To compare India Knight to Alice Munro?

[Heyyoupleasekeepgoing]

Just finished the brilliant piece in the New Yorker Magazine Here about how Alice Munro ignored the abuse of her daughter by her husband, and the general opinion (although easier to hold now she is dead) that her work should no longer be respected and read as it was.

AIBU to think of the vastly less celebrated but nonetheless still writing for the Times etc India Knight, who stood by her own paedophile partner (Eric Joyce) and was named as a mitigating factor in his sentencing for viewing and downloading the most extreme category of CSA - ie supporting his support of the severe abuse of someone’s children (and babies according to the court case)? As their promised “explanations” have not been forthcoming, please can we stop publishing/ reading her now?

Alice Munro was an exceptional, masterful writer. She wrote nuanced short stories exploring hidden, difficult aspects of the human psyche and relationships - guilt, shame, misunderstanding, deception, unspeakable failures, errors of judgement, insanity. She gave a voice to millions of women (and men). She also survived abuse and rape herself. Her writing is hauntingly beautiful.

It is a terrible mistake to cancel artists’ output because of their human foibles. I’m not aware that the Nobel prize is only given to those who have also received the “Dad/Mum of the year” award. If you only want to read books written by saintly writers, the list will be very short.

I can enjoy The Little Prince even though St-Ex was an asshole. See also Picasso, Caravaggio, Plato etc.

I am not minimising the impact of the assaults on her daughter Andrea, she has suffered greatly. But cancelling Alice Munro isn’t going to change that.

Any comparison to India Knight is ludicrous. I doubt anyone has ever felt a long lasting impact from reading Knight’s musings and beauty tips. I always skip her inane column. But even so, I don’t need her cancelled. I get to decide what I read - I don’t need to burn the books I don’t want others to read.

Art needs to be art - judged on its own merit. Not on the artist’s likability (or otherwise) as a person.

But it gets blurry doesn't it?

Who can watch early Woody Allen films where he is bizarrely in a relationship with a gorgeous woman barely out of her teens. Ans then he marries the sister of his children- who he has known since she was a child!

I haven't been able to watch an Allen film in years or listen to MichaelJackson - I wonder now who he was writing those songs to.

Art isn't made in a vacuum. The story of the artist and their life is part of the package. But there is a fundamental difference between being e.g. a shitty husband who suppressed his wife's talent (Mahler) vs a serial child predator.

Noone is saying artists have to be heroes or angels. I just feel there are some lines that once crossed cause me to find an artist distasteful.

Anyone still listen to Lost Prophet?

All this talk of cancel culture and woke nonsense really doesn’t fit here. We’re not talking about ending someone’s career because they hold an unfashionable opinion, rather someone who supported their daughter’s rapist before her. Or a Times hack who was so desperate for a relationship she stayed with a convicted paedophile.

If separating the art from the artist is important to you, I guess there’s an argument to be made for that, but I there’s never been art I’ve enjoyed enough that the artist being a paedo didn’t damage it for me.

There is a world of writers between paedophile apologists and the 'saintly'

@Anothernamechane but neither of these writers is a paedophile.

No, it makes you someone who recognises exceptional writing. Absolutely I now read AM differently. Her story ‘Wild Swans’, for instance, now strikes me as far more problematic, to choose only one.

No but in both women's circumstances, it's not a case of them believing their partner is innocent. Munro's daughter told her of the abuse many years before going to the police. He admitted it to her and she was fully aware her husband sexually abused her pre teen daughter and left her with bulimia and life long mental health issues. Staying with a man you know did that to your child is beyond fucked up and I have huge issues with celebrating someone who did that.

Eric Joyce was found with and pled guilty to making indecent images of children. I have no interest in India Knight's writing career in the same way I have no interest in writers similar to her like Liz Jones. However her loving support for a convicted paedophile certainly will make sure I never read anything she writes

I have read quite a few of Alice Munroe’s stories and had no idea of the family history, it will inform me going forward and if I ever read anymore of her work I will read it differently. As a child who was sexually abused, and whose mother knew and stayed with my perpetrator father, I found the article struck a chord. I indentified with Andrea and felt she was let down by all the adults around her. In my experience this is not uncommon but so damaging, the story and effects of abuse need to be recognised for any healing to happen.
I can see that art and the creator potentially need to be separate in some way, but maybe it depends on how the viewer, reader or listener identify or relate to the history of the artist for that to happen.
i can never walk past the Eric Gill sculptures outside the BBC building without thinking how he abused his daughters.

I read The Times and always wonder how India Knight reconciles being with someone who looked at child abuse online. I assume they are still together.

separating art and creator is a messy business I suppose.

India Knight can get in the fucking bin.

You make it sound as though paedophilia and abuse of children is just a “minor flaw”.

I was not familiar with either of these OP so will go and look them up now.

Cancel culture does not exist.

If it did asking “can we please stop reading” would not be an example of that.

Yes, that's exactly what I said.

I used to like India Knight's novels, they were a funny and easy read. Still can't believe she stayed with a fucking nonce.

Generally I'm happy to separate art and artist.

IK wouldn't have a column if it wasn't for who her step-father is, even leading aside her paedophile partner. She was never very good and is now very stale as well. Shunted onto a make up column because when she tried to write about serious issues they had too many complaints about the hypocrisy, but actually to be a good beauty writer you have to know something about the beauty industry, not just enjoy putting make up on, tra la la isn't life lovely being me with my chickens and lots of money and all my lovely things...

Yep, stopped following her when that came to light

Haven't actually noticed her about much on there these days

Is she still doing her beauty column?

They seem to have shunted her about a lot

Could we bear in mind that neither AM nor IK were/are paedophiles?

But stayed with men who were paedophiles and in one case her own child was abused. And both knew!
So...

Then don't read their work.

Responding to the PP who pointed out that the women weren't paedophiles.

And I don't

Yes, I understand that. Nonetheless, do you not think that the distinction between staying with a man who’d abused an child and being the person who actually sexually abuses a nine year old is an important one?

Given half of Hollywood gave Polanski a standing ovation that’s a lot of films to boycott

I do tend to boycott artists who are still alive and will profit from my engagement (such as Polanski and woody Allen)

In terms of dead artists I think context is importany. Some of Alice minors work can certainly be read in different light. But she is dead - does her daughter benefit financially from her mother’s work? Would be a shame to punish her

No.

Being accepting of an abuser is unforgiveable in my book

How do you know India is still with Eric ?

Just because it says so online doesn't mean it's true

I know a very famous person who hasn't been with their ex for years but online it states they're still partners