In what just may be the final straw that broke this camel's back, I can now officially declare that the world has gone mad.
According to Newsweek (remember them?), one terribly "woke" (a word I detest in this context) bookstore owner in Australia actually thinks it will make her little shop a safer place for customers if she quits selling anything written by JK Rowling. That includes, of course, the Harry Potter books as well as the books published under the Robert Galbraith pseudonym Rowling uses for her crime novels.
So how does this make her little woke-shop a safer place for her customers and their children? Well, according to the genius that owns the Rabble Books bookstore in Perth:
"...we want to talk about JK Rowling. We are always trying to make Rabble a safer space for our community, and part of that is trying not to put books by transphobes on the shelves, when we know about them."
Despite her obvious punctuation problems, this marketing genius goes on to say that all of that regained shelf space is going to be filled with comfort reads that are guaranteed to pull the community closer together by making them feel oh-so-safe as they browse her shelves. No longer will they have to look over their shoulders and wonder if a transphobic person might be sneaking up behind them:
"What I’d love to hear is your suggested alternatives - what are some queer and trans positive fantasy books for young people and crime books for adults?"
Please excuse the sarcasm, and don't get me wrong here. I have nothing against books featuring the "queer and trans" community. That's not really the point. With rare exception, I oppose censorship, and I agree that this woman can sell whatever she wants in her shop. What upsets me in this instance is the way she's going about it. "Cancel Culture" is a horrendous tool used by stupid people, and it's time that the rest of us stop condoning its use.
 |
| The Woke Genius, Nat Latter |
Evangelicals banned Rowling for the magical element. Now this? We can always choose to read or not read a book, but I do want to make that choice. Also, the word "woke" in its new context bothers me, too.
ReplyDeleteThe poor woman doesn't have a chance these days, does she? She's catching it from both extremes. Glad to see that I'm not the only one who grinds me teeth every time I hear "woke" used in that context.
DeleteWith you one hundred per cent, the world ahs officially gone stark raving mad.
ReplyDeleteIt's kind of like Pat Bertram said over on her blog the other day, it's impossible to write satire these days. Everything, no matter how ludicrous it may sound, is possible today. I suppose that's why fake news is so easy to spread.
DeleteThis- doesn't make any sense. I could understand it if the books actually had transphobic material in them, but I can't think of a single instance- which is why I was surprised when I first heard this of Rowling. It didn't come across in her work. So how is banning the books protecting people's feelings of safety... ? I mean, boycotting the material because you object to the author's stance is one thing, but that doesn't sound like what she's doing.
ReplyDeleteRowling made a perfectly sane and legitimate comment via a tweet a few weeks ago that got the cancel-crowd on her case. I don't even want to go into it here, but what she said was twisted in a manner that makes her sound like the most transphobic person on the planet. Some people take great glee in destroying the lives and/or careers of others because they are such losers themselves. That's what seems to be happening to Rowling.
DeleteJust shaking my head in disbelief. Dylan McDermott has a great spiel in the movie Home for the Holidays about the world going nuts. I can't quote it just now because it is in the Christmas closet.
ReplyDeleteI used to laugh it off, Nan, but I'm realizing that too few people are willing to point out this stupidity when they see it. We all are too nervous about being attacked by a mob of idiots these days.
DeleteIt sounds to me like she's just doing it for the publicity and to get people to notice her shop. But then I'm a little cynical these days.
ReplyDeleteShe probably knows her customer-base pretty well, but she sounds like quite the fool. After her "big" announcement, she called the cops on some fellow he challenged her decision and didn't want to leave the shop without a response. Totally non-violent, not even threatening, behavior and she called the law on him. He walked away before they got there. She's an ass.
DeleteOMG, talk about the world gone mad.
ReplyDeleteIn so many ways, Diane, in so many ways...
DeleteIt's funny how everyone has an opinion about EVERYTHING these days, but if someone dares to express an unpopular opinion they get totally berated for it. Doesn't make sense to me. We're all entitled to our own opinions - if you want people to listen to yours, you have to listen to theirs, even if you don't agree.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of separating art from the artist is also an intriguing one to me. There are plenty of actors, musicians, writers, etc. whose life philosophies and choices I don't agree with, but that doesn't stop me from enjoying their work. Personally, I can love one without loving the other. I know not everyone feels this way, though. And, to be fair, I don't feel this way about everything. I can't separate certain politicians' public lives from the things they say and do in "private" ...
what appalls me is that the very people who proclaim themselves to be the most tolerant are the very ones least likely to be open to listening to an opinion differing from their own. That happens so consistently that it doesn't even surprise me anymore.
DeleteAs for separating "art from the artist," I find, personally, that it's easier for me to do that with authors than it is with actors or singers. The latter two just come across to me as bigger phonies...I suppose it's because I have to look at them while they are performing. There are certain actors I can't stomach anymore because they appear to be such imbeciles when they are in their street clothes. I know that's kind of illogical, but...