That's some fucking racism right there pal. Hacker news is triggering too, implying a male of russian or Chinese descent. When will you learn?
On Being Blacklisted
31–40 of 201 posts
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#32Nobody owes you a free publishing platform. He expects that by calling the publishers of some journal "craven" and "scared", that he's going to elicit a reversal of their decision, and positive response from them, something to the effect of "oh, how dare we deny your article, woe unto us, we were so dreadfully wrong"... Really?
The biggest takeaway that I got from his December essay, and this one? A sense of self righteous entitlement, that whatever he writes must be of such great import and merit that of course publishers should be falling all over themselves to print it. Has he taken the time to sit back and consider that maybe he's not as critically important to the English language literature scene as he believes himself to be?
In general, insulting your potential publishing platform only serves to burn bridges. So, good luck with that, guy.
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#33Is there anyone that wants to defend this blacklisting of the author by the Chicago Review for writing this article [0]? That is, not to reconfirm that they do indeed have the right to do so, but to argue that they are right to do so? Maybe some of us can avoid this fate if we understand the grounds for it, since they decline to make it explicit. What did he say that was not just wrong, but so wrong that he should no…
Yes? I've just read the article. It's a collection of crypto-fascist dog whistles about race; it barely merits being called an opinion. (It is an example of why the academic personnel pool needs the thorough cleaning it's currently getting.) Anyone who declined to associate with the author would be right to do so. There aren't many people who don't understand what this kind of article is really about. The Chicago Rev…
> It's a collection of crypto-fascist dog whistles about race;
I read it having already seen you say this about it, looking for those, and, like the other sibling replies to you, did not find them. Could you please point them out?
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Dr. Seuss estate decided not to publish some of his works anymore because they believed they were no longer appropriate. I stand by the right of a work's owner to say, "you know, I wish this hadn't been released and I've decided not to sell it."
Except the author did no such thing. A corporate entity IP owner did. Those entities are subject to a myriad of whims, much the same as Nike or Apple. It's laughably hypocritical in an era where pop culture is full of all kinds of 'offensive' material. Go here, right now [1] to the Billboard Hot 100 and cruise down that list. Over 50% of those songs are chock full of brutal misogyny, racism, sexism, violence, and all…
> Except the author did no such thing. A corporate entity IP owner did.
The author is dead, so couldn't. The IP is owned by Dr. Seuss Enterprises, which was founded by his wife. It's not some random corporation who swooped up the copyrights at an auction, but literally the organization created to manage them.
> Go here, right now [1] to the Billboard Hot 100 and cruise down that list.
Presumably those IP holders have decided to continue selling their stuff, which is also their right.
> To think that EBay is 'banning' Dr. Seuss
They're doing no such thing. They've decided to stop selling the specific books that are being pulled from publication.
Every last bit of this stuff is garden variety free market capitalism: an IP holder decided to stop publishing certain works, and a market decided to stop selling them. Because I support capitalism, I have to support their rights to make these kinda of business decisions.
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#35Nobody owes you a free publishing platform. He expects that by calling the publishers of some journal "craven" and "scared", that he's going to elicit a reversal of their decision, and positive response from them, something to the effect of "oh, how dare we deny your article, woe unto us, we were so dreadfully wrong"... Really? The biggest takeaway that I got from his December essay, and this one? A sense of self rig…
Indeed, and similarly we are permitted to discuss publishing platforms' editorial decisions and merits thereof.
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#36Is there anyone that wants to defend this blacklisting of the author by the Chicago Review for writing this article [0]? That is, not to reconfirm that they do indeed have the right to do so, but to argue that they are right to do so? Maybe some of us can avoid this fate if we understand the grounds for it, since they decline to make it explicit. What did he say that was not just wrong, but so wrong that he should no…
Yes? I've just read the article. It's a collection of crypto-fascist dog whistles about race; it barely merits being called an opinion. (It is an example of why the academic personnel pool needs the thorough cleaning it's currently getting.) Anyone who declined to associate with the author would be right to do so. There aren't many people who don't understand what this kind of article is really about. The Chicago Rev…
Can we please not redefine fascism to mean “something I don’t like”? This article has nothing at all to do with the power or primacy of the state.
We have tons of pejoratives in the English language, why do we have to homogenize every word with any negative valence into yet another pejorative stripped of all nuance?
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Dr. Seuss estate decided not to publish some of his works anymore because they believed they were no longer appropriate. I stand by the right of a work's owner to say, "you know, I wish this hadn't been released and I've decided not to sell it."
It's closer to "you know, I wish this hadn't been released and I've decided that no one should be able to sell their copies of it ." According to wsj: > Online marketplace eBay Inc. said it is working to prevent the resale of six Dr. Seuss books that were pulled earlier this week by the company in charge of the late author’s works because they contain offensive imagery.
eBay decided themselves they didn't want to be associated with it; the author's estate didn't dictate to them that nobody is allowed to trade in it. They're still on Amazon, of course, as are a bunch of racist bumper stickers and a billion other SKUs.
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#38Is there anyone that wants to defend this blacklisting of the author by the Chicago Review for writing this article [0]? That is, not to reconfirm that they do indeed have the right to do so, but to argue that they are right to do so? Maybe some of us can avoid this fate if we understand the grounds for it, since they decline to make it explicit. What did he say that was not just wrong, but so wrong that he should no…
Yes? I've just read the article. It's a collection of crypto-fascist dog whistles about race; it barely merits being called an opinion. (It is an example of why the academic personnel pool needs the thorough cleaning it's currently getting.) Anyone who declined to associate with the author would be right to do so. There aren't many people who don't understand what this kind of article is really about. The Chicago Rev…
I'd submit that someone with the name of Aaron Kunin is unlikely to be a fascist.
From the essay:
"Last year when I proposed to teach a seminar in which the syllabus would include essays by Ralph Ellison, two of my colleagues wrote to the Curriculum Committee, as well as to the dean and the president of the college, objecting that it would be “literary blackface” for me to study Ellison."
Here we have professors talking like children, and this is an example of what Kunin complains about.
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
You die on the hill you fight on > Blacklisting is an evil in itself, corrosive to the ideal of an open society, and to professional relationships in the small world of literary publishing in which this story takes place Author wants to take one for their team. Everyone will let them. If it's about the ideas, then you can always get those out there. If it has to be attached to your name, well, you're in the realm of…
I should've been clearer: Your comment implies the author "just learned" what pen names are. What makes you think that?
> What makes you think that?
Nothing, it was exaggeration
Re: On Being Blacklisted
#40Is there anyone that wants to defend this blacklisting of the author by the Chicago Review for writing this article [0]? That is, not to reconfirm that they do indeed have the right to do so, but to argue that they are right to do so? Maybe some of us can avoid this fate if we understand the grounds for it, since they decline to make it explicit. What did he say that was not just wrong, but so wrong that he should no…
Yes? I've just read the article. It's a collection of crypto-fascist dog whistles about race; it barely merits being called an opinion. (It is an example of why the academic personnel pool needs the thorough cleaning it's currently getting.) Anyone who declined to associate with the author would be right to do so. There aren't many people who don't understand what this kind of article is really about. The Chicago Rev…
I would most likely have downvoted your reply if I'd encountered it in any other context, but I upvoted it because you were replying to an invitation to defend the magazine's decision that purported to be curious about why someone would defend it.
I really don't like the pattern of asking "I'm curious whether anyone would seriously advocate opinion X that's controversial in this community, and why" and then downvoting people who try to seriously advocate opinion X. (I know people can't downvote direct replies, but it seems like this pattern indirectly discourages curiosity and conversation and encourages a sort of official party line.)