bad people can make good art. I’m trans and like, a lot of the authors on my shelf, now dead, would probably have hated my guts. They enslaved people and murdered and raped, callously. But most of those are old enough that the author is dead.
That’s the distinction to me: it is not a sin to consume art made by a bad person. The only reason I’m going to boycott art is if supporting it lends aid to a materially harmful cause - so I’m not going to buy or promote Rowling books because that money goes directly to hurting trans people. Similarly, I wouldn’t buy or promote a book from an author who was dead but whose publisher was doing harmful stuff. If I buy a copy anyway, I’m going to do so used so the money doesn’t go back to the source, but I’m not going to throw away works I already own just because they were written by a terrible person. Of course if you feel differently that’s your business.
Also: there are SO MANY MORE NAMES than Gaiman’s on the comics. Gaiman’s is the biggest, but the art is at least half of why I like Sandman, and he had nothing to do with that. Even if you are on the side of disposing of authors entirely, what do we do with THAT?
Especially the late great Terry Pratchett.
Both Morpheus and Crowley are clearly self-insert characters for Gaiman. That is what gives me the ick now. I will not be seeing the rump of either show, though I have been fans of both since they first appeared in print.
"You cannot judge the artist by the art. The art always betrays the artist."
@@pattheplanter I remember reading somewhere that in an interview, Neil said Crowley wasn't self-insert, it was Terry mocking Neil's capital A *Aesthetic* because he felt Neil was taking his punk rock a bit too seriously. So every time I laugh at Crowley being Crowley, I think of Terry making fun of Neil. It helps. (It also helps that I've been a Pratchett fan since Day One, and knew Neil was a raging misogynist since Talking to Girls At Parties. idk who believed him when he said he was a feminist. He was plainly lying based on his own work. Stardust? Odd's mum being the world's happiest smex trafficking victim? People had to work very hard to think Neil's a good person.)
@@FunkyLittlePoptart Even so, affectionate mocking won't do it for me, unfortunately. Still inserted, whoever was responsible. A particular photoshoot comes to mind. I have been a Pratchett fan since book two of Discworld came out, when my friend gave me both together and told me I had to read them.
I recently got back into reading and have all his books on hold at my library. I adored The Graveyard and cried. Reading Norse Mythology currently. Ugh it all makes me sick. I love his works but this is something else. And this following these election results, I just have this deep pit of disappointment that idk what to do with. 😭
There's an old phrase that comes to mind when I think of this situation: "Never meet your heroes."
Thank you so much for sharing this. Today, I uploaded a re-edit of a video that initially featured Neil Gaiman prominently and no longer does. As I was writing my post explaining my decision, I saw your pop-up video and appreciated what you said.
Something that I've always wondered...does time have an impact on how we react to works written by awful people? Like, if a living author turns out to be a horrible person we might disown the works, but what about someone who lived 1000 years ago? Does time and culture of origin play a role? Does knowing that the author was a bad person from the start vs falling in love with their works and then finding out have an impact? Does genre/the kind of book matter?
To me it matters if my actions end up putting money in the hands of someone who was criminal/hateful or even worse continuing to commit crimes/hate.
Once the author is literally dead, then enjoy the works without regard to the actions of the author.
So for me, that means no more JKR, Orson Scott Card, Woody Allen. But Michael Jackson, maybe. I am still not sure if the people who enabled his own wrongdoing…and also contributed to his death…might still be profiting from his work.
However, buying used copies or unauthorized work based on an IP might be okay if not used in a way that promotes the IP.
Bad people can produce good things, just like good people can inadvertently produce bad things or even harmful things.
I enjoy reading a lot of classics from the turn of the century (19th - 20th) and early 20th century, especially the ones known to have queer and feminist themes/undertones. At the beginning, it was hard to understand and accept how most, if not all of these great writers had also very racist, sexist and homophobic parts to them and their stories, even if their works did have progressive elements that are especially impressive when considering the time they were written. It's easier said then done - to accept that people are multi-faceted, that these artists were simultaneously genius, talented, innovative, while also having some genuinely awful opinions that dont allign at all with my own morals. At times, these books are genuinely hard to read (lately I have especially struggled with the absolutely disgusting way so many of the books of that era refer to romani people. It's rough to get through at times).
But after a while you start to learn how to "squeeze" the value out of even the worst passages. Most things that have been written (and especially all books that have become classics) have SOMETHING to offer, you just have to learn how to judge them for yourself. You develop a critical mind, one that is able to judge everything you are reading and be able to discern what is bullsh*t from what is not. You start accepting the fact that these artists are just people at the end of the day, and were absolutely molded by the time they were alive (just as we all are). This does not mean you should excuse all the awful opinions they expressed, or all the awful stuff they did throughout their life. It just means that you start being able to take each work for what it is - nothing more and nothing less. You don't ideolize any writer, and you keep a separation between their writing and who they were as a person. And most importantly, you start accepting that multiple things can be true at the same time - a book can be genuinely incredible in certain aspects while also having really bad ones. Same thing with the writers.
I have a tendency to forgive old artist more readily, because there's factors that stack against them. Like, book covers coloured with arsenic, lead in wall paint and water pipes, there were heavy metals everywhere which we now know fucks up a brain.
@@aurawilming6047 nah you are to lenient, these things dont excuse racism and sometimes the most vile xenophobic opinions.
Do we give up Huck Finn, one of America's most important protests against bad parenting, slavery, and religious hypocrisy, because the culture of the time used ONE WORD that is now current, common, and limited? Yeah, for me it starts there. Nuance, limits, balance the hurt and the gain ... ask the victims ...
My best friend is a huge Neil Gaiman fan, she has all of his works and I havent dared to talk to her about this yet and have kinda avoided everything that talkes about him until Im mentally ready for tuat, I dont think she has really seen anything anout this yet, she doesnt really follow stuff like this, and if ahe heard it she probably didnt look too much into it, being scared of what thats gonna mean and I feel so bad for her.
I did really love HP when I was younger and it broke my heart when Rowling showed her true colours but I wasnt nearly as invested in it as she is not his stories, ita gonna be tough on her but I hope shes gonna be okay.
Perhaps introduce your friend to Diane Duane and other potential substitutes that will allow some comfort. Before telling about the news. She will find out eventually.
0:15 His Dark Materials was written by Phillip Pullman I believe
True
They didn't say anything to the contrary. They said they got into reading by reading "his dark materials" and then went on to discover Gaiman
I have Gaiman (and Rowling) in my book collection. Orson Scott Card, too. But at some point, I made the same decision you made to never spend money on them again. Do I get rid of my Sandman comics? I don't think so. It's a sunk cost fallacy and most of his projects are collaborations with other artists (Terry Pratchett, for one). The only author I've been purposeful about deleting from my collection is Marion Zimmer Bradley, who was a different kind of monster all together.
Gross i just read about MZB, glad I know to avoid her writing...what a monster.
I’m so gutted by this - Coraline is one of my favourite childhood stories, and I have turned to it for comfort for years. I was just talking about it with a friend yesterday. It sucks how often we are disappointed by people we look up to. I think Gaiman will be joining JK Rowling in my attic until further notice. Thanks for making this video and talking about this, I had no idea about the allegations!
Yeah same. I used to watch and listen/read Harry Potter and Coraline every year… time for them all to be shelved.
I don't get why people conflate "writes well" or "sees this part of reality the way I see it" with "must be a good person", what ideas about morality and/or human behaviour do you have? (general you, not specifically you, though if you want to answer, feel free.) Is it an identity thing where you identify with someone and you can't bear considering that you too are human enough to hurt others either through intent or as a result of self-deception?
@@bramvanduijn8086 this is an interesting question!! I think personally I just assume (maybe naively) that people are generally good. It's not a matter of conflating "writes well" with being a good person - it's just my baseline is assuming that people are good, and it's always disappointing when people I looked up to turn out to be not so great
@@bramvanduijn8086 it is GUTTING to be shaped by a work of art only to find out the artist has done awful things. You just want them to be good. You want everyone to be good.
Oh, crap ... Coraline ... my grandson. I am not enjoying thus week.
Gaiman, just like Rowling, were my literary idols. I wanted to be like them. My writing was influenced by them, whether I like the fact currently or not. So yeah, I'm sad af that two of my most formative authors are pure sacks of crap.
I'm not buying anything else from his works, old or new. But I think I'll keep my Absolute Sandman books on my shelf for now, at least for a while, if only for the monetary factor.
They were HELLA expensive here in Brazil and I bought them all last year, I have to at least finish reading them before I decide to do something.
What a place to live in, this Earth that we share, huh?
"innocent until proven guilty" only means that you, as a third party, do not harrass either party.
Technically that is not true, innocent until prooven guilty means that the person should be treated as innocent until there is enough proof of someone being guilty
If we talked about all the horrible and dirty things that any artist has done in their life, I think we would end up throwing away half of the world's art and throwing away billions of books from libraries. Today we can learn about these painful cases, and give ourselves the opportunity to judge what to do with their works. Should Neil Gaiman stand trial? ...Of course!!. I stay with what is written, that with his person they do what is right, I stay with the talent that he has left behind when writing stories.
Yup pretty much every rich person is bad. And honestly boycotting then don't do much they are already rich. And with the world literally on fire and my rights on the line I think I'm going to just enjoy whatever book I pick up without worrying too much about who wrote it. Of course I have limits. If it's supposed to be a factual book but it's got fascist ideology I'll probably throw it away. But for fun stories I don't care anymore. I'll still avoid giving money to Rowling tho because she is ACTUALLY attacking the trans community and won't stop. But I can't boycott every author every company every whatever or if have nothing
Thank you for making a video on this, Willow. This has been on my mind a lot because similarly to you, I also got into reading largely through his books and they were some of the things that got me through high school, pretty much. I also made the decision not to engage with his work/support him anymore, but I've noticed there's a part of me that feels oddly... guilty for having enjoyed the books in the first place? So I just need to keep reminding myself that at the time I had no reason NOT to support him but now that I do have one, I'm consciously making the decision not to engage. The circumstances have changed, but so has the way I'm approaching his work. That's the best we can do as his former fans right now.
You briefly touched on the conflict between "innocent until proven guilty" and "believe the woman". I watched this play out in a small group I'm part of, where two young women who were relatively new to the group made what initially seemed like credible accusations of inappropriate sexual behavior by an older man who had a long history and was well respected. Long story short, over the course of a few months it became clear that the women were (a) friends and (b) delusional about this matter along with many others. They lost all credibility, and left the group. But the damage was done. The man also mostly withdrew from participation. He was unable to shake off the feeling of betrayal resulting from how quickly we believed the women despite his years of rock-solid reputation with the group.
I didn't know how to thread this needle. I think that 95% of the time believing the women is the right decision. But there's no good way to determine *which* 95%.
Allegations happened to an ex friend of mine. He was not the best person but the allegations were and are pretty insane. I basically watched this man loose his very sanity and had distrust in everyone trying to support him for years. Allegations ruin lives! On the other hand as a survivor myself I'm inclined to believe victims and I don't believe he was 100 percent innocent eather. Sometimes even if allegations are false there's a bit of Truth to them that's just very exaggerated. Other times the person is just very angry and wants to get revenge or something.
This is why “innocent until proven guilty” should apply to everyone, not just the accused or just the accusers, but both. Assume both parties are telling the truth until you can be sure who isn’t. If you choose to believe one side and demonize the other, you only turn up looking like an asshole if you’re proven wrong.
Another great, thoughtful video Willow!
I never finished HP so never felt many conflicting emotions about JKR being horrible. This whole situation really messed with me though.
I spent a lot of my teen years reading Gaiman's work to get through the tough times bought about by complex traumas. Speaking as a survivor of SA myself, books were (and still are) a safe haven for me, to have a previous favourite author behave in this way towards women and girls feels viscerally wrong to me.
Glad to have channels like yours to recommend more diverse (and hopefully less ethically shitty) authors i should be reading instead.
Well this sucks. Thanks for making the video. I had somehow missed all of this. :/ I'm with you - we all need to figure out how we will react to something like this and live accordingly. I'm really disappointed right now, so quite a few books will be coming off my TBR. Thanks for reminding us also about the enormity of literature to devour. : )
It's sad to witness how people easily turn their love into hatred the exact moment someone tries to accuse their idol of being a 'bad person'. Or do it when their idols view of the world doesn't match theirs. Be there or be square, right?
Men and women of art should not be judged by speculative accusations or their honest opinions.
Ugh I know, right?! Why do autonomous humans have to ruin themselves with morals and ethics when we could just glue our idols to pedestals and make sure they are completely untouchable? I hate when people are reasonable and savvy 😤😤😤
@@WillowTalksBooks Choosing to believe totally unproven allegations and gossip is hardly evidence of someone being "reasonable and savvy". Frankly, it seems more like someone trying to whip-up a handy bit of controversy for their RUclips channel.
Well said, Willow. 💜 A clear and compassionate message that includes healthy boundaries, with neither apathy nor rage. This video was comforting for me today. Cheers.
If someone claimed you had stolen from your employer, should you be sacked? If someone said you'd made a racist comment 20 years ago, should you be put in jail for a hate crime? Of course not. Not until the claims had been investigated. There's a process to be followed with Gaiman (I write as someone who's not particularly a fan), and decisions should be made in the light of its findings.
Hello Willow! This is my first time watching one of your videos, and I just wanted to commend you for your perspective on this topic. I’ll admit I haven’t seen much in-depth commentary on Neil Gaiman’s situation, possibly thanks to the algorithm gods (LOL).
I’m naturally long-winded, but I’ll try to keep this as concise as possible (a difficult ask, given the complexity here). Your arguments about choice are compelling and well-reasoned. That said, choice is a double-edged sword-it’s most effective when informed. (And I don’t mean to imply you’re uninformed, just a general reflection on how essential it is to seek facts, especially in complex situations.) Think of all the poor choices we’ve made simply because we lacked experience or perspective-believe me, I could write a book about mine (no pun intended 😉). For someone like Gaiman, his public status exposes his choices, forcing us to reckon with the impact. And yet… is ignorance bliss? Simply because an artist hasn’t faced public scrutiny doesn’t mean they haven’t led a scandalous life. We may just be reveling in the absence of knowledge. Thus, should we avoid enjoying any artistic works at all if the specter of controversy is probable were we to look through someone’s life through a magnifying glass?
The larger issue here, I think, is our tendency to speak in absolutes: “I’ll always do this,” or “I’ll never do that.” History shows these absolutes rarely hold up and often lead us astray. I agree with you-society still grapples with gender bias and related issues. Yet nuance remains elusive, as our recent political climate makes painfully clear (November 5th results, anyone?).
May I propose an alternative? I think we can celebrate art that impacts us while acknowledging the flaws of its creators. Rather than “canceling” works, we can let them serve as vessels for two intertwined stories: the beauty they bring to our lives and the human imperfections behind them. We don’t need to enjoy artistry’s darker elements, but we can appreciate them, seeing art as both beautiful and ugly-and, therefore, sublime.
For example, I once stood in awe at the Vatican, marveling at its beauty, tears streaming down my face. And yet, simultaneously, I felt disgust for the suffering and exploitation that enabled its construction. How many lives were ground into its marble? But I would never advocate for razing it to the ground. Destroying such structures would be fruitless-they’ve defined who we are in all our humanity, through the good, the bad, and, yes, the downright ugly. Similarly, I don’t think we gain by erasing flawed authors or works from our lives. Instead, we can use them to understand ourselves better and confront our own humanity-the creative genius and ignoble horrors that reside within us all. Let them serve as reminders of how we must continue to evolve in our understanding of humanity. Let’s use them to educate future generations about what we must all beware.
I’m someone with strong opinions (as you may have gathered!), and one of these opinions falls like the “Great Eye of Mordor” on organized religion. Yet I can’t deny that Christianity helped lay the foundations of my moral standards. While I oppose organized religion today, its teachings remain part of my life, threads in my tapestry I cannot simply cut away. I’ve learned to judge myself and forgive myself, hoping to grow. “Let him who is without sin among you, cast the first stone at her.” I don’t need to be Christian to recognize the wisdom there, nor any faith to hold the axiom “Do unto others” as true. These ideas resonate even if their origins were shaped by flawed, fragile humans whose complexities, for better or worse, have impacted humanity for over one hundred and twenty-five thousand years.
So, I say this: “A life led in absolutes shall absolutely lead us astray.” For what it’s worth, that’s my choice and my opinion. I hope that, agree or disagree, you might see it as grounded in the nuance I believe we all need to navigate a world that is rarely just “this” or “that.”
Your video was insightful, and I wish you all the best.
❤
Many other writers might turn out to have done horrible things, which we don't know about yet. I don't assume someone is a good person or a bad person because I admire their work. I don't know them personally, so I only make the same assumptions about them as I do about most strangers. The idea of innocent until proven guilty can apply to the fans as well, in that we assume that our favourite authors must be good people, until they prove that they're guilty when something like this comes to light. I won't be getting rid of my copies of Gaiman's work, because I read him due to his skills as an author, not because I like him as a person. However, I respect other people's right to make the same choice for themselves.
Yup same. If I'm reading something from a rich guy I assume they probably suck
This is heartbreaking for me. I was in university when The Sandman was first released, and I still have the original print of every single issue, carefully stored in individual bags with acid-free backing. Despite trying, I can’t separate the man from his creations. I deeply respect the courage of the women who have come forward, and my heart goes out to them for what they’ve endured, are enduring, and may continue to face. I also think about Maddy and his other children and the impact this will have on them. I’ve decided to pack his books away, honoring the inspiration and joy they brought me, but it’s time for me to say goodbye. I’m grateful for the memories, but I’ll let them go now.
I feel the same about JK Rowling and Roald Dahl. Loved their works as a child but now I have mixed feelings due to their horrible views/actions against others. Sad when a person you admire turns out to be the worst of humanity.
What have they done that is so bad?
@@Euro.Patriotyou don't think Rowling has been encouraging harassment etc?
@@Euro.Patriot JK being transphobic and Roald Dahl was antisemitic. I still love Dahl's work but as a person he wasn't nice. As for JK she's ruined her work for me due to how much hate she spreads online regarding transgender people.
@phoebevaughan5095 Transphobia is not bad and I doubt Roald hated Semites. He might have hated Jews but not an entire ethnic group. Getting angry over hearing someone say only women have periods is an issue on your side, it means harden up...
Well if you can harden up you're not a woman.
@@phoebegee54 I don't know anything about them other than JK made Harry Potter which sucks and Roald made Fantastic Mr. Fox, Matilda and BFG which were good.
This is one of the hardest things to deal with. We get so invested in these worlds created by people we don't know, and trying to put wondrous world building and fantastic stories next to people we find have done and believe deplorable things - it's ridiculously conflicting.
I had this feeling with the accusations of Michael Jackson, too, that was my first experience of this. Then I found out about the author of Ender's game, Orson Scott Card and his bigoted anti-gay views, then there was J.K. Rowlings trans-nonsense, and trying to breathe through Johnny Depp's trial, and now Neil Gaiman. People I have listened/read/watched works of that I love, and is a part of my upbringing, my history, my personality - and the entire ground I'm not standing safely on is ripped away.
I don't know how to deal with it. All I try to remember is that money talks, and while I in my ignorance have purchased and enjoyed works, now that I do know, I put my money elsewhere instead of the coffers of people who have brilliant creative minds, but rotten "souls".
I think the art is separate to the artist. I can't remove his old works as they are in a way now a small part of me. However, choosing to continue to support future works is something else entirely.
I have the same feelings, but then still, if you think about it - we are only now learning about it, he was apparently doing those awful things when he was creating some of those works :(
@@wiktoriatluvi He was. And that's going to be true for every similar instance, wether it is writers, actors, musicians, you name it. But noone can change the past, you can't unread books or unwatch films. We can only choose what we do with this information tomorrow.
I have been aware of this for quite some time and am dismayed that it has barely made the news. I have been a huge NG fan since I was 15, I went to signings and readings and devoured all his work. I was later so excited that he married one of my favourite musicians, Amanda Palmer and they collaborated on music and writing that I adored. Amanda had been giving quite cryptic messages as to what has been going on, I think she must’ve signed an NDA. You only need to listen to her last E.P ‘New Zealand Survival Songs’ particularly ‘Whakanewha’ and ‘The Man Who Ate Too Much’ to get a glimpse into the hell she has been through. My Sandman’s are on the bottom shelf of the bookcase, behind my chair - for now. Thanks for talking about it Willow. Xx
Yes, I'm amazed after all these months that most folk still don't know about this.
I am a huge fan of Amanda and attended some of their joint concerts. I was upset when I heard they were divorcing but it makes sense now.
I definitely dodged the emotional rollercoaster on this one as someone who has read a few of Gaiman's works and not clicked with them (I feel he's an incredible idea person but fails on execution). For me, this one was painless.
But I grew up as a Harry Potter kid - I was the same age as the main characters as the books came out. I remember the day I saw the first book at a Scholastic book fair, sitting with a car full of my friends and my mom at midnight as we waited outside bookshops for the newest releases. I have the newspaper clipping that announced the movies in a photo album somewhere because I went feral with excitement.
I still have the wonder and joy of my childhood love for the world - she can't take that - but she won't get one more dime from me or one more moment of my engagement. That was the only choice I could make.
And it's sad that she is only one example of dozens of musicians, directors, actors, and writers I have had to toss out of my life but, as you said, there is endless good art. I've chucked so much to the curb by now that it's gotten much easier. And there's so much out there to fill the void. More than I could consume in my lifetime anyway!
Good Omens was a book my brother and I shared via mail, back and forth for about 15 years. I got our battered copy signed by both Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett (shortly before he died) and gave it to my brother one Christmas. When my bother died 6 years ago, I inherited our book. It’s so precious to me, and I am so broken about these allegations. Harry Potter was a huge part of my kids’ childhood, and THAT was awful too. Hannah Gatsby in her Nanette special talks about what a horrible person Picasso was and how difficult it can be to separate the artist from the art when you find out the artist (or writer) is/was an absolute dick. I don’t have any easy answers, and I loved Neil’s work and have multiple books signed by him, and the Good Omens season 3 being changed to a 90 minute movie makes me want to cry. So, no answers, but I loved your video discussion about all the nuances.
thank you. I've been trying to gather the strength to get more information about the situation and I finally felt ready. I was so hurt about Good Omens and just... I felt deceived, even though obviously he's just some author who's stories I like. I feel ready to read up on everything now and you gave me a starting point. Thanks for presenting the way you did
I bought two Neil Gaiman novels at a yard sale over the weekend. Don't know if I'll read them now, so I'm just gonna focus on the fact that I helped out a neighbor by buying some stuff.
I was a fan of his books, too 😢
The one and only signing I went to put me off 1) the worship going on was jawdropping, people giving him gifts, a young woman (late teens) ahead of me in the signing line left him some artwork she'd made. 2) i met him, got my book signed and then asked my friend if she thought he wasn't a bit lechy toward the previous woman.
When the allegations came out I remembered that night. I did get a weird vibe in person. Not from a distance though, initially when he was on stage he simply seemed just a great orator/storyteller.
I attended a talk he gave in Dublin years ago. It was a great evening, but when it came to the signings, he seemed to allow female fans to take photos , etc with him despite everyone being told to keep the queue moving. I got my own book signed and thought nothing of it at the time-as I was thrilled to have met him briefly. Years later and in context of all this, this was almost god-like worship, with said god giving more time to young female fans more than others.
I was in the midst of reading Coraline when the news dropped, and I've been struggling with what to do. I'm not only reading it for pleasure but for various research projects and essays. I've currently put it on pause, while I figure things out. I also haven't heard many people talking about this tbh (or maybe I've just been out of the loop) so it's good to hear someone who's consumed pretty much all of his work say something.
I see this kind of discussion on reddit: Do you separate the author from their works? I choose not to because it would feel like condoning their actions. I'd had Neil Gaiman on my TBR list for years with some vague intentions to get around to his books. That's on ice.
I usually buy books/CDs etc used, so no more money goes to the artist.
@@mandyschmidt7960 Buying used books makes a lot of sense both economically and environmentally, but that wasn't my point. It's about giving an author my time and the recognition that they deserve it. Just look at Marion Zimmer Bradley and Alice Munro, one of Canada's greats. It's about what acts they committed or were complicit in covering up (often for years) that make or break it.
Thank you for a very gentle update. Nuance and understanding is awesome. Describing your actions and reasons, without a call to action! Much more convincing that any strident call. You have likely convinced me. Which sucks, because I like a lot of their art.
I cant even begin to express how disappointed I am with this situation. If there was a person I would have never thought this of, that was him. I can't even read anything by him anymore.
For me the principle of innocent untill proven guilty, is sutch an important principle that no matter who, all deserves that and sutch principles should never be wavered because if those principles get challenged to hard we might loose them and never get them back.
Innocent until proven guilty is a restraint on the government and not relevant to social shunning or purchasing boycotts.
Thank you so much for this thoughtful discussion!
It was hard to take in, but I did read the various writings on this, and the sources. Glad it's finally breaking past the suppression efforts. Devastating as someone who has LOVED his work. But not as devastating as being one of his victims.
6:57 I’m going to give them to libraries, so someone can enjoy those stories without giving him any more money. Same with JKR.
As an American, he sounds like a deluded creep with disapointingly entitled frat boy and line stepping tendencies, not necessarily a criminal under US law (not what necessarilly applies). From the articles I read, it is not that I disbelieve the women, but I think a lot of detail would be needed that wasn't in what I read (it may be there, but I haven't read it). The closest we have to acknowledgment of an issue is the NDA, of which I haven't read or heard enough details to make sense and if what i heard is true, Gaiman should look into malpractice against the attorney who drafted it.
I also think it is important to note, one of the things that was newsworthy was a "bad pass" he made at a woman in 1986 (39 years ago at age 25) and he stopped because he realized she wasn’t in to it. I think part of the issue is just that from his writing, his audience thought we knew him and expected him to be a different, better (non-skeevy) person. We thought what we knew was genuine and it is closer to a commercial brand. I still like the books, but I won't be buying anything new from him; however, if I were to see a copy of something at a used bookstore, I might pick it up if I was having trouble finding something else I wanted to read.
I do wonder if he ever sits out in his awesome writing shed staring out the window and thinking about all the articles about how he is just another coercive rich villainous reason to choose the bear, shocked because "I thought they wanted me to do it because it made me happy, I am so cool and they were such big fans... not that they didn't want to and only tolerated it because I had money."
I am so torn. On the one hand, I never want to off-handedly deny an accusation of SA. On the other, he has always been a supporter of liberal ideology, and there have been many attacks and accusations from right-wing trolls trying to discredit those voices. I suppose all I can do is wait and hope these allegations are proven false.
"It may help to understand human affairs to be clear that most of the great triumphs and tragedies of history are caused, not by people being fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, but by being fundamentally people." - Good Omens
Women are people too, no matter how much some would like to deny it.
Willow, sadly I envy your ability to choose. As a woman of color I do not always have the choice to disengage from those writers who view me as an adversary. As a writer my foremost reason for reading is the writing itself. I have been made better by reading the best of the worst. "To err is human..." Aren't we all?! ❤
Thank you for that astonishingly powerful post.
I am delighted RUclips suggested this video to me. I appreciate your take on Gaiman, and your focus on reading diversely. I look forward to more of your videos.
Interesting video. Putting aside the Neil Gaiman cases while they go through court etc; separating the artist and the art is a challenging one.
Many great artists / writers / composers have incredibly problematic elements to them - all the way along the spectrum. Not sure I would never want to listen to Wagner again...for example
Maybe the line in the sand is, as you say, sticking to your principles about who you fund with your purchases today (i.e. people still around who benefit financially from our purchasing decisions)
There are so many problematic artists, living and dead. Cosby, Allen, and Spacey, Rowling, Lovecraft, and Wagner. One time I went on this quest to get to Anaheim to hear Gene Roddenberry speak. It was an awful fiasco, and when I finally entered the auditorium, I could hear in his voice that the man was dead drunk. Now Gaiman.
My model of reality is that this is all one big school. We came into this world selfish, ignorant babies, and we're here to learn and to grow up. Some of us will graduate to more demanding classes, and judging by the latest election results a lot of us are gonna get sent back a grade. Our classmates are often awful, really awful, and it's hard to bear. I think we can all relate when Carlin says he's rooting for the comet.
Folks, artists are people -- fallible, imperfect people like us, and the cult of celebrity we cherish is so very unhealthy. We can't expect celebrities or artists to be any better than the rest of us. Yes, hold them to account, hold us ALL to account; consequences help us grow! "Use every man after his deserts and who shall 'scape whipping?" Then bring on the whips! I am no better than you, whoever you are reading this. Nor is Gaiman. Write him a letter if you must, telling him how angry you are, how disappointed in him you are, and then let it go.
Art endures. Art teaches us. Cherish the art, not the artist. Gaiman taught us, ""Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot." Well the same is true of the storytellers who told us those tales. To invert Shakespeare, "let the good men do live on, and bury the evil with the bones."
I like HP Lovecrafts works, he was not the best person.
So do I, but you have to admit that in some of his stories, his racism and idiotic fear of another cultures is prevalent. That all said, I'm also a huge 'Dracula' fan, but the racism in some of Bram Stoker's work makes Lovecraft look like a civil rights champion.
But as far as we know, Lovecraft didn't ever hurt anyone.
He "just" wrote racist comments, mostly in private letters, but it seems like he was a pretty harmless guy in person. Also almost every white guy in the US was racist back then, and Europe was worse.
Gaiman is the opposite: he openly posts feminist contents, he criticizes other authors for their sexism... but it appears he's a very different person.
The thing I've found difficult through this is that a lot of the allegations against other celebs, politicians, etc, were people i barely knew and could easily jump on the "support survivors" bandwagon. But with Gaiman's allegations... it feels so much more grey and i didn't want to believe it. And in good consciousness, I don't think I can
This is why it is important to apply “innocent until proven guilty” to both accused and accuser. Assume that both accounts are true until one is proven false.
We must all conduct ourselves in alignment with our values and ethics to the best of our knowledge and ability. To me that includes my purchasing decisions because I don't want my small amount of money to go to support people/activities/practices that are counter to my values and ethics. Doing this will always attract trolling, anger and ire from others but I am the one that must be able to look in the mirror each day and be happy with the person I am. I support your take 100%.
I'm very glad to hear your take on this, as a former fan. The only people I've heard talk about this were not fans to begin with, and found it very easy to cut ties entirely. Which felt like they were being dismissive of how hard it was to confront the news of said allegations, as someone for whom these books were pivotal. So it's helpful to hear from someone with that same heaviness in their heart when looking at this.
And I might believe that ONE allegation could be fabricated. Two makes me waver on that stance. When thereafter appears 3 and 4 and more, then I'm like "ohhh, no, it's over, that's a pattern." FCK what the courts say, someone's rich enough, they could hire lawyers to cover it up. When there's multiple allegations like that, across time and space, it DOES NOT matter what the courts find, that's a preponderance of evidence in my book. Hah. book :/
Welp, I guess it's used book shops for me if I ever want to read the entirety of Sandman - I never did get thru the entire run myself, and I do want to...
Worst part about this is how, this is just one guy. ONE famous and powerful man getting accusations and finding public support among his fanbase waver. And yet, look who just got back in the white house :( It just really feels like punishing individual bad actors who take advantage of their power and money, like you mentioned, to take the low road and be sleezeballs and hedonists and criminals... It doesn't feel like enough. Like we should do something else than rely on the courts. Dismantle patriarchy? I don't know how to do that, do you? :/
If an author like Rowling openly takes a stand about a topic I deeply disagree with the decision is very clear - I don't support that person in any way. It is way more difficult if we only have accusations. Therefor I totally agree, the best way is to collect as much info as we can and then decide for ourselfs what we feel is right. And I think it also important to not only reflect on what persons we support but also what we consume in daily life (brands). I often feel we are so quick to decide to love or hate a person but we mindlessly consume and support brands that are also morally not at all in line with what we believe.
Thank you for your nuanced take, especially of the balance between accuser and accused. I've come to the following: 1) mercy demands we listen to the accusers and hear their pain; 2) justice demands we let legal proceedings run without prejudging; 3) legal guilt and "did he do it" are separate questions; and 4) no-one can tell you how to spend your reading dollars and time.
Regardless of the outcome, this is tragic for all involved.
What bits me how can you be friends with an acctual rape victim and knowing how devastating it was for her go and abuse other women. How?
People seem to not be able to apply doing bad things to themselves. Mental gymnastics
This is hard stuff to listen to, so i sometimes allow myself to get distracted by what a lovely outfit that is! The neckline/necklace/glasses chain combo is 🔥, i am pretty envious. Thank you for addressing a difficult topic on your channel, I'm off to dee what else you have to say.
An interesting topic to be sure about the separation of artist from their work. But I wonder if that holds up when it comes to other commodities? For example, how does one square the circle of not support JK Rowling becuse of her abusive rhetoric, whilst buying iPhones, fast fashion, even energy (climate change), etc. If we are going to stand on principle and reject an artist’s work due to their wrongdoing, why does that scarcely apply elsewhere? Maybe it gives us a chance to feel righteous whilest deluding ourselves to the brutal oppressive systems we maintain with our daily payments. Amazon buying, meat eating, tax paying…
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism so we can only do our best with the resources and power we have
@ are we doing our best though? Or is only our best without sacrificing comfort?
@@macolof362 At the very least, phones are more or less needed for most interactions in modern life, including employment.
@@sylph8005 does that sound acceptable to you?
@@macolof362 The systems are deeply, unfathomly messed up at their roots. We can do our best to get by, the more marginalized among us especially. We can also work to make change at various levels
I remember reading Amanda Palmer’s autobiography and feeling deeply deeply uncomfortable with his super creepy and abusive behavior (which she describes lovingly, like victims of abuse are wont to do).
The idea of “death of the author” (or separating the author’s works from the actual person) is something i understand people can do but it’s so hard when buying their books directly helps them... and even more it just feels wrong supporting someone like that. The cupboard trick is a good plan or keeping his books in box, I think you’re right about seeing what happens (in court) but it doesn’t seem good at all O_O
How about not buying these authors'books directly and buying them in second hand or something, in this condition is reading their books okay? :')
@@fatima_hrexactly. I always see it that way in case I happen to like some wort of work by an awful famous person - I'm gonna rip them off by not letting them get my money, so secondhand and other measures it is.
No. Death Of The Author is the theory that any individual audience member's interpretation of an artwork is as the valid as the artist's original intention.
My personal disappointment was that I had been looking for a used copy of American Gods for years. I was going on a camping trip and there was a huge used book store on the way and I finally found a copy and was so excited. Jump forward three days to when I had internet again and it was exactly when the allegations were starting to be addressed by creators on RUclips. The book has just sat in a bag ever since, I don’t really desire to read it right now.
I’ve had my HP books since childhood and they’re currently all turned pages out so I can’t see the covers and being used to hold up a shelf since I don’t think I can get rid of them, there’s a lot of good personal memories attached to them. If I had the space they’d probably be boxed away but I don’t. I was a huge fan though and I had so much HP stuff and it was such a huge part of my life it really was hard to get it all out of my life. A couple years out I don’t find enjoyment in it anymore, I certainly won’t and haven’t continued to financially support her, but I can admit it was hard to erase 2+ decades worth of being a fan from my life, especially when some of it was my own artwork. I personally can’t separate her from her art, she’s too vocal, actively too hurtful and destructive, and a lot of people have been pointing out how her views are in her work and I can’t look past that as an adult. I almost feel icky in admitting it was hard but I view it now as kind of going through a bad breakup, you know now the person is trash but you still had some good times and memories with them and there’s a bit of a grieving period for what was but there’s absolutely no way that you want them to be a part of your future anymore so you move on.
I've also been a huge fan of Gaiman for yeeeears, his books were so dear to me. I am beyond disappointed. Honestly, I'm scared to call myself a 'fan' of anyone anymore because these very successful people keep turning up to be awful human beings... My NG books are also going away in a box next to hp so I don't have to look at them.
Thank you for making this video!
I have no idea whether Gaiman is guilty or not, but until judgement has been passed - and my knowledge about these incidents is be clearer - I’ll be leaving my Gaiman books on the shelves, and I won’t be investing more money into his products.
It’s awful to think that his power and money has been fed by our adulation of his skill as a writer, which in turn made the alleged abuse possible. It’s also hard to imagine the empathetic disconnect between his work and his actions. As many others surely feel, I hope these allegations are proven false, but until that happens, I won’t be propping up his reputation with my time or money.
Well said. Let people choose their own opinions.
Great video Willow, really well put.
With any sexual abuse allegations like these where the behaviour happened years ago and the person being accused has so much more power and resources than their accusers/victims, it’s always so unlikely that legal action will result in a fair, accurate verdict, and a lot of the time fans will never know the ‘truth’. But I personally feel much more comfortable stopping my support of someone who might (but let’s real, probably isn’t) innocent, than continuing to support someone who is potentially an abuser.