Alma T. C. Boykin
Well, here we go again. An unpublished book was pulled from the publication roster and the author is apologizing because of possible insensitivity. Except this time it’s not about ethnicity, but politics. Elizabeth Gilbert wrote a story about people in the Soviet Union who flee to Siberia to live as they want and protect the wilderness there. OK, I know, yes, but it’s fiction, and who knows. Stalin might have thought that if people wanted to go to the Gulag region of their own will, they were insane and not worth tracking down. It’s fiction, and I’ve not read it yet to see how she works that bit. She can publish whatever she wants and her publisher greenlights.
Unless it is about Russia. A large number of people* posted one-star reviews on Goodreads, or contacted the author protesting setting a book in Russia as war is ongoing in Ukraine. Her response was:
” ‘Over the course of this weekend, I have received an enormous, massive outpouring of reactions and responses from my Ukrainian readers expressing anger, sorrow, disappointment, and pain about the fact that I would choose to release a book into the world right now—any book, no matter what the subject is—that is set in Russia,’ Gilbert said in a video message posted to Twitter. ‘As a result, I’m making a course correction, and I am removing the book from its publication schedule. It is not the time for this book to be published.’ All pre-orders, she said, would be refunded.”
Responses ranged from people who said she shouldn’t pull the book just because it hurt feelings or might hurt feelings, especially since the setting is the Soviet Union between 1930-1980, and the Soviet government is shown in a negative light. The Authors Guild supported her decision.
“However, some, including the Authors Guild, backed Gilbert’s decision. In a statement, the Authors Guild affirmed that “every author should have to right to decide when and how they want to publish their work.” The statement continued:
“It’s a personal choice, and since words have power, Elizabeth Gilbert absolutely has the right to decide how and when her words should best be used. Some Americans believe it is a stretch to be so upset about a book set in Siberia a century ago seemingly detached from the current regime or crisis wrought by Putin, but Gilbert heard and empathized with the pain of her readers in Ukraine, and we respect her decision that she does not want to bring more harm to her Ukrainian readers.”
The piece in Publishers Weekly is fairly neutral. I will assume that her contract with Penguin Random House allowed this, or she agreed to pay back any advances, or what ever. Perhaps the plan is to wait until the war is over, or an armistice is reached, and then publish the book. She has an international readership, her books are translated into other languages, and she and her agent and publisher might be looking at larger pictures than just events in the English-language markets.
One reason this caught my eye, aside from the self-censorship over attacks on a book that no one has read yet, is that I have seen several new fantasy novels in the past year that are set in Russia. One is the continuation of a trilogy, one stands alone thus far. They are set in the czarist period, so that might be one reason they got published. It could also be that since they are fantasy and not literature, the publishers and authors decided that it was so far from current events as to not be controversial. It’s not something I’ve ever considered, since it’s not an area I write about at the moment.
Another reason it interests me is that I have self censored, in this case distribution. The next-to-last book in the Cat Among Dragons series is not available in some markets as an e-book. I can’t afford to pay for legal costs if I get sued under laws against defamation of religion. How defamation was defined was … open to a wide range of interpretations. Because of court cases then in progress, I opted not to release the electronic books in those markets. A handful of people contacted me directly, and I sent them files of the books. Is it overkill? Probably. I’m a tiny fish in a huge pond. However, the chance remained, and still remains. Based on developments since then, I’ve not changed my decision. It’s unfortunate for people who might want to read the book, but the ones who contacted me have been understanding.
It’s an odd problem. I can see not wanting to hurt people who have lost their homes and families to a war that is ongoing. I can also see standing firm and pointing out that Russia is not its leadership, and that the book is set in a different time and different place. I do agree that Gilbert and her publisher and agent have the right to make decisions about releasing her book.
Thoughts?
*Or was it a large number who used a form letter. The linked article from The Free Press (“Eat, Pray, Cringe”) talks about the pre-reviews in a bit more detail.
Image: Image by Steve Buissinne from Pixabay
Mad Genius Club 
36 responses to “Self-Censorship and the On-line Mob”
“To avoid legal issues” is a very reasonable reason to not publish a book in an area.
“A sudden wave of form-letter emails” is not, although it could indicate a good reason to make a choice.
One is because someone is out to get you, with reasonably possible concrete risks in the long term.
One is because someone is throwing shade at you right now. That can indicate a longer term attack is possible… or it can be a random feeding frenzy that’s really a half-dozen people with too much time on their hands.
Is it wrong of me to assume that this was actually Random Penguin’s decision and the author got shoved out onto the stage to make it official?
No, it shows that you’ve been paying attention.
The trashing of Gilbert’s book started with an organized weaponized campaign on Goodreads, a place that all of us should avoid like the plague and (ideally) completely ignore. No controversy coming out of Goodreads merits any attention whatsoever. Your honor should feel soiled just typing the name.
The first law of trolls is “Don’t give in to trolls”. The second law of trolls is “No one who might like your book gives a damn what trolls have to say.” Say it with me… “IGNORE TROLLS” — that’s even better than engaging them in a fight because they desperately crave attention from their fellow troglodytes — that’s how they keep score out among the pond scum.
Alma’s situation is not the same, of course — that’s a recognition of different laws, rather than dishonest assholes, and thus potentially a real risk.
Yes. I heard about the law, researched it, and found a case (then pending) where the law had been invoked. Given how that case was argued in that country’s court, and the differences in law codes between the US and the other countries involved, I opted for caution. It is unfortunate, but I did a cost-benefit analysis and the costs far outweighed the sales I’d seen in those countries.
The second law of trolls is “No one who might like your book gives a damn what trolls have to say.”
That’s true for you and true for me. I’m not sure it’s true for Gilbert. She writes for a very different audience than the MGC crowd. I’ll admit that I know only one of her books (Eat Pray Love), but that book at least seems designed to appeal to left wing women. And if that’s your audience, then staying on the right side of THE MESSAGE becomes very important.
I get frustrated when I see anthology call after anthology call saying things like, “If you submit something written from a conservative perspective, we’ll throw it in the trash where it belongs,” but this is the flip side. Non-leftist writers have a certain freedom that those on the far left just don’t.
Yup – non-leftists have the freedom to widely-range in telling stories and building characters, even characters who have opinions unacceptable to (Assume Critical Drinker voice) “THE MODERN AUDIENCE! My current WIP (about two-thirds done, which is an improvement on languishing half done as it has for a year or so while I worked on other projects) concerns a female abolitionist in the 1840s. In one chapter, a couple of Southern gentlemen defend and justify the institution of slavery to her, in much the same manner as antebellum slave-owners did. I can hardly wait to finish it, and for some easily-triggered reader to discover that passage and begin to REEEEEEEEE!
A controversy would do wonders for sales…
This sounds like a cry bully hit. Their argument that one should not write a story involving people fleeing Russia while Russia is invading Ukraine because that somehow makes Russia look good is stupid on the face of it.
It’s like arguing a book about southern blacks trying to escape the Klan should be barred because the Klan is bad and you can’t have them mentioned even as a villain. They’re just word hunting for victim status points.
That’s why I assume this is actually about some commie freaking out because it makes the Soviet commies look bad. 🙂
Russia did push some of the early “these guys were HORRIBLY HARMED because they are connected with RUSSIA!” right at first — mostly notable because of the amount of twisting going into the stories, like “fired for teaching on Russian lit” but was actually “one person emailed a question and the freebie lecture person quit in a huff, they rescheduled someone else” — so it might be an attempted distraction?
Could be, but I was thinking more along the lines of “western commies offended at the book for dissing Soviet commies, decide to false-flag as a bunch of indignant Ukraine supporters(1) to shut the book down.”
(1) I can’t imagine actual Russia-unfriendly Ukrainians having a problem with the book as described.
With a minor huff about hard to tell the actually working for from the fanbois, ditto.
Meaning actual Putinbots? Sorry, didn’t pick up on that earlier. Certainly a possibility 🙂
I was looking at my cousins, but flip side–yes.
Indeed – a crybully hit, possibly by a handful of bullies with very loud voices.
I know that as far back as Ivan the Terrible, ‘Fleeing to Siberia” was something of a traditional way to get AWAY from the tsar when disputes get too crazy (there was at least one religious one under Peter the Great). And if you flee to Siberia you are NOT going to Gulag where they can control you so your odds are better. It has never been common. Moving anywhere without permission was a pain in the Soviet Union.
I think anyone who can defy the mob should defy the mob. Loudly. However I do realize that not all of us have J K Rowling’s bank balance and while I appreciate what she has done I will never judge someone for being prudent. Ever. I am prudent myself.
Yes. For various reasons, some people don’t have the resources, or don’t have the career stability to tell the mob to go pound sand. And resources can include “hiring body guards and 24/7 security” in some cases.
The biggest problem with dealing with these crybullies is that they’re very good at weaponizing social media and social interactions. They have far too much free time, “devil’s workshop” idle hands, amazingly thick rolodexes, and a huge amount of sock-puppet accounts that they can use to artificially drive up “engagement” for their cause of the day. And dealing with them eats up so much time that for normal, sane activities like actually writing your stories down.
Like the gal that would undo any change to Robert Spencer’s (the historian) Wiki page within 5 seconds of corrections being made, and also guarded major Wiki pages about Islam. Spencer finally had to sue to get her editorial privileges revoked. Talk about time on your hands.
I wonder if that was an early-generation bot of some kind, but still, yea…
In my worst thoughts, I wonder what would happen if they were sent to a re-education camp to learn how to interact with normal human beings…and failing terribly.
No, she was an actual person. Spender did a lot of research and proved it. She was Muslim, and spent all her tine “defending” Islam and attacking him, with her family’s approval. (Obsessed much?). I followed the whole mess, back when I was more active in that area.
I met the fellow who build Wikipedia professionally in Silicon Valley in its very early days. He would consider that a feature, not a bug — the creation of propaganda that was difficult to correct. He had no shame. Anything for the cause.
There are a -lot- of ideologically illiterate, morally bankrupt pukes in tech. They can code, they think that makes them Übermenschen.
Tech Bro is a term of disparagement for many reasons.
I lived in the San Francisco area, and any stories you heard about the dudebros that worked in the industry, especially if they were in finance or “masters of their universe” managers…there’s worse out there.
This is what I hear.
I do know one individual big in tech, whose moral degeneracy is absolutely epic.
More need not be said.
I consider that life to be its own best punishment, the individual probably is coming to agree. It isn’t going well.
That’s why we say never engage, never apologize. It is also sometimes useful, and fun, to delete them.
https://phantomsoapbox.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-iron-finger-of-deletion.html
It hungers…
The big issue is that you’re caught between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea-you don’t want to give the trolls oxygen, but you can’t just let them set the rules of the conversation.
Trolls are the a-holes who exploit the rules of the conversation to vex the participants. “But I followed your rules,” complained the camel.
Personally, after mocking them soundly for the stupidity of their comments, I delete every single further comment they post, and mock them for posting it. The worst one lasted five comments before running off to find better trolling waters elsewhere. That was the idiot I posted the Iron Finger of Deletion for. He needed a serious crushing, that boy.
That’s what the Lefties do at scummy iO9 and TOR.com, that’s what China Mike does at the Vile Hive. It works.
I add the mockery because I’m a vengeful bastard.
Oh no, I tend to just toss the trolls out on their ears as hard as I can if at all possible. They’re like hecklers to a stand-up comedian-you stomp on them like a cockroach, you wipe the remains off, then you forget about them.
I recall the Twitstorm hits against Rush Limbaugh, where apparently it was a half dozen people with Twitter scripts trying to look like 10,000. I’d stopped following talk radio, so never caught the resolution (if any) of that one.
On the one hand, Random Penguin/Lefty author, so I don’t care. They f-ed around, now they get to find out. Boo hoo, bitchez. Go bankrupt faster, please.
One the other hand, publishing fiction set in Russia right now is simply idiotic. Fight all the anti-Russia propaganda on every single media outlet? Ridiculous. No point. Change the location to Latveria or Krasnovia and move on.
On the gripping hand, who cares what “Ukrainian flag on my Twitter page!” imbeciles think? It might be worth writing something about Russia just to make them REEEEE!!!! That’s always fun.
To sum up: I don’t care, that person is an IMBECILE, and I don’t care.
Personally speaking, what I will always find interesting is how the Internet’s script flipped on Putin when Russia passed anti-LGBT legislation.
Within five seconds, he went from being a hilarious meme, despite his shady and dictatorial actions, to being Literally Hitler. (Of course, you also had the equally idiotic people who suddenly decided that he was based and trad, despite his shady and dictatorial actions, but that’s another story.) The whole thing has just been painfully hilarious to watch.
I think he has a glass jaw. He strikes me as someone who needs to have himself photographed repeatedly riding a horse bare-chested while toting a totall real you guys rifle bigger than my Mazda while looking for bears to wrestle mano-a-bearo because just existing as a man is not enough, he needs to make absolutely certain everyone knows exactly how tough and strong he is. Supposed KGB training aside, I’ll bet he’d be the second or third fighter in a game like Super Punch-Out. Even I could beat him, and I had a tough time with Bald Bull and could not beat Kid Quick. He’s a politician, not a hitman, after all.
Thoughts? I don’t care. I am now completely politically incorrect. There are certain ethnicities that have shown a pattern of corruption and racism across the globe who I now despise and think they should be deported at least from here. Maybe some individuals are fine, but the overall pattern is unacceptable.
:Snort: That’s a very silly issue of definition, starting with ‘who gets to define ethnicity’ and then going on to it being based on your emotions.
The over-all pattern of history suggests that those who want to punish entire groups based on their own emotional decision with explicit recognition that they are deliberately targeting those who do not justify the emotional reaction should be removed. They cause too much damage.