Annals of woke literature
A while back I saw a link at Powerline to an article in The Critic entitled, “On the chopping block.” I idly clicked on it, wondering what it was about, and saw that it concerned one of those all-too-common flaps over some author’s use of statements some group or other finds objectionable. This began a cascade of events that led to the resignation of Sir Philip Pullman, president of “the august writers’ institution the Society of Authors.”
These are Brits, in case it wasn’t obvious by now. But it could just as easily have taken place here, or in Canada, or just about anywhere in the Anglosphere. A bit of inside baseball; I hadn’t ever heard of that “august society” before. Nor had I heard of Sir Philip Pullman, or the book in question, or its author Kate Clanchy. But I became curious to learn what her offensive words or phrases had been, and so I quickly read the article and discovered that they’re not even quoted in it, although they’re described this way: “ableist” and racist. The book itself is entitled Some Kids I Taught and What They Taught Me, and it won something called the Orwell Prize.
Orwell? Yes, that Orwell:
Each year, our independent panels award prizes to the writing and reporting which best meets the spirit of George Orwell’s own ambition ‘to make political writing into an art’.
So what language did Clanchy use that was so terribly offensive? I read another entire article on the brouhaha and then a third one before I found anything that gave me a more precise idea. It’s as though her words were so toxic that they couldn’t be mentioned, even in an article covering the episode.
But here they finally are, in an article in The Guardian entitled “Kate Clanchy to rewrite memoir amid criticism of ‘racist and ableist tropes’”.
Rewriting a memoir to suit current political demands – what could be more deserving of an Orwell Prize?:
Kate Clanchy is rewriting her critically acclaimed memoir after widespread criticism of her portrayal of her pupils, particularly children of colour and autistic children.
It follows reports that the publisher, Picador, had been in discussions to update future editions of the Orwell prize-winning book Some Kids I Taught and What They Taught Me, after days of online scrutiny over offensive passages, and was criticised for not going far enough in its initial statement.
Readers and fellow authors had been critical on Goodreads and Twitter of descriptions in the memoir, including 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”.
The award-winning teenage author Dara McAnulty, who is autistic, shared the passages and tweeted: “Some people didn’t believe me when I shared some of my education experiences and how teachers felt about me … We can understand how you really feel about us.”
Oh, the horror!
When Clanchy’s book was awarded the prize, the group described it as “moving, funny and full of life”. The publishing world and the woke twitterati seem bound and determined to leach those characteristics out of all future offerings.
Sensitivity readers are one of the fastest-growing subsets of editors in publishing, particularly in fiction. They’ve been around for a few years now: here’s an account from 2019 by a writer who hired a sensitivity reader even though his book had already been accepted for publication:
The idea of a sensitivity reader, the newest profession birthed in our politically correct times, instinctively does not sit well with writers. Because writing is not about protecting people’s feelings—it’s about provoking them. And nobody pursues a career in the arts because they like being told what they can and can’t say with their work. So I, like many writers, watched the influence of these “editors” grow with significant consternation. In theory, sensitivity readers simply review looking for anything that might offend the arbitrary sensitivities or transgress the invisible fault lines of the moment. In practice, I saw what looked like hordes of censors with the power to block the publication of Young Adult novels. I even watched as one professional sensitivity reader—a black, gay man—had his own novel sunk for not being sufficiently sensitive to diversity concerns.
https://quillette.com/2019/10/01/the-problem-with-sensitivity-readers/
None of those things quoted seems particularly offensive.
Bad people being aggressive.
Kate:
My point exactly.
I confess I may be mistaken, but I think you put one too many ‘n’s in the headline…
:-9
There are NO Truths that someone doesn’t absolutely hate.
So, do you think anyone hired “sensitivity viewers” before displaying “Piss Christ” or “Virgin Mary In Elephant Dung”?
:-/
}}} There are NO Truths that someone doesn’t absolutely hate.
I hate that…
— Robert A. Heinlein —
It’s not about offensive tropes, it’s about control and the power that extends from control. The Left so needs people to defame, that they will invent out of whole cloth ‘offense’.
Tell them to go pound sand and if they react violently, finish what they start.
I’m re-reading a favorite British novel written in 1917 and set between 1900 and 1914. The casual anti-semitism and occasional misogyny are jarring. Do I wish some editor had removed those references in 1917, or that someone would re-issue this book this year with the offending parts removed? I do not. It’s where the author was coming from. It’s good to know people like him were prone to certain errors; I can certainly learn something about comparable (though likely different) errors I’m prone to myself.
I didn’t realize Philip Pullman had joined the ranks of Sir Mick and Sir Paul…
A friend recommended his book, “The Golden Compass” (outside the US, known as “Northern Lights”). At the time I had become some sort of born-again Christian. I didn’t have to read too far into the book to realize Pullman had an axe to grind against Christianity, so I lost interest in reading him.
However, Pullman is an old-school liberal — freedom of speech and all that — so it’s not surprising he would get into trouble with today’s woke world.
@ huxley > “I didn’t have to read too far into the book to realize Pullman had an axe to grind against Christianity, so I lost interest in reading him.”
I had seen that observation, so didn’t spend any time on the books, despite their positive reviews. However, I had acquired a copy of the video adaptation of “The Golden Compass” and watched it to see if it was acceptable for the grandkids anyway.
The treatment didn’t engender any angst religion-wise, but it was very badly scripted, without sufficient antecedents or explanations for much of the plot-line and using confusing dialogue; poorly acted; and had somewhat cartoonish special effects.
I ditched it on those grounds.
AesopFan:
Interesting! And entirely likely.
Aside from my thorough disenchantment with the underlying SJW notions of Hollywood. I’m struck by how shoddy the work is and how far down the standards have fallen.
By the gods of the Original Star Wars Trilogy…
Interesting pullman sr was an army officer killed in kenya in 1954, when phiilp was 6
I’m re-reading a favorite British novel written in 1917 and set between 1900 and 1914. The casual anti-semitism and occasional misogyny are jarring.
Wendy Laubach:
Nine years later with an American novel, you’re talking about “The Sun Also Rises” and I’m with you on that count too…
Damn good novel, chaps.
Yet again: neurotic (mostly) young (mostly) women at the forefront of Making The World Worse.
Re Pullman: I read the first volume of his series. It had some rather intriguing and appealing features, but the extreme anti-Christian and specifically anti-Catholic theme made me uninterested in reading further. Basically a somewhat shallow village atheist type, I thought, despite the imaginative scope of the fantasy.
@ Neo > “So what language did Clanchy use that was so terribly offensive? I read another entire article on the brouhaha and then a third one before I found anything that gave me a more precise idea. It’s as though her words were so toxic that they couldn’t be mentioned, even in an article covering the episode.”
I continue to be intrigued by this common characteristic of Woke complaints: omitting the actual language or action or behavior that is said to be so horrific it merits ostracism from public life forever, if not incarceration (and for some execution).
PA Cat’s link to an article on Sensitivity readers — which is frightening, by the way — led to another Quillette post remarking on one of those omissions, in the process of detailing a long list of attacks on Wokism’s heretics.
https://quillette.com/2021/06/24/standing-up-to-the-gender-ideologues-a-quillette-editorial/
Another good Quillette piece, but I don’t think the newly-found sanity from the Brits has traveled across the pond yet.
https://quillette.com/2020/08/05/at-the-nhs-and-bbc-important-steps-toward-restoring-balance-in-the-gender-debate/
>> I don’t think the newly-found sanity from the Brits has traveled across the pond yet.
It may actually be a factor underlying the urgency with which Progressives in the US have been attempting to institutionalize their Child Sexuality & Gender Identity agenda.
The reforms discussed in that article were set in motion about a year ago with the Bell v Tavistock ruling and the revelations arising from that investigation. Those were soon confirmed by investigations and clinical reviews in the EU resulting in changes to pediatric care in line with the UK’s.
There’s been almost no acknowledgement of this fact in the US media, nor has there been a response from the NIH that I’m aware of – though it was the NIH that funded the development and promotion of the ‘affirmation model’ as well as the primary hormone therapy protocol for minors. They also launched the clinical network that implements it domestically, through the SGMRO.
Instead we’ve seen intensified efforts to expand and compel the inculcation of Gender Identity ideology in schools and Federal intervention to prevent states from regulating those treatments.
I don’t expect sanity to take hold any time soon in the “Biden” administration.
(To the contrary, they simply MUST keep those crises a’ comin. And the war on the American family is particularly well-suited.)
In any event, the US military had better expedite that “preferred-pronoun” training. PRONTO…. (That means, by yesterday.)
“Russian Airlines Told To Prepare For World Without GPS”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russian-airlines-told-prepare-world-without-gps
Correction:
Turns out the US military has until the fall to complete “preferred-pronoun” boot camp:
“Putin brags his new nuke is UNSTOPPABLE: Russian warmonger boasts his ‘Satan II’ nuclear missile ‘can break through ALL modern defences’… and will be aimed and ready to strike Britain ‘by AUTUMN'”—
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10747929/Putin-brags-new-Satan-II-nuclear-missile-break-modern-defences.html
Someone mention Britain?…
“More than 5,000 parents go to war with Welsh government over plans to teach children as young as THREE about ‘sexual attraction’ and gender identity”—
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10747825/Parents-sue-Welsh-government-plan-teach-children-young-THREE-sexual-attraction.html
Time to get out the blue war paint.
a little remarked note about Clockwork Orange, is alex and the rest of the droogs operated in a Soviet controlled Britain, except in this case they do it to themselves, of course the EU having been designed by an Italian communist Aldo Spinelli, might explain things,
How about the bible? Was Cain Ableist?