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

Fuck me. Someone thinks they're Jeremy Paxman.

@BadHairDayExpert Since most participants here are women, should we take that as a slur?

Fuck me. Someone thinks they're Jeremy Paxman.

Fair enough. But I would really like an answer.

Actually - never mind. I said I would step away and I really will now, if only because my posts are getting longer and more numerous and also, as has been noted, more repetitive. And because I'm prepared to bet that literally no one will say they do think Kimiko should be cancelled, and that is an excellent thing.

I love MN because it is one of the few places where robust discussion thrives, and it thrives precisely because the greatest risk we take is having our arses handed to us, which is what "being held to account" should really mean. It stings, but it doesn't destroy, and it leaves space and opportunity to think and come back better. I think we all see this, on a microcosmic level. I am in favour of enabling voices, especially well-meaning ones, that's all. We don't gain anything by silencing them.

[quote Innocenta]@QueenPeony @SantaClawsServiette You're both completely wrong, sorry. 'Butch' is a uniquely, fundamentally lesbian identity. That doesn't mean the word isn't used metaphorically (as KC is using it!) outside that context. The closest parallel is something like 'twink'. The unique meaning of the word is a certain subtype of gay man. But it is used metaphorically outside that; I have heard/seen straight men described as twinks in an adjectival, metaphorical sense.

Nonetheless. It's actually both hilarious and disgusting that you both think you get to tell me (or know better than I do) what 'butch' means. @SantaClawsServiette, I remember your shitty homophobic posts elsewhere, so goodness knows why you think any lesbian is going to care about your opinion on this. @QueenPeony, you're just wrong, read some lesbian history (I know you won't!). [/quote]
If you've ever wondered where TRAs get the idea that anyone who disagrees about issues with them is transphobic, you might consider your own posts.

The word butch exists outside of that context, in fact it predates it. That's not an opinion, it's a fact.

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

More to the point: stop shitting on lesbian culture. You're terrible.

@SelfPortraitWithPterodactyl

will comment only on the now bizarre suggestion that publicly stating a teenage girl has a moustache was really done with the best intentions of being a morale booster.

The section is one of the many which have been pulled from the book.

I don't know if that means that you can't comment on the context, having only got the new edition, or whether you're making a different point. But I would say that your sarcasm - "obviously it cannot possibly be a positive thing" - highlights very clearly your own prejudices against butchness and non-feminine features (plenty of women have facial hair, some because of e.g. PCOS, but apparently it must automatically be shaming). You have internalised the value judgements of the male gaze to the extent that you literally cannot imagine stating the fact without it being meant as anything but negative and judgemental. And your dismissal of the context as plainly "bizarre" only highlights your inability to imagine a different way of thinking. I think that is your problem, not Clanchy's.

But let's put that to one side for a moment. Do you think you should be cancelled?

I'm sure a teenage girl will be delighted to read that description of herself. Your theoretical ponderings about the "male gaze" etc, etc , etc ,are hardly likely to be of much comfort to the average teenager in real life.

The wording however has been pulled so possibly you should address your lecture to Clanchy and her new publisher.

Clearly with the benefit of hindsight she and they can't have thought it was a kind or necessary thing to say.

Your theoretical ponderings about the "male gaze" etc, etc

...um, this is FWR, @KimikosNightmare, I think we're allowed to talk about the male gaze. If you think that's irrelevant waffle, maybe this isn't the forum for you?

@KimikosNightmare

I've got Jewish friends. The first time I met them I didn't feel the need to query them at lenghth about their Jewish heritage or publish anything in the public domain about their "Ashkenazi noses"

Why did Clanchy?

She didn’t.

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?

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

It’s pointless making stuff up.

[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.

@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.

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.

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

@Innocenta

Your theoretical ponderings about the "male gaze" etc, etc

...um, this is FWR, @KimikosNightmare, I think we're allowed to talk about the male gaze. If you think that's irrelevant waffle, maybe this isn't the forum for you?

The theoretical discussions on here are utterly irrelevant. Clanchy said this publicly about one of her young female pupils. The book was not talking about the theory of the "male gaze" It was a specific comment about one specific girl's appearance.

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"

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

@Innocenta

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*

No, this thread is about Clanchy and her book and what she said about specific, indivual puplis. If you don't understand that I don't know what to say.

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.

I’m listening to R4

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

Going to read thread

@EishetChayil

"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.

This sounds bad to me tbh

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.

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

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.

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

@everythingcrossed

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

The sensitivity readers sound like out-and-out morons.

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.