I think some people think that’s implied however, that if you don’t join the boycott you’re immoral. It’s not been explicitly stated but there are clearly strong feelings on both sides.
In the entire Darkover series there is one and only one episode that was explicitly the rape of a young boy, and that’s already been mentioned: Dyan Ardais abusing Danilo Syrtis. However, there is a LOT of sex going on in the rest of the series: heterosexual, homosexual (most of it consensual), heterosexual rape, group sex, sex with aliens, a few tertiary characters that had sex with human/animal hybrids… If school parents object to sex in stories then no, Darkover won’t be on the approved list for reasons completely unrelated to the personal life of the author or her husband.
My issue is, and has always been, with being pre-emptively censored from telling the truth about her in a public forum, such as a recommendations thread.
Like I said, I* wouldn’t* shit all over a “What’s your fave Darkover book” thread even now, nor would I judge those who posted in it. I may personally divest myself of her work, but I’d still be aware that Heritage is a better work than the 90s Dry Towns crap, for instance, and if people want to discuss that, well, that’s what CS is for.
I would judge an IRL friend, but you people aren’t my friends, I don’t care what you do, nor do I have moral expectations of you, as long as you let me have the same freedom.
What a repugnant attitude. I don’t believe being molested, raped, abused, or otherwise suffering in life should give you a get-out-of-jail-free card for abusing other people in the same way. If anything, I think it would be just a little bit worse, for a survivor to perpetrate the same kind of abuse knowing how awful it is. But mostly, I think that people who do inexcusably horrible things don’t deserve a lot of compassion, absent any repentance and attempts at atonement.
Which “the boycott” would that be? Because all I can remember in this thread is people stating that they personally would be boycotting Darkover/Avalon, or that they’re ambivalent to one degree or another.
I think his statement was a bit too broad-brush–plenty of survivors of abuse don’t go on to commit abuse themselves–but it’s also pretty clear that this pattern does occur, that survivors of abuse commit abuse at a greater rate than folks who weren’t abused. That, I think, is what he was referring to, that one of the scars sometimes created by abuse is a belief that the abuse was normal.
That’s certainly your prerogative, but I don’t think someone who does feel compassion for Bradley is repugnant, as long as they don’t use the compassion to excuse her behavior, which Frylock explicitly did not do.
Rereading this, I think it’s better to say I don’t have the same moral expectations of you as I do those I choose to befriend. I still expect you not to *actually be *murderers, thieves, rapists or people who talk in the theatre. Just so you know. Impossibly high standards, I know, but I have faith in you.
The problem with that is that she had ample time to find out that it wasn’t normal, and, as far as I know, didn’t apologize or repudiate her views. At some point, what happens to you has a child stops being a valid excuse for how you behave as an adult.
I’m on record as saying that I do not withhold sympathy from anyone for any extended length of time. But I don’t see any reason she deserves any more than the default sympathy that everyone gets. I see no reason to feel especially sorry for her.
As faithfool says, there are too many people in similar situations who rise above it. I was just recently reading about a teen who figured out he was a pedophile and started a support group only for those who have never offended. He actually let himself get disgusted by his actions and stopped making excuses. He gets special sympathy, because he’s fighting his urges and doing what’s right.
All this woman deserves is the basic “didn’t realize what she was doing was wrong” caveat that nearly all people get.
Plus, remember, this seems to inform her work in a very direct way. It’s not like she’s some Lewis Carrol, who, if he was a pedophile, you pretty much can’t tell in any of his works. (“The Walrus and the Carpenter” aside–you wouldn’t interpret it that way unless you already suspected).
I’m not saying I’ll never read her works, but in the same way I might read Mein Kampf, to better understand the mindset of someone who could justify such evil. (not that I’m comparing them in any way. Just because I also give Hitler the standard caveat, it doesn’t mean I leave his actions and results out. He’s still worse by multiple factors of magnitude.)
I don’t think there’s that clear a divide between the two. Is it possible to write fiction that is completely divorced from the views of its creator? Sure. But it’s rarely the case, and even rarer if the work is actually well-written and deeper than a children’s book.
It has been argued in both threads that her pedophilia and pedophiliac apologetics do in fact inform her work. There are parts that directly deal with pedophilia in a sympathetic light–parts that even people who don’t know about the author would feel uneasy about. Sure, you can make excuses for it, but it’s still there. The only alternate interpretation is “it was acceptable at the time when the work is set,” which is not all that compelling considering the author’s viewpoint.
To put it another way: her works are already at the very least questionable, and knowing about the author tips it the rest of the way for a lot of us. For a work that is not morally questionable, perhaps the author’s beliefs and actions would not so easily inform the work. The same could go for if the author’s beliefs and actions were not so horrible.
In other words, what has been shown is that there is no inherent cycle, but it has not been shown that the abused are not more likely to become abusers themselves. It’s just that abuse is unnecessary to cause one to be an abuser, and being abused does not necessarily lead one to become an abuser. It’s still possible that being abused is one of several factors that can led one into becoming an abuser.
And none of that covers whether the adult considers it to be normal or is otherwise less affected by it.
And, note, I agree with you that, if she were abused, that garners no addition sympathy from me. Not when she had ample time to figure out it was wrong.
So far I have heard mentioned only ONE specific scenario in her entire body of work that has a direct molesting connection, and that was adult male/adolescent, not a kiddie-diddler. And, as has been mentioned in other threads, that Dyan Ardais/Danilo Syrtis episode is NOT universally seen as “sympathetic” to the molester. The other characters are not as virulently “hang the bastard!” as our modern society is but the rapist’s actions had consequences.
So where are these “parts” plural? Can you name them? Which novel, which characters, which scenarios? It’s not that I in any way approve of child molesting but if we’re going to make assertions let’s be able to back them up.
I have read the entire Darkover series of novels, most of them more than once. The Ardais/Syrtis scenario is the only one “pedo” I recall (which, strictly speaking, was ephebophilliac. Which fits more in line with Breen’s offenses than strictly pedophillia). Lots of underage girls in the same age range being married off against their will, so maybe that’s what you’re referring to? I don’t recall any of that being seen sympathetically either, in fact, in some stories it seems half the Renunciates come from that category of characters.
I think peoples’ knowledge of her personal life are influencing them to the point where some folks are seeing what they want to see rather than what’s actually there.
This is the first I’ve heard of this. Just goes to show how far I’ve removed myself from the book world. I really need to go back to reading more.
I probably read a bit of her works but not too much. I can’t remember which ones. If I had any desire to go back and read them its over now.
I’m usually all for separating the work from the artist. I don’t care if someone is an asshole. I don’t care about the antics of Cruise or Gibson. It doesn’t effect how I watch their movies at all. I don’t care if someone has different politics than me. I will eat the fuck out of some Chick-fil-a. If I had a hobby I would probably go to the lobby. But I guess my line is drawn at child rape. I would not be able to separate the work with from that.
If I were into such works I would probably be able to read Anne Perry but my knowledge of what she did would cloud my opinions on the works. If only she didn’t write about murders. Write what you know I guess.
The poems of MZB’s daughter linked in the OP were absolutely chilling. After reading that I don’t see how you can remain neutral to anything she did including her books.
Planned Parenthood has done a lot o good in this world, and I can’t think of any current policies of that organization that support her eugenics ideas, so I know my money is going to be used to further the good that they do and not the ideas she had so long ago. If people stop supporting Planned Parenthood, others will suffer for it.
Let us compare that to the case of MZB, who directly brought harm to others and aided and abetted at least one other who did the same. Reading her works isn’t necessary to help our fellow humans-it is merely a means of entertaining one’s self while passing the time. If you support her works you give money, directly or indirectly, to a person that aided and abetted both her and her child-molesting husband.
I think trying to compare Planned Parenthood and the great good it does for us because of some ideas it’s founder had far in the past that they do not support to MZB because of some illegal, immoral and downright ugly actions she performed , whose works direct benefit an enabler of said crimes, both undeservedly demeans the good name of Planned Parenthood and elevates the rightfully sullied name of MZB.
I was referring to the Darkover series, and I’m pretty sure I’ve explicitly said “Darkover” pretty much every post where it is relevant. I don’t recall reading Mists of Avalon or her other Arthurian works so if the offending passages are there, yes, please point them out but please don’t assume I have read a book or a series unless I explicitly say I have.
More than one. More than a minority of novels in a series. And as I pointed out, the one instance I can recall in the Darkover series of man-boy rape was NOT portrayed sympathetically so, really, I can’t see where this is promoting such activities on any level.
Given how many novels incorporate rape on some level if I refused to read anything that touched on the subject a hell of a lot of literature would be off limits. Chelsea Quinn Yarbo seems to have at least one rape or attempted rape in every novel of the Saint Germain series - does that mean she’s promoting rape? Does that mean she’s been raped herself? Frankly, I don’t know if she has or hasn’t been.
I mean, it was pretty effing creepy when I learned that the “child” vampire Claudia in Interview with the Vampire was based on Anne Rice’s dead daughter but I didn’t stop reading her work over that (no, I stopped reading it because of other reasons).
So, since I haven’t read the Arthurian series she wrote - is there child rape in every single one of those novels? Molestation in every one of those novels? Since it’s the Arthurian realm we’re talking about it’s a given there’s brother-sister incest since that’s been part of the mythos from the beginning - should I assume Marion had sex with her brother, too? Or that the originators of the Arthurian legends were screwing their siblings?
No, that is not my motivation here.
If people are going to make accusations they should be able to back them up. Not “everyone knows” or “I’ve heard”. If there is evidence you should be able to name the novel, the characters, and the incident. Chapter and verse if you will. Specifics. Because I really loathe vague accusations, it’s personal peeve of mine. Especially when the vague accusations are passed on by people who have never read those books.
You don’t actually read the cites presented, do you? I don’t mean the links, I mean, like in my OP where I point out that one of the children that Breen raped (for three solid years) and that MZB point-blank admits to covering up was ten (10) years old.
I understand you’ve got some sort of weird emotional attachment to those books, but at least accept the facts about the case.
You got the first sentence wrong. It should be ''I think that some people’s investment in the fairy-tales that Bradley told are influencing them to whitewash Bradley and Breen’s multiple crimes".