Live data from Hacker News

A new moralism is gripping the literary world

persuasion.community

231–240 of 293 posts

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#231
post #212
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The online scans are illegal. The fact that your first recommendation is to advocate breaking the law just so you can discuss a book , shows quite how totalitarian the situation has become.

That’d be an interesting fair-use case: criticism is a very solid exemption (i.e. I’d be very surprised if showing the offending images for review wasn’t upheld by the courts) but even if you look at the whole book the other factors are things like whether your use is educational, non-profit, or impacts commercial prospects for the rights holder. That last point seems especially relevant since they’ve very clearly to…

It would be an interesting case, but doesn’t change the situation.

You can’t distribute the book for people to read and criticize.

It really is censored.

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#232
post #197
post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can still find the six discontinued Dr. Seuss books quite easily Can you? Even used copies are now banned even on eBay. Where do you ‘easily’ find them?

They're still available on eBay in the larger anthologies like Six By Seuss. It's only the standalone that were removed and as I understand it that was because of the crazy bids they were getting. I assume they wouldn't have bothered if the reaction hadn't been so extreme.

What’s ‘extreme’ about people bidding high amounts for a now rare book?

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#233

When the right wanted to ban media, a quire reasonable counter argument was "you don't have to buy, or read, the things you don't like". Where's that argument today? Why is anything "problematic" an assault against society as a whole, automatically, as well as whatever underprivileged group its offensive to? Have humans lost the ability to tolerate the knowledge that someone, somewhere, may disagree with them? Or is…

[flagged]

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#234
post #15

I've noticed this too. The recommendations I'm now getting from my audible account are full of newly-published titles promoting wokism and other morally and intellectually bankrupt junk rather than the classic titles I typically go for.

Why is anything classifiable as "wokism" automatically morally and intellectually bankrupt junk? That sounds an awful lot like simply dismissing a broad category of opinions that may contain a reasonably moral/intellectual subset, much like the thing that wokism is being accused of right now.

I have yet to see the wisdom in anything recent.

Possible after a time something enduring will precipitate out of recent thought.

There is no shame in confessing having sold "wokism" short, should it prove other than so much folly.

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#235
post #66

I hate this kind of anti-woke reactionary stuff. ... but for aspiring writers, there is a problem. On the one hand, writers should write what they know. They shouldn't try to assume they know some minority's lived experiences. On the other hand, literature should be inclusive. That means including minorities, and not just as peripheral characters. We don't need more My Magical Gay Friend stories. I haven't heard a go…

> I haven’t heard a good discussion on how to reconcile this contradiction. The best way to reconcile it is to stop engaging in the fallacy of division. Literature should be inclusive. Not every individual work of literature needs to be inclusive of every identity. Yes, a cis-het-male-Euro-American writer writing about unique experiences of cis-het-male-Euro-Americans (where characters of other backgrounds are seen o…

Great literature transcends culture. Take Fiddler On The Roof, for example. People in... I forget, Japan maybe?... were saying "We understand why it's popular here, but why do they like it in America?" If you can reach to that level, it doesn't matter that you're a cis-het-male-Euro-American, or that you're a trans-gay-female-black-African. It won't matter if you set your story in America or Nigeria. Your literature will speak to lots of people in lots of different cultures and situations.

But if you're just a run-of-the-mill writer, your stuff won't transcend anything. Still, you should try to include the real variety of people that your setting really has, and to do so with as much understanding of those people as you can.

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#236
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This pulled quote, in isolation, might not be, sure. The question about this particular complaint is whether its meant exclusively or inclusively. Does a woman who has stopped menstruating stop being a woman? Is a woman who has never menstruated and never will, in fact, not a woman? What if these people feel in their person like women? How one reads Rowling's comment in light of these questions informs one's sense of…

Do you know of any other group of people who are menstruating and are not women?

Some trans men and non binary people. And many women don't menstruate.

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#237
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know of any other group of people who are menstruating and are not women?

Some trans men and non binary people. And many women don't menstruate.

>Some trans men and non binary people.

Those are biological females (women).

>And many women don't menstruate.

What is your point here?

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#238
I read sci-fi. The idea that you only "write what you are/know" is laughable. Sure, if you write a book with such offensive ideas about another culture or race, you're a terrible person. But if you research, interview, try to understand, and come at it for a work of fiction, that is what large swathes of fiction is!

I read books about spaceships, about robots, about humanity that's split off into different evolutionary groups.

I credit part of my immediate acceptance of LBGT+ and people on the sci-fi books I read as a kid, where changing your sex/gender was as simple as a 15 min visit to a shop (or similar), and the protagonists switched genders or sexs regularly. Hell, or some where neutral (in one case, they were neutral, because they used to be a warship, and the author used the female pronouns to describe all characters, even men! Great book series, by the way. Ancillary Justice was the first one).

Or with two characters fall in love, when they're not human, or not male and female or whatever.

One of my favorite authors (two of them, they're sisters, SK Dunstall) wrote some amazing male protagonists (and female ones). Not once while reading their linesman series did i ever stop and go "they shouldn't write about a male protagonist". Hell, at times their male protagonist was better written as a male protagonist than books I've read written by men!

There's a book on my reading list now, (to be taught, if fortunate) about humans genetically modified for specific environments, like space!

The discussions these books generate is important, in many cases. Some are meant to, others meant to just be enjoyed. Intent is important as is accurate research and characterization, when possible. Sure, if someone writes a book that's purposely harmful, or accidentally (but with a huge, disproportionate impact) harmful, then the book should be reviewed and maybe issues addressed to the author or by those who sell it. But only when its extremely harmful as a whole.

But the important thing is, these are all fiction. There's good fiction, bad fiction, and 90% of it is subjective. Fiction gives you the license to go beyond who you are, what you know, what ties you to the real world. And invites those discussions, invites people to learn more.

Re: A new moralism is gripping the literary world

#239
post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some trans men and non binary people. And many women don't menstruate.

>Some trans men and non binary people. Those are biological females (women). >And many women don't menstruate. What is your point here?

Woman most commonly refers to gender. Very few people know the sex of most people they meet.

The point is women isn't a synonym for people who menstruate even if you ignore trans people.

What sort of answer to your original question did you expect?

Post reply on HN