The censors get lucky
Katha Pollitt on Elizabeth Gilbert’s self-cancellation:
Sometimes, the censors get lucky. The latest writer to cancel herself is Elizabeth Gilbert, the immensely popular author of Eat, Pray, Love and other memoirs, novels, and self-help tracts. On Monday, Gilbert announced on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook that she is “making a course correction” and pulling her upcoming novel, The Snow Forest, from publication. The novel, she explains, is about a Russian family that withdraws from Soviet society in the 1930s and remains isolated for many years in Siberia. “Over the course of this weekend,” she writes, “I have received an enormous massive outpouring of reactions and responses from my Ukrainian readers, expressing anger, sorrow, disappointment and pain about the fact that I would choose to release a book into the world right now, any book, no matter what the subject of it is, that is set in Russia.”
Which makes no sense. None. Zero. What about a book on how Putin clawed his way to power? What about a book on the state murders he has made happen? What about a book about the murder of Anna Politkovskaya? I have such a book; should I get rid of it?
What about a biography of Chekhov or Tolstoy or Balanchine? What about a book about Stalin’s Terror? What about a book documenting how New York Times journalist Walter Duranty prettied up Stalin’s Terror in Ukraine???
Katha goes on:
The publication announcement describes the book as “a dramatic story of one wild and mysterious girl in a pristine wilderness, and of the mystical connection between humans and the natural world.” To tell you the truth, it sounds rather silly to me. But since no one commenting has read the book, how do they know it romanticizes the Russian soul and admires Russia? After all, the book is about Soviet dissidents in the time of Stalin who are so horrified by their society they hide away from other Russians for many decades.
It sounds extremely silly to me, as does the eatpraylove book, but not as silly as her decision to cancel herself.
I support Ukraine in its self-defense against the Russian invasion. I don’t understand the infatuation of a part of the left with the USSR or Putin’s Russia, or their weird claim that Russia, currently invading a sovereign nation, is anti-imperialist. I can understand why Gilbert’s Ukrainian fans would be upset about The Snow Forest, as it exists in their imaginations. But I can think of better ways for Gilbert to have responded, beginning with “I think you’ll be surprised when you actually read the book.”
As for Hitler, should people really have stopped reading German literature when the Nazis came to power, let alone any book, by anyone in the world, set in Germany—in any time period? My mother, who was Jewish, took German as a student at New Utrecht High in Brooklyn in the 1930s—did memorizing poems by Heine make her a Nazi sympathizer?
Should Russian and German and Ukrainian people now stop reading US literature because of Trump? Reading anything is an act of rebellion against Trump, who can’t even manage to read the Presidential Records Act.
Just want to say at the outset, I support the right of people to publish silly books. There is, unfortunately, a rather large market for silly books.
I find this entire “you can’t write about something that bothers me” quite disturbing. Self-censorship is even more dangerous, in my mind, than state censorship. State censorship is able to be fought against, flouted, rebelled against. You can thumb your nose at it by obtaining the works through an underground and reading them, if you are willing to put yourself in danger by the writing or reading thereof. But self-censorship is pervasive, and hard to find unless the writer announces it…like here. In this current world, announcing self-censorship seems to have become a badge of virtue, proof that you aren’t like those white people and imperialist governments.
I will admit, I wrote a few books that I have not given to the school library because of their critical of religion themes. I plan to donate them now, because it will not cost me my retirement income. I know that’s probably cowardly of me, but at least I am ashamed of it. However, anyone who wanted to know if I had written books critical of religion could easily find them on Amazon or Barnes and Noble websites.
The brave new world of social media has given those with the inclination the ability to target books and their authors. I can understand why authors are afraid of this, as other writers have been dropped by their publishers for expressing things that upset some who felt oppressed and made a stink about it. (Several gender-critical writers come to mind who got cancelled themselves.). The problem isn’t really with the writer acting out of fear though, it’s with publishers who refuse to stand by those they publish. Or college administrators who won’t back their faculty when they express wrong thoughts, for that matter. The heckler’s veto over what is allowed to be heard and read is something publishers have given into and it stinks.
I just don’t get the need to censor what topics people can write about. I guess there need to be narrow exceptions for certain types of writing, but for really obvious reasons those should be exceptionally narrow. There certainly should not be an outcry over the taste, sensibility, or gender status of the author*; or the nature imaginary world they create that should lead to banning of their work. I think it’s quite sufficient to ignore and not buy work that is not to your taste, Or if you really dis/like it to critique and review it after the fact. Authors who find their work is constantly getting panned and not selling tend not to publish eventually. That is also a form of self-censorship, but at least it’s based on feedback of what people have written, not what they think you might be writing.
* With the exception that TW should not be eligible for awards or prizes dedicated to women.
Oh lort, this stuff makes me roll my eyes. I will be the among the very last of those who would swoon and admire Russia, given that my mother is Estonian and literally fled for her life from Soviet murderers in 1944, but that being said I do know some individual Russian people whom I like and admire. But I made the terrible, TERRIBLE mistake of saying something about that on facebook back when the current hot war in Ukraine started when Putin invaded–something like “Putin is an asshole and a murderer, but don’t forget that not all Russian people support him”–and for that sin, a rather well known Ukrainian journalist on my friends list, with whom I had previously had many enjoyable and enlightening interactions, commented something along the lines of me being a “woke lefty bullshit-artist asshole” and promptly blocked me. And she KNEW my family’s background, as I had posted about it extensively (along with various rantings about Russian autocracies over the centuries).
Amusingly, when I now post and complain about the danger of transgender ideology, it never fails that someone pops into the comments to call me a “far right nazi extremist transphobe asshole”.
Rob @ 3
I think it’s more that they tend not to get published. They can always self-publish (which doesn’t mean they can always find readers).
does it make me a beyond the pale Putin tool to muse about American self righteousness, given how American foreign policy has killed millions? Or Europeans, whose history of colonial depredations is exceeded only by their propensity for fractional murder? one can also note there were a lot of Ukranians who participated in as well as being victims of Soviet terror? I just don’t like this group identity stuff, be it victimhood olympics or communal guilt.
Re; the withdrawing the book situation. It seems a lot of the people supporting the book’s suppression are English-speaking Ukrainian activists on social media. Check out the response to this LitHub article criticising Gilbert’s decision. It’s full of comments from Ukrainians criticising the article and supporting the withdrawal:
https://lithub.com/the-internet-thinks-elizabeth-gilberts-decision-to-pause-her-book-was-not-a-good-one/
Sample comment:
This is typical white WASP colonialist view of everything outside the first world countries, except, as we see, Russia. Why do Westerners love Russia so much? Perhaps because they see in Russia the same colonialist as they are. As the Ukrainians say, “a crow will not peck out the eye of another crow”
It looks like the language of American Identity Politics is moving into Eastern Europe.
I oppose Putin, his regime and his invasion of Ukraine. But I don’t see how stopping Gilbert’s book will help the people of Ukraine.
James @ 4
I was bothered by the way the war was covered and discussed as well. It seemed that Ukraine, a country at war, could do no wrong, and was represented by lots of photos of smiling fresh-scrubbed young female soldiers or civilians. It just seemed a little too pat, a little too packaged. There is a clear bad guy in this conflict, but even so, the boosterism was unnerving.
I suspect any book, good or bad, would sound silly trivial etc. when described in a short single sentence.
Art that is set in Russia or made by Russians is not bad just because it is presently led by a dictator. Shunning what is good about the place and its people only enlarges his share of the public perception of the nation and its history. I think it is good, now more than ever, to remember the moving and the amazing that has arisen from there. The nation is not Putin.
I got a quite nice Russian secret Santa gift from a Russian two years ago and I still wish the state of Russia no longer existed… Publish the damn book!
Ophelia, thank you for writing about this.
I think about it a lot because I’m Russian, and if I finally finish my book, my magnum opus, I’m afraid I won’t be able to publish it.
I left Russia because of the war, but I could try to publish there… But it would obviously be censored. And I’m afraid I won’t be able to publish it anywhere in the West because of Ukrainian activists (just because I’m Russian) and illiberal leftists (because the book may not be inclusive enough, or because of cultural appropriation, or many other things like that).
Only somewhat related but this reminded me of a Twitter conversation yesterday. A friend was saying she admires a particular band and its lead singer, who is trans. She was immediately swooped upon with horrified indignation….. by trans activists.
They couldn’t believe that she would like a band with a member who happens to be trans because she is so “transphobic”. They said she must either by lying about liking the band (to what end?) or secretly a trans activist. I suppose it’s a corollary of the idea that people must now despise Harry Potter because of their skewed opinion of the author.
Very telling, though. The gender critical people involved just said “if you like the music, who cares whether the singer is trans?”
latsot,
Much like liars expect others to lie and swindlers expect others to swindle, in my experience Manichean thinkers expect others to be Manichean. It just doesn’t enter their heads that others might see shades of grey where they see utter evil, and the band with a trans member is Good and liked by Good people, while your friend is gender critical and therefore Evil.
Holms,
Suzanne Moore is a big fan of transgender punk rock legend Jayne County, which surprises some people.
I quite enjoyed the 2022 remake of “Hellraiser”, and thought actress Jamie Clayton did a fine performance as the villain “the Priest” aka Pinhead. The fact Clayton was transgender wasn’t an issue for me.
Again, I was speaking to my 19-year-old cousin last year. She said she doesn’t agree with J. K. Rowling’s views on the transgender issue, but she still reads Rowling’s books. Some of her friends were angry with her and said enjoying Rowling’s work in any way is an endorsement of Rowling’s politics. She replied to one of those friends that said friend is a Brexit supporter. Said friend still kept on reading Rowling’s work when Rowling was anti-Brexit, so my cousin thinks she should be allowed the same latitude.
I would have to throw out nearly my entire vinyl collection if I demanded purity from the artists (even still I just can’t bring myself to buy any Led Zeppelin albums, and cringe at how George Harrison and John Lennon have been given passes on their abuses of their 1st wives.)
Yes, I do have bands I really like that are all in for TQ. It’s just part of the whole human mess.
Also it makes a difference whether the art in question has disputable content or not. Music qua music doesn’t, really, while writing of course does. It’s pretty easy to bracket the politics of a violinist or drummer, less easy in the case of a writer (whether of novels or song lyrics or editorials).
Semyon @ 11 – If/when you do finish your book and seek a publisher, keep us informed. Maybe we can help.
Probably *old* news to most people here: but I saw mention of how *one* of the actors in the Harry Potter movies said he declined to stab Rowling in the back over her positions on the Trans issue. The implication was that he disagreed with her, but wasn’t going to denounce her for holding a position he disagreed with.
Leave it to me to state the obvious. There are very few if any currently existing polities that have never committed conquest, genocide, repression, or colonialism.
Hm, I’m suddenly in the mood for some (Stalinist) Schostakovich.
Thank you, Ophelia! By the way, it’s a fiction book, I’d say it belongs to the fantasy genre, although it’s more science fantasy (I’d even say biological fantasy, haha). And It’s based on Slavic myths and folk beliefs.
Re #18, I went looking, and found this interesting list from the Daily Mail:
Which Harry Potter stars have backed JK Rowling – and who has spoken out against the author amid transgender controversy?
In addition to discussing the comments from the three main stars, it lists half a dozen actors, some of whom express disagreement with Rowling, but who nonetheless support her and her work. Jason Isaacs (Lucius Malfoy) is mentioned as not wanting to “stab her in the back”.
Well that sounds interesting.
Semyon, I suspect you’d find a few pre-release readers here if you wanted comments…
Bruce C: Indeed. Some have more egregious histories than others. Russia/Soviet Union. it takes real delusion for putin to believe Ukranians were eager to run back into the arms of lurrrviiing Mother Russia
Rob,
Good, I’ll keep that in mind