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

[ArabellaScott]

Picador are unpublishing - ceasing to distribute - all of Clanchy's books. The article says 'by mutual consent', but it's not a good thing to hear a poet/author being 'cancelled'.

Literature/poetry is not in a healthy state right now.

unherd.com/thepost/picador-cancels-poet-kate-clanchys-books/

In case you missed the brouhaha - Article from last year:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-58151144

Maybe I'm naturally contrary but every time an author or book is cancelled I have an overwhelming urge to read it so I can make up my own mind. It is turning into quite a time-consuming and expensive practice.

3timeslucky - you won't regret picking up Kate Clanchy's book. It's wonderful.

I'm not for cancelling authors, but some of the comments she made about school kids in her book about poetry are pretty questionable. Surely they could have worked with her to take out the classism/racism/fat phobia instead of just ceasing to publish her.

Wasn't there meant to be a heavily supervised rewrite going on ahead of a new edition? Did that hit unresolveable rocks?

Picador is part of Pan Macmillan now. They currently have this on the opening page of their website!

But is it a witch hunt to ask that a writer doesn't indulge in racist tropes to describe people? I know that plenty of women are being silenced; I just don't think this is one of those cases.

@IvyTwines

Picador is part of Pan Macmillan now. They currently have this on the opening page of their website!

JFC

Racist tropes? That's pushing it a bit, I'd say.

And yes, this is undoubtedly a witch hunt. There are people in the world who are undoubtedly racist and wish harm on people. Kate Clanchy, poet who has done much to support and mentor many children, is not one of them.

There is no way she could re-write the book. It does contain institutionalised, entrenched, racist attitudes. BUT Kate Clanchy is absolutely not the problem. Yes, when I read it my thoughts were that I wouldn't be employing her as a teacher. It's in the vaguely patronising vein as all of those 'village school teacher' stories from the 1950's. All the heartwarming stuff is actually her slightly approaching the students from a superior perspective. It's morally questionable from a teaching perspective, to be honest. As a Head if Department I would have been looking to get rid of somebody who wrote a book which reflected on colleagues' teaching from a humorous and slightly patronising perspective. I don't think one of those colleagues would have been happy with their portrayal, or the students. So my view is it shouldn't have been written. It feels very unprofessional and uncomfortable in today's world.

BUT- Kate Clanchy is also reflective and sweet. She clearly loves the kids and thoroughly enjoyed teaching them.

It's her publishers and the entire industry that is the problem. This book went through a major publisher RECENTLY. It won a major award. Many, many people were involved in reading it, editing it, marketing it. She is also represented by a major literary agency. To me, that's the entire industry that considers those views to be ok. Blaming Kate Clanchy is pathetic.

I feel really sorry for somebody who is a poetry advocate, who only has good intentions, and who is clearly a nice person. She has absolutely been hung out to dry for the industry's issues.

@BlueSkyeThinker

Wasn't there meant to be a heavily supervised rewrite going on ahead of a new edition? Did that hit unresolveable rocks?

I think that was discussed, yes:

'Publisher Picador is considering alterations to Kate Clanchy's Orwell prize-winning memoir amid accusations of racial and ableist stereotyping.'

"the use of racial tropes such as “chocolate-coloured skin” and “almond-shaped eyes”, and references to one student as “African Jonathon” and another being “so small and square and Afghan with his big nose and premature moustache”.

Another passage was highlighted for the inclusion of ableist descriptions, in which Clanchy, a poet and teacher, refers to two autistic children as “unselfconsciously odd” and “jarring company”, and writes “probably, more than an hour a week” in their company “would irritate me, too, but for that hour I like them very much”

From the Guardian.

A good discussion could have been had around the legitimate issues raised by the book (and there has been some good discussion).

I'm not averse to that particular book eventually sinking without trace, or future editions having an extra section that talked about the problems, or re-editing, but for ALL her books to be withdrawn, for it to be decided that EVERYTHING she wrote is without value and tainted.

This scorched earth approach - who does it actually benefit? Was this what her critics were aiming for? Surely not? She's a poet - a good one. I hope she manages to get her work back in print again.

OP, the website you included a link from, quotes from the original source, which states that the publisher has reverted the rights. So I'm not sure how she has been cancelled? One publisher has decided it will not publish new titles nor updated editions of the previous books, but the author has the right to do so in the future via another publisher, or she can self-publish?

www.thebookseller.com/news/pan-macmillan-stops-publishing-clanchy-it-parts-company-author-1300938#

The original furore occurred because she took to Twitter to complain someone had made up some quotes from her book (in a GoodReads review) and outright denied those phrases were in her book. If I were a publishing house, I'd like my authors to be able to accurately quote from their own work, before publicly claiming someone had falsified text from it.

twitter.com/sammiisammii_/status/1423385534412509184?t=Z3NO9HSvERJ7Y9X-e9oE4A&s=19

How ironic that Kate Clanchy won the Orwell Prize with a book Some Kids I Taught and What They Taught Me that has now been cancelled, despite support for her from the people she taught.

Picador obviously knows how to keep on the right side of Big Brother!

George Orwell would have been proud of her.

Huh. Are those the really bad bits? I mean they are othering yes but I would have really liked it if I had thought any of my DD's teachers when she was in mainstream had liked her for an hour...

I think telling the truth is becoming a terrible crime. If we have people in our lives who are different they must be altogether wonderful and we must be saints. Like we're a living glossy magazine story about how rewarding it is to have x issue in our lives.

That's a bit of a derail though as I don't know enough about this woman to say whether she is culpable or not. I just think that this sanitisation of what can be really difficult complex issues (in this case whether people with complex SEN are delightful to be with all the time) doesn't help those of us who actually have live with the reality.

One publisher has decided it will not publish new titles nor updated editions of the previous books, but the author has the right to do so in the future via another publisher, or she can self-publish?

In any standard contract an author retains copyright to their work, and so can republish, but usually a writer/author/poet (at this level) is represented by one main publisher. Picador was Clanchy's publisher - withdrawing her books - stopping distributing them - means they will no longer be in print/available and she will lose out on being represented by Picador. It may also make it hard for her to find another publisher, given the very public 'sacking' and furore.

Yes, of course in theory she can go and try and find another publisher, just as if someone is sacked they can go and try and find another job. But in reality it's not quite that straightforward.

There was a lot of classist stuff in there too.

It's really not ok. It should never have been published in the first place.

In the same way Gillian Philliip was eventually pushed out of publishing:

www.express.co.uk/entertainment/books/1493963/children-author-lorry-driver-gillian-philip

And Rachel Rooney:

wildwomanwritingclub.wordpress.com/2021/12/09/rachel-rooneys-exit-interview-from-publishing/

And other books have been withdrawn/pulped:

www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/opposition-is-no-friendship/

These 'wars' have been ongoing for a while:

www.thebookseller.com/news/scottish-poetry-library-transphobia-row-over-no-platforming-stance-1195285

I don't believe in book burning

Repent, as far as I know, yes, those are the crimes for which Kate Clanchy has lost her publisher.

What's offensive about "almond-shaped eyes"? It's a simple description of an eye shape. And how is it a "racial trope", when it's seen in people of various ethnic backgrounds? I'm genuinely baffled by this.

Well, here's the woman to whom the phrase was applied, thinking:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/i-do-have-almond-shaped-eyes-my-teacher-kate-clanchy-described-me-beautifully-vtwp50b06

Hmmm, I read the book in question last year. I found the author’s patronising attitude towards her white working class students far more problematic than her cliched descriptions of her BAME ones. Despite this, I thought she had some really important and insightful things to say about the English education and class systems, however clumsily expressed.

FWIW, “unselfconsciously odd” is a phrase I might use to describe my own autistic child; I don’t see it as pejorative at all.

I have followed this quite closely as it is my field, and I think you’ve misunderstood, OP.

The issues around Clanchy’s book are:
She denied accurate quotes from her book were in there, and launched a coordinated attack on two women of colour who had respectfully drawn attention to them
She was supported by her publisher and the mainstream press to defend herself, while the women who had tried to open a debate were harassed, abused and - yes - cancelled.
Clanchy did not apologise for anything in the book but it was withdrawn by her publishers for an edit.

There has been a slow, grassroots movement (chiefly among feminists) ongoing for many months to support the women who have been victims of this abuse. It is not the first time that Clanchy has been implicated in this kind of campaign against less powerful writers
In the last few weeks, the publishing industry has started to listen more to these womens’ voices. I see that as a victory for feminism.

The issues around the racism and othering in the book are a valid but separate issue to these issues of bullying and racism. Although having said that, there is a link - to do with the relative power and behaviour that middle class while women can have in some contexts, and how the ideas of feminism can be misused to defend indefensible behaviour.

I am myself a middle class white woman who works in publishing, and a fan of clanchy’s work, this has been a very horrible time but I do believe the publishers have made the right decisions. I don’t think Clanchy has been cancelled, so much as held to account.

Hmmm. Kate, Gillian, Rachel, Jenny Lindsay in Scotland .... You can't help noting what these enemies of the people have in common ...