Want to know what really pisses-off an author?
The list is long, I admit it. Bad reviews, puny advances, MS
Word, Goodreads, cat hair, hipster bookstore clerks, people who boast that they
buy only used books…I could go on.*
But the one thing that REALLY sends an author into the
vein-popping bourbon-swigging spouse-beating nether regions of self-destructive
fury is this: His (or her) book gets banned by people WHO HAVE NOT READ THE BOOK.
It happens a lot. And not just in the world of children’s
literature. Do you think that the bluenoses in the U.K. and U.S. who banned
James Joyce’s Ulysses back in the
1920s read the book? Nah. They just read the sexy bits of Molly Bloom’s Soliloquy—just
enough to get their puritanical juices flowing through alarmingly intimate and unfamiliar
channels—and they screeched “Obscenity!”
Authors like to talk about context. For example, if a YA
author uses the word fuck, she wants the reader to understand why she did so.
And if a parent at a school board meeting stands up waving a copy of her book
and shouts, “This book contains the f-word!” the author feels that some
allowance should be made for the fact that 50,000 non-f-words surrounded it,
and that no other word was available to effectively replace it.
I say, “That’s f-worded up.” The problem is not that the
parent in question did not read the whole book. Context doesn’t mean a rat’s
ass to such people. Context won’t change the mind of someone who is mortified
by a particular word, or by the sexual orientation of a character, or by a
disagreeable religious or political position, or by the mention of a dog’s scrotum.
The problem is that some people feel
their personal sense of outrage can and should be imposed upon their extended
community.
Me, I am easily offended. I go through life in a constant
state of sputtering outrage. When my neighbors erect a “wrong” political lawn sign, I feel
rage, sorrow, pity, disdain—the whole self-righteous package. But I don’t tear
down the sign. Okay, I did, when I was eight years old, on Halloween, knock
down a few Nixon signs—but only when they gave me Circus Peanuts.
Ahem. Back to my original topic: the outrage felt by authors
whose books have been challenged by people who have not read them. (Here comes
the questionable metaphor.) Imagine you are a chef who has prepared, at great expense and
effort, a seven course tasting menu. You have worked on it for months, and it’s
only $16.99** (wine pairing not included). You present your lovingly designed
menu and some guy looks ahead at the third course and says, “Foie gras! I do
not eat foie gras! Foie gras is evil, and the chef should be banned from
serving such food.” Whereupon he storms out of the restaurant, organizes a
picket line, and leaves the other diners picking disconsolately at their first
course, which happens to be locally sourced beet root carpaccio, to which no
one objects.
Okay, the foie gras hater*** has the right to express his
opinion, and the other diners have a right to become uncomfortable in the face
of his moral outrage. But the chef?
THE CHEF IS FURIOUS. And he has a cleaver.
** Coincidentally, that’s what my latest novel goes for.
*** And the geese.
I'm going to try to post something every day for Banned Books Week. Celebrate by reading something that makes you unreasonably angry.
I'm going to try to post something every day for Banned Books Week. Celebrate by reading something that makes you unreasonably angry.
No comments:
Post a Comment