Scif/Fantasy Authors who hate scifi/fantasy and/or their fans.

[sologdin]

The big fish does not care which way the little fish swims".

that's incredibly badass.

+1 TP.

[Grack21]

Grack, can you just strike through your posts instead of deleting them? I think it's better form to let people read what you wrote -> you can always disavow or change your opinion in the course of the conversation.

Well, a bit late now, but thats probably a good idea in the future although when I change my opinion/statement/etc that's just fuel for the trolls.

[Contrarius]

Well, a bit late now, but thats probably a good idea in the future although when I change my opinion/statement/etc that's just fuel for the trolls.

**sniff**....**sniff**....I think I've just been called a troll.....where's my hankie??

;)

Seriously, though -- there's nothing wrong with changing your mind on a topic. The important thing is to be HONEST when you do it. Don't bluster, don't lie about things you've said previously, don't try to evade the truth, don't make up lame excuses -- just "man up" and say something like "yup, I changed my mind, I too am capable of learning." See? Easy peasy. :)

[Contrarius]

The big fish does not care which way the little fish swims".

that's incredibly badass.

+1 TP.

Actually, though, the big fish probably DOES care -- since the big fish is likely to be EATING that little fish in the near future. ;)

[jagilki]

dropping my usual joking mode and going slightly more in the direction I think Grack was aiming for. I've never been around other genre readers much. My Fathers family are heavy readers, but the majority of them read Westerns and Westerns only. And up until I decided to join these forums I haven't bothered too much on "keeping up" with Authors and their beliefs/attitudes/etc. So, I can't speak too much as to real world situations, just hypothetical.

If there was an author I enjoyed reading and he came out and publicly bashed Fantasy/Sci-Fi/SFF/Whatever and it's fans, I'm not sure if I'd be honestly upset or not. If I enjoyed the books, I'd probably be just a tad more forgiving. An authors opinion of me doesn't bother me that much. Just the reading.

That at least I think follows the original question of the thread.

Now as to some of the stuff that's followed latter on in it. I've read books buy people who's views I don't agree with, I've enjoyed some of it. Since I enjoy hunting and fishing, I've read books by authors who lead a more.... meatless lifestyle. As long as they don't let it invade the tone of their books and I still enjoy reading them, why should I let it bother me?

[Sci-2]

If the former, how do we decide who gets to be offended? There's always a lot of talk about Card, but there's lots of material out there in scifi/fantasy that is "offensive" to religious people, too...does that get considered or is this a one-sided cleansing?

And if the latter, how can we ever agree on what to toss since everyone's viewpoints and tolerances are all over the place in relation to each other?

We can never agree on what should be tossed, which is why legally enforced censorship is wrong.

If enough people want me to read a book, I'll buy it used or get it from the library. I mean, I know I'll likely read some Naipaul in the future but I won't be putting money in his hand.

[Grack21]

First, I apologize for being such a raging asshole. You may have not have noticed, but OSC is a bit of a sore spot with me. Still no excuse, so I apologize.

If enough people want me to read a book, I'll buy it used or get it from the library. I mean, I know I'll likely read some Naipaul in the future but I won't be putting money in his hand.

This.

[Contrarius]

First, I apologize for being such a raging asshole. You may have not have noticed, but OSC is a bit of a sore spot with me. Still no excuse, so I apologize.

Twice in my life I've had surgical procedures which required the temporary immobilization of one hand or the other. It's no fun being one-handed, even if that only lasts for a week or two or three. So no worries!

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

So let me get this right. You walk up to an author, even as established author, and ask him his favorite story. So he just responds that he enjoys his own. So far, not egotistical so far as i am concerned. Comfortable with his own writing, lacking humility, but certainly not Joe Abercrombie levels of asshole.

But then you...well...blithely continue on by stating that someone else's story in the book is better than his, while you are getting HIS autograph. And then you take umbrage? I mean fuck man, what did you expect? I have no actual idea if he's a douche, but you basically spit on him. He expects you to want to talk about his work, not some other dudes.

No offense, but that was fairly clueless.

Glen Cook would have kicked his ass.

Don't get me wrong -- I don't think Glen Cook is an asshole. But he does lean towards being a crotchety old bastard on occasion, as in this interview.

http://fantasyhotlist.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-glen-cook-interview.html

Anyway, met him at the same Con where I met GRRM and was cheese steak knighted, and he was a good guy. But no B.S.

[jagilki]

Maybe it's a generational thing but I don't get what you are getting at by showing us that interview.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Maybe it's a generational thing but I don't get what you are getting at by showing us that interview.

You don't think Cook was rather a asshole in that? His response to about half the questions was essentially that it was a stupid question:

"After thinking about it for about 3 days I think I've finally figured out what you were asking." That's not exactly friendly.

[jagilki]

.... I was riffing on his answers.

[polishgenius]

I never saw the problem with that interview. Crotchety it may be, but it's also very funny.

Same with Pratchett's one that was mentioned before, although I read it without the context of his manner at the time. I've never seen him come across as particularly arrogant in interviews, though.

[Zach H]

That Cook interview is probably my favorite thing about the internet.

[peterbound]

Ahh, but now you have changed your argument significantly. Your original argument ran something like this: we should not buy books written by authors with offensive views. Your new argument runs something like this: we should not buy books WHICH CONTAIN OFFENSIVE MATERIAL. Do you see the difference there? Now, neither argument is a slam dunk -- but at least the second argument addresses the concrete written word being purchased, rather than attacking the person holding the views. So, given your new argument -- you now posit that we should not buy OSC's books, because you believe that they contain anti-homosexual propaganda. Please provide evidence that, for instance, Ender in Exile contains anti-homosexual propaganda.

I can't type a long reply, as i'm on a 48, and i'm knocking this out while my truck is at the library.

I will not buy or support OSC in any way. I'm a firm believer in voting with yoru pocket book, and i will not support that ass hat at all. OSC is a dick hole, and deserves all the hatred thrown at him. By celebrating him, and supporting him as an author, you give the man a forum in which to spread his vile thoughts. Many around here gave up on Moon when she spoke out on Islam or Bakker when he spits out his percived mysogiony, i see no difference between that, and this. For the same reasons i would not buy Glenn Beck's fiction, i won't support OSC. I see no difference in the work and the author. I will occasionally make exception for 'essential' works from the past, but i don't rank EG up there with them, and let's be honest here, the man's not that great of a writer.

As for the Anti-homosexuality in his works: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/sep/08/outcry-hamlet-novel-gay-paedophile

[peterbound]

First, I apologize for being such a raging asshole. You may have not have noticed, but OSC is a bit of a sore spot with me. Still no excuse, so I apologize.

This.

Never apologize for being an asshole. Embrace that shit.

[Contrarius]

As for the Anti-homosexuality in his works: http://www.guardian....-gay-paedophile

First, that is **A** work -- singular and specific -- not "his works" -- multiple and general.

Second, that link you posted isn't even a review of his book. It's a review of a review -- third hand intel.

I'm pretty sure that nobody on this board has actually read the Hamlet thing for themselves. If I'm wrong about this, somebody please speak up. Otherwise, we don't really know how homophobic the thing actually is. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. I, for one, am very loathe to lean on tertiary sources when it comes to such vitriolic accusations.

Heck -- a few years ago there was a big blowup about the Democratic Party using the song "Captain Jack" at their national convention. All the Wise Conservative Talking Heads were going on about how Terrible it was to glorify the drug culture through this song. Well, if you actually LISTEN to that song, you'll know that it's actually an ANTI-drug song.

That sort of misrepresentation goes on all the time. We all know that OSC is homophobic in real life. But I have yet to see really good proof that he exhibits his homophobia in even *one* piece of his literature -- and none that he does so in *multiple* works.

I can't type a long reply, as i'm on a 48, and i'm knocking this out while my truck is at the library.

I will not buy or support OSC in any way. I'm a firm believer in voting with yoru pocket book, and i will not support that ass hat at all.

And that's absolutely your prerogative. But I get very uncomfortable when people start acting as though the author and the work were the same thing, and start trying to mandate their personal comfort level as a standard that others should meet.

Incidentally -- if OSC actually *did* write homophobic cant into his fiction in a general sense (multiple works, strong message, etc.), then I would probably not buy those books myself. To compare, I would not seriously consider buying books written by Ann Coulter -- because she actually does spread her hateful rhetoric throughout every book she writes. However, I am perfectly willing to separate fiction from real life, and separate the non-hateful message from the otherwise hateful messenger.

[peterbound]

First, that is **A** work -- singular and specific -- not "his works" -- multiple and general.

And yet you're willing to accept this man is a good/relevent author based on *one* of his books.

And 'his works' must also include his essays and lectures. Same as Twain, Rand, or even fucking Kevin Smith. The whole person concept.

[Contrarius]

And yet you're willing to accept this man is a good/relevent author based on *one* of his books.

Wherever did you get that idea?

OSC was my favorite author for years. (No, he isn't any more.) Trust me, I've read much more than one of his books.

And 'his works' must also include his essays and lectures. Same as Twain, Rand, or even fucking Kevin Smith. The whole person concept.

Nope. He's not selling his essays and lectures to me. He *is* selling his fiction to me.

[genegirl]

I think it is hard to be a popular author, I cannot imagine having to deal with some of the crowds. A writer is often walking a thin line in what they say and do. One writer I know as a friend does not shake hands, people can be unpredictable.