Kate Clanchy - poet - is 'cancelled' by her publisher

New thread on this topic

www.mumsnet.com/talk/feminism/4622024-goodreads-secret-book-spite-and-kate-clanchy

I'm finding it interesting that most cancelled artists are seen as so inextricably linked with their work that it must be cancelled or destroyed but because the unicorn-frotting perma-teens cannot wean themselves off Harry Potter they've decided that JKR must be disappeared from her own work.

Discussion of the differing techniques between JKR and normal artists here:

Bloody hell. Maybe I should apply to be a sensitivity reader. At least I know that e.e. cummings isn't a typing error.

It's giving me echoes of the Soviets forcing artists to submit work to bogus unions for ideological vetting before it could be disseminated to the public. And of course any work of art can fall foul of this dogma as one of its features is to constantly and arbitrarily change the rules of what is and isn't ideologically acceptable (because it's all about having the power to destroy someone rather than changing things for the better). The important thing to note is that now Clanchy has been condemned she has absolutely no way of redeeming herself in the eyes of the ideology. Whether she apologises, changes her work, defends herself or stays quiet, it is all taken as further proof of guilt.

I'm finding it interesting that most cancelled artists are seen as so inextricably linked with their work that it must be cancelled or destroyed but because the unicorn-frotting perma-teens cannot wean themselves off Harry Potter they've decided that JKR must be disappeared from her own work.

Just more excuses from Clanchy. Can't she just own the fact that some of what she wrote was inappropriate?

JFC. She did own the fact - she even says in the article that she was looking forward to rewriting bits of it to redress that. But the comments from the sensitivity readers are ludicrous, contradictory and, quite frankly, offensively stupid.

I'm guessing you didn't actually read her article though, did you? Just leapt in with a snide comment.

Just more excuses from Clanchy. Can't she just own the fact that some of what she wrote was inappropriate?

Excellent point, @WinterTrees (and I would recommend reading her book, I found it honest and moving in places).

I've been interested in the contrast in the way people in my corner of publishing/media twitter have responded to Kate Clanchy and Adam Kay, the author of This is Going to Hurt.

Most of my timeline have given themselves whiplash in their haste to distance themselves from Clanchy. However, they're all hailing the current TV series of This is Going to Hurt as a work of insightful genius. Kay's misogyny is apparently excusable because he's just showing how much pressure NHS doctors are under. 'He's not meant to come across as a hero, he's reflecting what it's like in an impossible job'. He has not been cancelled and his reputation has not, seemingly, been dented by the emergence of grossly offensive songs about Downs Syndrome and Northern women that he wrote a few years ago. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10506277/This-Going-Hurt-author-Adam-Kay-sang-vile-songs-Downs-syndrome-baby.html

I haven't read Kate Clanchy's book and I don't know her, so I'm not well qualified to comment, but from what I can gather she is also quite open about her own failings as a teacher, which is also a very challenging job. It makes me wonder what could possibly account for the difference in the way she and Adam Kay have been treated...?

There's an irony somewhere in the fact that people will niggle over things like whether it's better to write "SEN" than "special educational needs" (why?) when the internet is awash with the most grossly offensive and demeaning pornography that apparently no one cares about.

I'm not sure how wise it is to refresh this thread, but Kate Clanchy has written about the process of submitting her work to sensitivity readers. I found it profoundly depressing.

They sullied my memoir to suit their agenda

Yes, it's the absolutism and requirement for people to be sorted into 'good' or 'bad' that drives much of this, I think, and is one of the most frightening aspects. Transgress, make an error, and you are banished forever, beyond the pale, irredeemable.

@Phobiaphobic I agree, and same re: having met her and don't particularly get on (definitely not a friend).

I've read through all this thread and what really strikes me is how so many people are unable to hold someone's faults in balance with their more positive aspects, and the good they do in the world. Clanchy may not be perfect. I don't particularly get on with her (and I have met her). It's clear she didn't handle things as well as she might. But at the same time she has got off her arse and spent years helping these kids, which is a lot more than most of us could boast. And who's to say any of us would have reacted better, put on the spot as she was, following a huge personal bereavement?

Those of you who think she deserves everything she got, who are so thoroughly disgusted with how she behaved, are you sure you'd do better? Are better? Are you certain you've done more good in the world? Seems to me there's a lot of projection going on, along with a failure to look at your own shadow, your own lack of empathy or forgiveness.

I’m listening to R4

I’d not heard of any of this but she was very emotional

Going to read thread

It's about being a teenage girl and seeing that that was what your teacher chose to focus on and say about you. If you lack sufficient empathy and imagination to understand what a teenage girl is likely to feel on reading that, well not sure what I can say.

If you want to start a thread about "the male gaze" generally , go ahead.

Again, this is a forum for the discussion of feminism. It is not, by definition, irrelevant to discuss the male gaze. If you don't understand the relevancy, I suggest you start by re-reading the thread. @KimikosNightmare

It was crass and insensitive towards that girl and has been removed from the bowdlerised version.

I'm just amazed none of Clanchy's defenders have tried to justify the reference to a "Cypriot bosom"

@DisgustedofManchester I agree, and it's something that massively puts me off GC 'feminism'.

Multiple bigotries being held by the same personis pretty normal. Its how they find common ground. "My enemies enemy" bullshit. Why on earth would so called feminists share platforms and be mutuals on social media with MRAs, The Christian Right ( a whole collection of bifotries in there including white supremecy, anti-abortion, anti contraception etc ) and racists. Nothing shocks me these days.

@SantaClawsServiette Your pattern of behaviour demonstrates bigotry. It's not about any single post, but the totality of what I've seen you say about gay people and our culture(s).

The fact that accusations of bigotry are sometimes misused and sometimes applied maliciously doesn't mean they're automatically wrong. Obviously you aren't going to think you're a bigot. But I do think that.

[quote Innocenta]@SantaClawsServiette Why are you bringing up "TRAs"? That's completely irrelevant.

More to the point: stop shitting on lesbian culture. You're terrible. [/quote]
Yes, pointing out that a word existed earlier than one particular usage of it, and that it is still sometimes used that way, is shitting on lesbian culture.

Obviously.

It's awesome when a response to a factual statement is a reflexive accusation of bigotry.

She doesn’t say in the book that she “queried them at length”.

It’s pointless making stuff up.

She didn’t

She absolutely did, or are we now at the "denying the stuff that was actually in the book" stage of the argument?