Leave a comment

Comments 47

Edgar Wright’s Polite Exchange With The Censors About The Word "Cunt" cartesiandaemon August 2 2013, 11:45:33 UTC
I don't know why I find it so hard to believe the system works :)

(I'm not sure if I do approve of "cunt" or not -- he's right that a non-aggressive non-sexual use isn't really a problem, but the perception that it's always aggressive and sexual is a self-fulfilling prophecy.)

Reply

Re: Edgar Wright’s Polite Exchange With The Censors About The Word "Cunt" andrewducker August 2 2013, 11:52:07 UTC
That's not everyone's perception though. And I'd rather _not_ make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Not that it matters either way around how I feel about the word - it's the actual usage across the country that matters.

Reply

Re: Edgar Wright’s Polite Exchange With The Censors About The Word "Cunt" alitheapipkin August 2 2013, 13:07:22 UTC
I think it's good that someone can manage to have a sane attitude to it. Personally, the perception that the BBC seems to have, that it's the most offensive word in the English language regardless of context, is something I find quite offensive. But then I read 'Cunt: A Declaration of Independence' at an impressionable age (and have shocked people I regarded as pretty liberal by having a copy on my living room book shelf).

Reply

apostle_of_eris August 3 2013, 01:15:37 UTC
An example I get great use from is Dick Gregory's autobiography. (a black comedian who fought the good fight politically for decades) He titled it Nigger, and dedicated it to his mother, " . . . so if you ever hear that word again, you'll know they're advertising my book."

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

andrewducker August 2 2013, 12:11:37 UTC
The one in italics? Yes.

Reply

del_c August 2 2013, 14:47:18 UTC
What does his complaint really boil down to? He would like to be paid lots of money to do what he likes to do; many people would sort of like him to do it, a bit, but not enough to pay him lots of (or sometimes, any) money; the negotiation often ends with the would-be employer saying "well, if you don't want to do it for us for little or nowt, don't let the door hit you, we know plenty who will".

Well, welcome to the world of the entire working class majority, mate.

Reply

moussaka_thief August 3 2013, 09:58:40 UTC
Agreed. I worked in publishing for many years and you just can't make a living selling the occasional book anymore. It isn't that the publishers, editors, designers etc etc are making a killing - far from it! You have to supplement your income or use your books as a jumping off point for talks, paid articles, events and so on. Even when authors and publishers made more money from books, most authors had to do other things to survive. Writing is not, and has never been, a career you into expecting a comfortable living....

Reply


philmophlegm August 2 2013, 12:09:19 UTC
I saw your link to the "Writer would like to be paid..." not long after I'd seen Saladin Ahmed (whom I follow on twitter) post this:

http://www.saladinahmed.com/wordpress/cap-in-hand-the-darker-side-of-the-writing-life/

You assume that once someone has had a successful novel published that they're set. Ahmed's first novel got both Hugo and Nebula nominations (deservedly so, I really liked it - 'Throne of the Crescent Moon', middle-eastern flavoured fantasy), but he can't actually afford to go to WorldCon - or even childcare.

Reply

andrewducker August 2 2013, 12:12:18 UTC
Oh yes. Writing is only a good way to make money for the 0.1%

When I posted it to Twitter yesterday I got this back from Graham Linehan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE

Reply

philmophlegm August 2 2013, 12:29:04 UTC
I think Ellison is right.

It's part of a wider issue that certain aspects of the way creatives are rewarded for their work don't actually work, and the rewards go to various middlemen - publishers, editors etc. Don't get me wrong, all of these people are valuable, but the balance of power doesn't seem right.

I don't see an easy solution for this, but other industries that aren't that dissimilar seem to reward the creatives adequately. Major sports pay their athletes for example. Maybe sports agents are more effective than literary agents.

Maybe the problem is that it's a buyers' market. There are so many people out there trying to write the next great novel that it's difficult for genuinely talented writers to stand out without big marketing pushes from the publishers. (The J.K. Rowling pseudonym novel is a perfect example of this.)

Reply

andrewducker August 2 2013, 12:32:00 UTC
Oh yes. You don't expect people to make a living on selling 500 copies of a book, but that's apparently very good for most authors.

Reply


Genocide is good for you channelpenguin August 2 2013, 12:09:52 UTC
Ahem. The stronger survive the experience, the weaker don't.

Reply

Re: Genocide is good for you drdoug August 2 2013, 20:36:46 UTC
That seems the -obvious explanation for what they claim to have found, but they only give it a brief and unclear consideration in the article.

Reply


erindubitably August 2 2013, 12:38:21 UTC
They ended up hiring her, which is pretty cool.

Reply

philmophlegm August 2 2013, 13:18:27 UTC
Yeah, very.

Reply

gonzo21 August 2 2013, 12:42:56 UTC
That cosplayer landed a job with the game publisher as the official face of Bioshock Infinite at events and things, thanks to her amazing costume.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up