Times Interview with Kate Clanchy - shared article in post

Your comment is nonsense

Ah - so you haven’t read her book. Thanks for confirming.

Have you read her book @musicismyboyfriend?

I didn’t lol

Don’t buy or read her books then.

Have you read the book?

She wasn’t using the children’s phrasing ‘back at them’ and

as though I was an animal - how on earth did you get from an author using the children’s own terms to describe them in a book, to ‘dehumanising’ them and speaking to them as if they were animals??

For whatever reason you seem hugely triggered by this book and author and I think, especially from your other comments - (Jimmy Saville wth?) that you are rather overwrought and maybe this has clouded your thoughts. I’m very sorry for whatever situation has led you to feeling like this but your attacks on Kate are vicious and unfounded.

Perhaps you could answer my questions , which @DeanElderberry has declined to do so far. They're just a couple of posts back, but here they are again. I'd appreciate an answer from anyone who is saying that nobody should be defending her.

In your opinion, what would be an acceptable way for a teacher to write about their experiences?

Can you suggest a book by another author perhaps, who has written about teaching children from different backgrounds in a way which you find more acceptable?

Or do you think that teachers should never write books about their experiences in schools?

What a despicable post. No wonder you side with the foul bullies.

Why is it a "horror" to say someone looks like they have an Ashkenazi nose? Only if you believe that it's an insult to be Jewish or look Jewish.

And Jewish people are having nose jobs (Jewish Chronicle) mainly young women. So people can't look diverse and we can't describe diversity? What a horrible world to live in. https://www.thejc.com/news/the-complex-history-of-jews-nose-jobs-and-antisemitism-cygdnrx2

As for Clanchy's other descriptions of children she quoted the children's descriptions of themselves from their own poetry.

From The Times article "She used the phrase “almond eyes”, for example, but did so because it was a term she had learnt was used by the Hazara people of Afghanistan as an “important political term and identifier” of their ethnic group. One of her old pupils had even written a poem that included the line, “In Iran where they offend because of their almond-shaped eyes.” Similarly, a pupil wrote in a poem that “the scorching sun melts my chocolate face”. "

https://www.thetimes.com/article/7681d5ec-3773-4b36-ab95-e4ab409d7899?shareToken=e76def471fd13ded750d7295fd554675

If you or those 3 twitter bullies are offended by what children wrote about themselves that doesn't make Clanchy's work offensive or her the problem.

I could not agree more. These are children she is writing about so callously. It turned my stomach.

“She wasn’t a pretty girl, even by the standards of the IU… she was fat, a swathe of freckly flesh bulging out of her collar, blurring her jawline, giving her premature double chins.”

There is a lot to criticse with her so called writing. But the worst was reading her description of a child's physical changes after being raped. It came across to me as absolutely unhinged and sociopathic.

To me, she's no different to creative types making poverty porn... Getting paid off the back of exploiting others under the guise of 'giving a voice to the voiceless' .

The fact she is still getting any airtime at all is a disgrace and clearly demonstrates she has not been 'cancelled' how ever much she doth protest...

Many people like to use social media to demonstrate what good people they are, simply by virtue of saying the currently approved line about refugees or immigrants or any other topic. Far fewer people actually use their lives to make a difference to others, Kate Clanchy has spent years of her life making sure that refugees and other disadvantaged groups have a chance at a better life. Why not judge her on that rather than the things she said?

I think this is a prime example of the hysterical frenzy of cancel culture. Actually have I crossed a line there with 'hysterical'
“I’m interested,” Clanchy says, “that all the people who attacked me were women around my own age, often exactly my own age, often white women just like me. I think that we’re the first generation of women to have succeeded and got anywhere. But the men can relax, because we’re just going to form a circle and shoot each other.”

Seriously I'm starting to worry at this behaviour among successful women who should have enough battle scars to stand firm instead of crumbling before sanctamonious 'sensitivity readers'.

Well yes, exactly. She has improved the lives of her students - they have said so. She’s made a difference and I’d rather judge her on that than her use of almond eyes (which the student used herself).

I read this with horror as it played out. I hadn't read Clanchy's book, but I followed her on twitter and loved the poetry that she promoted.

It seems to me that women in book publishing (which I would love to be a part of one day, which is now somewhat a worry) are falling over one another to display their 'kindness' in a weird format that involves pointing out what other women have done wrong.

Clanchy is not perfect, but no one is. Yet in these kindness wars there's no room for nuance and it annoys the hell out of me. If some of her language could've been better, the publisher had a chance to pick it up. It seems to me that on balance she was a fantastic teacher for those children and did not deserve to be repeatedly ripped apart.

But publishing would rather eat itself than stand up for someone who is not perfect.

I didn't read Adam Kay's book but I watched the first episode of This is Going to Hurt and I didn't want to watch any more.
I like Ben Wishaw (Paddington Bear). And I like Jarvis Cocker who did the music but I didn't want to continue after the doctor deliberately sewed up a woman wrong who had a dolphin tattoo which he ruins and he laughed about it. His malpractice was justified because the patient was racist.

Sexism / misogyny is fine but perceived racism or transphobia ends your career.

Why was it ok for the slightly fictional / dramatised version of Adam Kay to be spiteful but not ok for the slightly fictional version of Kate Clanchy to sometimes give judgemental descriptions of composite characters (in the introduction to the memoir she says children's identities were protected, names were changed, no individuals should have been identifiable).

I think this is part of the problem, separating reality from fiction especially with memoirs where we expect them to be non fiction but really they're a mix like Oranges Are Not The Only Fruit which was originally marketed as a fictional novel but is a memoir / semi autobiographical.

When I hear Kate Clanchy talk about the Kate in her memoir it's clear in her mind that the written Kate is a fictionalised or dramatised version of herself but we the reader (or podcast listener) don't know the real Kate from the fictional Kate so how are we able to compare?

I have now listened to the whole 'Anatomy of a Cancellation' and in my opinion Monisha Rajesh was let off lightly. She was asked why she called Kate "KKKlanchy" and Rajesh said she felt attacked by Kate! Who didn't call her any names.
Rajesh never apologised and played the victim when she was the bully.

This article might explain some of her twitter outbursts. She says she raged during lockdown and needed anger management for postnatal 'depression'. It must have been quite scary for her kids to witness. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/aug/31/moment-changed-me-smashed-toddlers-toy-kitchen-smithereens-knew-i-needed-help

Rajesh mentions being bullied as a kid and having abusive teachers and I feel her whole response to Kate's book has been Rajesh projecting her experiences onto Kate. Kate is now viewed as the abusive teacher Rajesh had and she is again the child experiencing racism. To which I can only suggest you need more therapy Monisha rather than continue the cycle of abuse.

But these 'responses' seem to be limited to a tiny number of people with an axe to grind on social media. Overall, reviews seem to have been positive. It won the Orwell prize.