# The NYT Ignores the Widder Sontag **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 29, 2004, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088 "2004-12-29T13:57:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/1 "2004-12-29T13:57:34Z")
Just sent this correction in to the _Times_: “In your front-page obituary of writer Susan Sontag, you neglected to mention that she is survived by her partner of more than two decades, photographer Annie Liebowitz.” Now, I happen to think both Sontag and Liebowitz are pretentious, overrated hacks, but that does not negate the fact that they lived together and were all but legally married for decades. If Sontag had been married to a famous male photographer, that would have rated a whole paragraph in itself! The _Daily Telegraph_ wrote, “Susan Sontag never re-married, and her close relationships with several women provoked speculation; in 1999 she wrote an essay for _Women_, a compilation of portraits by her longtime friend, the photographer Annie Leibovitz. ‘I don’t talk about my erotic life any more than I do my spiritual life,’ she said. ‘It is too complex and always ends up sounding so banal.’” All the _Times_ said was that she was “photographed” by Annie Liebowitz. Is that what the kids are calling it nowadays? Were they afraid Annie would rush into their offices and take badly lit, badly composed photographs of them to publish in _Vanity Fair_? ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/2 "2004-12-29T14:27:28Z")
They’re just jealous of somebody who’s a good enough writer to use “erotic life” and “banal” in the same sentence and not have it sound dirty. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/3 "2004-12-29T15:45:05Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > All the _Times_ said was that she was “photographed” by Annie Liebowitz. Is that what the kids are calling it nowadays? Were they afraid Annie would rush into their offices and take badly lit, badly composed photographs of them to publish in _Vanity Fair_? Worse yet, they feared she’d bring badly lit, badly composed erotic photographs of a 71-year-old woman! :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/4 "2004-12-29T16:36:45Z")
**Eve** - how “out” were the two of them? I mean, regarding both their sexuality and their relationship. It’s very possible that I’m wrong, but women of their generation might have preferred to be regarded as just close friends, at least in the press. In which case the NYT is just behaving tactfully, as would be expected. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/5 "2004-12-29T16:42:35Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > **Eve** - how “out” were the two of them? The AP obit yesterday of Sontag mentioned she was survived by her longtime companion Annie Liebowitz; they lived together for well over a decade and were frequently seen in public together. It was one of those “everyone knows it, but no one makes a big deal out of it” things. ---
**Author:** ![Mehitabel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mehitabel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mehitabel)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/6 "2004-12-29T16:50:15Z")
While it might be a shame that their relationship was hidden, I don’t know if either wanted to have that aspect of their lives define them. I don’t know if they wanted their names and work to be viewed through the filter of gender politics that lesbians have acquired recently. I would guess that neither wanted “the famous lesbian writer/photog” in front of their names. It’s pretty silly to think that a Sontag who would have a husband and two kids mourning her today would write differently from the actual one, but there’s plenty of people incapable of seperating the love life from the life of the mind. I do hope that Annie took some pictures that she’ll share with us when she feels like it. ---
**Author:** ![moriah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b2d939/32.png) [@moriah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moriah)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/7 "2004-12-29T16:51:56Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > Now, I happen to think both Sontag and Liebowitz are pretentious, overrated hacks, but that does not negate the fact that they lived together and were all but legally married for decades. Wow. You **are** Dorothy Parker reincarnate. ---
**Author:** ![Arwin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Arwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arwin)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/8 "2004-12-29T17:08:59Z")
Imho NYT, which I generally respect for bringing balanced and informed news reports, pretty much screwed up here. Well spotted. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/9 "2004-12-29T17:11:00Z")
> [@Mehitabel](#): > > While it might be a shame that their relationship was hidden, I don’t know if either wanted to have that aspect of their lives define them. But a newspaper’s job is to report the facts, and the fact that a famous writer was, essentially, married to a famous photographer belongs in her obituary. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/10 "2004-12-29T17:33:50Z")
> [@Eve](#): > > But a newspaper’s job is to report the facts, and the fact that a famous writer was, essentially, married to a famous photographer belongs in her obituary. I’ll agree that a newspaper’s job _should_ be to report the facts, but I’m not sure that _they_ know that anymore. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/11 "2004-12-29T17:53:43Z")
> [@Mehitabel](#): > > While it might be a shame that their relationship was hidden, I don’t know if either wanted to have that aspect of their lives define them. Nobody _ever, ever_ says that about straight people. _EVER._ I’m sure there are many straight people whose marriages and so forth “don’t define them,” but they still rate a mention, and nobody thinks anything of it. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/12 "2004-12-29T17:54:37Z")
When I was in high school, I did a report on Audre Lorde for an English class. I was a bit surprised to find that in all the big author bio reference books at the library they mentioned that she was divorced with two kids, often giving her ex-husbands name and the years of their marriage…but spared not a word for her in-all-but-the-law wife. That was lo these many years ago. I’d have hoped that things would have changed since then, but I guess not. ---
**Author:** ![betenoir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/258eb7/32.png) [@betenoir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/betenoir)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/13 "2004-12-29T18:07:39Z")
:eek: I had no idea they were a couple. (Of course, I don’t get out much.) A photographer living with the person who wrote “On Photography”? That takes balls :D. (Not to be quite so flippent. My heart goes out to Annie.) ---
**Author:** ![amphibian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8797f3/32.png) [@amphibian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amphibian)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/14 "2004-12-29T18:15:51Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Nobody _ever, ever_ says that about straight people. _EVER._ I’m sure there are many straight people whose marriages and so forth “don’t define them,” but they still rate a mention, and nobody thinks anything of it. I agree. Anyway, newspapers make an issue of it with their euphemisms and deliberate cover-ups and suchlike. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/15 "2004-12-29T18:42:33Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Nobody _ever, ever_ says that about straight people. _EVER._ I’m sure there are many straight people whose marriages and so forth “don’t define them,” but they still rate a mention, and nobody thinks anything of it. Despite some people’s protests otherwise, unless you are self-centered to a sociopathic degree your relationships DO help define you. One cannot develop a picture of you that is not superficial without knowing a lot of things you might prefer were kept private. Then again, I assume Sontag and Liebowitz would prefer they were not the first people reporters called to get “a lesbian’s take” on an issue. Perry White: “Kent, Nathan’s has changed their brand of mustard! This is a big story so I want you to get Harvey Fierstein’s take on it, Lois to get Sontag’s, and have Olson take some photos. But whatever you do, keep an eye on Olson and Fierstein; this has to make deadline and we can’t have any delays because those two started cuddling!” ---
**Author:** ![missbunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/76d3ee/32.png) [@missbunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/missbunny)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/16 "2004-12-29T18:54:58Z")
Does the NYT mention other people’s partners in the same situation? If they do, then maybe Sontag or her family had expressed a wish that any story about her not include that facet of her life. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/17 "2004-12-29T19:09:13Z")
> [@missbunny](#): > > Does the NYT mention other people’s partners in the same situation? If they do, then maybe Sontag or her family had expressed a wish that any story about her not include that facet of her life. I really doubt it, but if that was the case it’s the paper’s job to tell them to shove it and then report it anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/18 "2004-12-29T19:10:21Z")
Well, I can see a line of reasoning given the facts outlined in this thread. (Bear in mind, I know nothing of Sontag except that Crash Davis mocked her in ‘Bull Durham’) Even if her sexuality was an ‘open’ secret in NYC the fact that the writer herself never publicly admitted to it puts the obit writer in a bit of a bind. They could simply assume that Sontag was closeted by her on choice and therefore chose to respect that choice in her obit. I don’t know that their reasoning went in such a way…but I could see it occuring. ---
**Author:** ![missbunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/76d3ee/32.png) [@missbunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/missbunny)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/19 "2004-12-29T19:20:04Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I really doubt it, but if that was the case it’s the paper’s job to tell them to shove it and then report it anyway. Unless Sontag and Leibowitz were openly gay and openly acknowledged themselves as a couple, then what they do in the privacy of their home is not public information. If she had lived with a man for 20 years but not ever publicly called him her boyfriend/lover/companion/whatever, then how is the NYT supposed to know whether they were just close friends & roommates or having hot monkey sex? Also, I would venture it’s possible that Sontag knew someone at the NYT and if she did make a request that her private life not be part of her obituary, they might very well not publish it. It’s not like it would be the first time that a newspaper did a favor for someone. I imagine similar favors are done all the time if withholding the information isn’t going to hurt anyone. It’s not like anyone NEEDS to know, definitively, that Sontag was having a lesbian relationship. If the job of the newspaper is to report facts, then reporting on a relationship of which they have no actual proof is only speculation. Maybe the NYT has higher confirmation standards than the AP. Plus, what Jonathan Chance said. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2004, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088/20 "2004-12-29T19:24:08Z")
> [@missbunny](#): > > Also, I would venture it’s possible that Sontag knew someone at the NYT and if she did make a request that her private life not be part of her obituary, they might very well not publish it. I _know_ the people at the _NYT_ Obituary section (yeah, like you’re surprised), and that would have been the surest way of getting their relationship into the _headline_. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nyt-ignores-the-widder-sontag/282088.md?page=2)