Revolt at publisher Hachette re Rowling "transphobia"

I think I saw Dawson on Pointless Celebrities recently. High levels of fame and influence indeed.

Fair enough, emily. But the next generation absolutely have heard of Juno and love her work (and sympathise with her opinion). She’s got much more of a current line in to teenagers now than JKR. Once upon a time JKR was a god to teenagers but she’s not writing for them now. Those teens have all grown up (and mostly turned on her ). So you can see why from a children’s publishing division POV they might want to ‘stand up for’ their other authors over JKR. Head office Hachette needs to defend JKR primarily because of her adult crime series. No one will be out of a job over this.

Now that's fucking offensive!

I assumed it was JKRs profits that would be going to charity. I assumed Hachette would still be taking their normal cut.

Juno Dawson isn't a big player at all. Their books are always pointedly ignored in my local library, no matter how prominently displayed. I doubt anyone's massively interested in reading 'This Book is Gay" when the author has said that being gay was a huge mistake and that all gay men want to be women

I've never heard the of Juno Dawsin, I have heard of JK Rowling.
I have never read the Harry Potter books but I'm more inclined now to watch the filns, read the books and when it's possible to and see the musical.

yes, agree with nosquirrels here- its unlikely that the motivations of the 4/5 was nastiness, stupidity or even lack of business acumen. i also don't think they would be 21/fresh out of uni.

friends in publishing who feel strongly that jkr is a bigot, feel 'a line must be drawn', feel they cant keep publishing woody allen and jkr, feel that 'diversity' is more important than anything, are ex oxbridge mid-late 30s.

And I would have thought the most important thing would be someone who could do the job best. Rather than someone whose politics could conflict with their boss making money.

No, I get it Datun - it’s very ... tricky.

Right now - right this moment - someone like Juno Dawson has the potential in the future to make MORE money for a children’s imprint than JKR.

Yes, The Ickabog is with Hachette. But it’s only being published because COVID & charity & existing relationship. She is mostly firmly adult crime now. Bloomsbury get the financial benefit from Potter, not Hachette. She’s not writing new kids books for anyone...

If they lose e.g. award-winning Juno Dawson PLUS other children’s authors similarly inclined to make a principled stand, because that editor/publicist/sales person/whatever ‘stood up and was an ally’ those authors feel inclined to follow their tribal loyalty... they have a big divisional problem the JKR Ickabog profits (to charity!) won’t solve in 18 months’ time...

I’m not suggesting JD is particularly a player in this - just an example of one of their authors with a big reach who has skin in the game and relationships worth money...

Nuance actually confirms people

Comforts. Nuance comforts people.

Sorry squirrels, that ^ was in reply to your post to me.

Okay, well I'll take your word for it. I think it's rather shortsighted. And I would have thought the most important thing would be someone who could do the job best. Rather than someone whose politics could conflict with their boss making money.

If everyone has to agree with the authors and the content and all politics have to align, and they all have to be heading in the same direction, I would imagine that would ultimately make for crushingly anodyne books.

There was another thread a few days ago claiming that young adult books are exactly that, now. Dull to the point of stupefaction.

ProdigalKitten I think you've gotten so used to being on the back foot that you're not seeing the need to claim back the moral high ground.

I dunno. I can argue this shit in the pub - and have a chance of being effective if I listen first, buy a drink then go in.

Can’t do that right now. And I think in person individual conversation and connection is worth more than any online interaction.

I don’t think it’s a moral high ground, though. I think it is intellectually dishonest to claim transwomen are women. I think most people haven’t followed the logic just the emotion. I’m not sure that means I need to say I’m morally superior. Nuance actually confirms people. I like trans people being happy. I like women feeling safe. Not mutually exclusive.

do you really believe that a publisher would hire people who have demonstrated enthusiasm to conflict with the financial interest of the publishing house?

Datun I believe the landscape is changing very VERY quickly. Yes - if you are important enough they’ll hire you, give you power and - importantly- celebrate the reasons why you’ve got that power... and that could be “took a principled stand against JKR” if it serves the purpose of the imprint. “Diverse” is a HUGE buzzword and has been for ages but is really having a moment that will probably resonate for a bit.

Equally - even if a ‘big’ employer won’t take a chance there’s also a huge movement to start-ups etc (who’ll then get assimilated into a ‘big’ employer at some point, same old same old). There will be support.

It’s not just graduate interns. Alas.

(And stop letting them pretend that it is either.)

Which is why we need to stop pretending that what they're doing is ethical, good, and entirely for the benefit of vulnerable others. I think you've gotten so used to being on the back foot that you're not seeing the need to claim back the moral high ground.

I should have been clearer:

they might be tomorrow’s top hire, on the ‘ones to watch’ lists

They might already be be tomorrow’s top hire, they might already be on the ‘ones to watch’ lists.

Granted mid-pandemic in a creative business is not a brilliant time to lay it on the line but equally, if you’re thinking the onward career ‘pitch’ on social media and networks about why you’re now redundant then... well, that’s it right there. Social justice is big business.

NoSquirrels

I'm not doubting your credentials, but do you really believe that a publisher would hire people who have demonstrated enthusiasm to conflict with the financial interest of the publishing house?

It might be a woke issue today, but tomorrow, it could be something entirely different. Not related to woke at all.

Would they really jump to hire someone who thinks nothing of holding their employer to ransom over their own subjective politics?

OK, timetoshine - you believe that. I am telling you - with a career in publishing - that you are wrong.

That won’t be the quote on their LinkedIn - in fact publishing doesn’t really network via LinkedIn.

It’ll be the pinned tweet they capitalise off and they’ll be snapped up for ‘principles’.

If they resign.

Which they probably won’t. Right now. But in 9-12 months they’ll be moving, and shaking.

Like I say, know your enemy.

Their statement is spot on tbh. Why one arth does it seem to be such work for others to do this?!

When I read about the protesting I said the publisher wouldn't be on board with it, given how much they make off her! Plus if they did dump her, its unlikely she would struggle to find another, they would be falling over backwards for her, lets be honest.

These kids who are tantruming about this, if they refuse to act like adults..should really be let go.

Such a massive overreaction, thats still bloody going on a week later..to something that shouldn't even be controversial..followed by a bunch of supportive tweets about gender dysphoric people..AND a huge essay on reasons for the view. And still its just toys out of pram 'you raging transphobe, we will ruin your life!!!!'

they might be tomorrow’s top hire, on the ‘ones to watch’ lists.
Oh, give over.

Putting "I tried to insist that my publishing house sacked their biggest cash cow, (who just happened to be J.K. Rowling!) on the basis of a tweet I didn't even understand" on your LinkedIn will not get you on the one to watch list.

Btw - probs 10 years ago I sat in a presentation about a “what if” scenario that a major publishing house was trialling: what if one of their ‘brand’ authors decided to go it alone? How would that impact the health of the business? What could they do to add value and prevent that? It’s a major concern and has been for years.

But it doesn’t mean the “woke staff” thing isn’t also an absolutely equal concern. This is a very very dicey moment for companies. They’re not just sacking & replacing staff who say this stuff, believe this. They’re not all 22 and expendable, I guarantee. Those staff aren’t necessarily ‘marked’ in this climate - they might be tomorrow’s top hire, on the ‘ones to watch’ lists.

So it’s not helpful or smart to say they’re malicious.

I’m not missing the point - they’re wrong to think their opinion on JKR’s opinions is the same as a moral position that their employers should give a shit about.

They didn’t read her essay without their filter of ‘this is transphobic to even discuss it’.

I’m just dismayed that everyone in this dogfight assumes the worst of everyone else.

JKR perfectly entitled to give voice to her thoughts. She’s NOT transphobic and she’s been appallingly bullied. I am as shocked as anyone that the horrible abuse she’s had is being ignored, erased.

But equally there are clearly lots of people who do feel ‘violated, attacked, dismissed, erased, choose-your-emotive-phrase’ and are using their loud voices saying ‘this is unkind to people who don’t need more unkindness’. People listen to that - they have personal relationships with people saying that loudly - and they buy it uncritically.

I’m NOT saying they’re right. I am just saying painting everyone who disagrees with gender critical views, or JKR, as “fundamentally malicious” is unhelpful. On an individual level I believe they’re not malicious they are misguided.

I’m NOT saying “be nice”. But I do in general, in life, think you catch more flies with honey and understanding that things aren’t black and white good vs evil, young vs old is important.

I think the Hachette employees’ critical thinking was flawed and the ‘protest’ always doomed to fail. But I see that on an individual level actually there might have been reasons they felt it imperative to speak up.

In each micro-battle of this ‘war’ there are individual people, circumstances, professional cultures, backgrounds that you have to account for. Know your enemy. Keep your friends close but your enemies closer. Etc.

I’m not an apologist for them. But I think background is valuable.

It's worse than that .... if she so wished she could set it up to specifically publish works the wokespoke brigade disapprove of. The fact she hasn't already suggests she is a far far better person than I am.

I'd have this hypothetical company set up a deliberately goady social media presence too. Seriously, they are so lucky that Rowling is not a petty person.

Indeed. These young people are less "sweet naive baby" and more "Lord of the Flies". Their action was intended to hurt Rowling because she pissed them off. Don't let them off the hook for the fundamental malice of what they were trying to do just because it didn't work.

Spot on!

I believe all Juno’s books are now in her name so whatever you saw was presumably second-hand via third-party sellers. Nothing the publishers can do about that. She’s been Juno for enough years now - and doing well, as I say - that all previous books will have reprinted plenty of times.

Anyway, publishing in general but particularly children’s publishing is very declare-your-pronouns-fly-the-rainbow-flag-be-a-good-ally and the trans stuff has also got assimilated into the whole BLM diversity minorities conversation (which is problematic in itself) and whilst I disagree with those Hachette employees critical thinking I don’t disagree that they decided to have the conversation. But I’m glad Hachette reminded them they’re effectively wrong on this occasion. A book about fairytales that profits charity is a stupid hill to fight on, even if you think there should be a fight (which I 100% don’t).