Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think this story provokes a "yuck" response in a lot of people and that makes people want to say "everyone is equally culpable." I get it. This kind of intractable interpersonal conflict is so unpleasant to be around. If you've ever had something akin to this happen in your social circle or at job or in a school you attended, you can probably relate to the feeling of "oh my god, just stop."
But usually in these situations, both sides have behaved kind of badly from the start. Like one person was a bully, but the other person was also gossiping behind their back or something. At least, that's been my experience. I keep waiting to hear that's the case here too. I keep waiting to find out exactly what it was that made Sonya Larson decide that Dawn Dorland was a villain worthy of a take down. The race angle had me waiting to read that Dawn had been engaging in micro aggression, had a history of negative behavior toward Sonya or POC in general, that kind of thing. The fact that it's been weeks and I still haven't seen anything like this though, makes me think it's not out there.
And that leads me back to what we know, which is that Sonya and her friends were really, really annoyed with Dawn for talking about her kidney donation. And by my count, she was punished for this "crime" with:
- Nasty gossip and backbiting from people who called themselves her friends and were nice to her face
- A thinly veiled takedown of her kidney donation in Sonya's story
- The theft of a letter she wrote from a private FB group
- The potential mishandling of a sexual harassment claim at Grub Street
- Literal years of gaslighting from Sony and others about all of the above
- A lawsuit initiated by Sonya
- Getting dragged in the NYT and on Twitter by Sonya and multiple bestselling authors who Dawn almost certainly counts among her literary heroes
If this happened to me, I can tell you for certain I would not have gone after Sonya as aggressively. No way would I have done things like ask a publisher to pull the story or offer me space to publish my own response. But it's not because I'm nicer or kinder or more emotionally stable than Dawn. It's because I lack the self-esteem and the effing cajones to stand up for myself like that. If this happened to me, I'd probably just crawl away and stop writing and focus on treating the depression, anxiety, and PTSD this situation would definitely cause.
So, no, I don't think Dawn is now the Bad Art Friend.
Well said. I also think that class comes into this. The writer class -- the Hobbes essay above is an example -- cannot see another UMC member as the wrongdoer. Look at Hobbes, look at Kolker, not to mention Ng and Gay and the smarmy sexist Almond. The commonality among all of these authors is that they are MC and UMC successful authors who are contorting themselves to come up with a world view where Dawn did something "as bad." I think it is because they cannot abide by a world in which a lower class writer attempting to climb into their world isn't somehow wrong, somehow at fault in some way. There is a deep need on their part to "both sides" this because that protects a class member and -- conveniently -- keeps a lower class interloper out.
Disagree that Hobbes can be lumped in with that group. He's a writer but not successful the way Chee, Gay, or Kolker are. He is mostly known now as a podcaster, because You're Wrong About and Maintenance Phase both got really popular in the last couple years. His writing day job is more mundane and lower level (and likely not that well compensated), and unlike these other folks, he's never published a book and certainly not a bestseller.
If you are familiar with his podcasting work, he just likes doing this kind of deep dive into controversial issues to try and sort them out. I disagree with his conclusion here, but I think he's very much acting in good faith.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think this story provokes a "yuck" response in a lot of people and that makes people want to say "everyone is equally culpable." I get it. This kind of intractable interpersonal conflict is so unpleasant to be around. If you've ever had something akin to this happen in your social circle or at job or in a school you attended, you can probably relate to the feeling of "oh my god, just stop."
But usually in these situations, both sides have behaved kind of badly from the start. Like one person was a bully, but the other person was also gossiping behind their back or something. At least, that's been my experience. I keep waiting to hear that's the case here too. I keep waiting to find out exactly what it was that made Sonya Larson decide that Dawn Dorland was a villain worthy of a take down. The race angle had me waiting to read that Dawn had been engaging in micro aggression, had a history of negative behavior toward Sonya or POC in general, that kind of thing. The fact that it's been weeks and I still haven't seen anything like this though, makes me think it's not out there.
And that leads me back to what we know, which is that Sonya and her friends were really, really annoyed with Dawn for talking about her kidney donation. And by my count, she was punished for this "crime" with:
- Nasty gossip and backbiting from people who called themselves her friends and were nice to her face
- A thinly veiled takedown of her kidney donation in Sonya's story
- The theft of a letter she wrote from a private FB group
- The potential mishandling of a sexual harassment claim at Grub Street
- Literal years of gaslighting from Sony and others about all of the above
- A lawsuit initiated by Sonya
- Getting dragged in the NYT and on Twitter by Sonya and multiple bestselling authors who Dawn almost certainly counts among her literary heroes
If this happened to me, I can tell you for certain I would not have gone after Sonya as aggressively. No way would I have done things like ask a publisher to pull the story or offer me space to publish my own response. But it's not because I'm nicer or kinder or more emotionally stable than Dawn. It's because I lack the self-esteem and the effing cajones to stand up for myself like that. If this happened to me, I'd probably just crawl away and stop writing and focus on treating the depression, anxiety, and PTSD this situation would definitely cause.
So, no, I don't think Dawn is now the Bad Art Friend.
Well said. I also think that class comes into this. The writer class -- the Hobbes essay above is an example -- cannot see another UMC member as the wrongdoer. Look at Hobbes, look at Kolker, not to mention Ng and Gay and the smarmy sexist Almond. The commonality among all of these authors is that they are MC and UMC successful authors who are contorting themselves to come up with a world view where Dawn did something "as bad." I think it is because they cannot abide by a world in which a lower class writer attempting to climb into their world isn't somehow wrong, somehow at fault in some way. There is a deep need on their part to "both sides" this because that protects a class member and -- conveniently -- keeps a lower class interloper out.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm pp who just posted the AWP, and I thought for sure that it was crazy to say that Ng was somehow really crafting this, but it sounds like there is enough issue in that community, which is pretty sad. I really hope it is a productive conversation.
Eh, it will be the same conversation it always is. These conferences always have lots of panels like this and they are pretty repetitive. People are always talking about furthering the conversation but mostly people just talk in circles.
If that's the case, what a colossal waste of time. If Chee is done with the incessant chatter, then maybe he should tell his pal Larson to take the damn letter out of her story. Then it would quite literally be over.
Agreed. I know people in real life who are friends with Chee. They seem to find him a wonderful person, but I admit his social media presence irritates me. He's a little too self-righteous or something.
I think he doesn't want people discussing this story because it throws too much light on how literary cliques work.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm pp who just posted the AWP, and I thought for sure that it was crazy to say that Ng was somehow really crafting this, but it sounds like there is enough issue in that community, which is pretty sad. I really hope it is a productive conversation.
Eh, it will be the same conversation it always is. These conferences always have lots of panels like this and they are pretty repetitive. People are always talking about furthering the conversation but mostly people just talk in circles.
If that's the case, what a colossal waste of time. If Chee is done with the incessant chatter, then maybe he should tell his pal Larson to take the damn letter out of her story. Then it would quite literally be over.
Agreed. I know people in real life who are friends with Chee. They seem to find him a wonderful person, but I admit his social media presence irritates me. He's a little too self-righteous or something.
I think he doesn't want people discussing this story because it throws too much light on how literary cliques work.
Anonymous wrote:Clearly an unpopular opinion here, but to me this is an issue of interpersonal meanness versus material harm -- the purposeful sabotaging of a career. Yes they should walk away from each other, absolutely, and they've both behaved poorly, but one of them tried to destroy the other's living! There's just no getting around that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm pp who just posted the AWP, and I thought for sure that it was crazy to say that Ng was somehow really crafting this, but it sounds like there is enough issue in that community, which is pretty sad. I really hope it is a productive conversation.
Eh, it will be the same conversation it always is. These conferences always have lots of panels like this and they are pretty repetitive. People are always talking about furthering the conversation but mostly people just talk in circles.
If that's the case, what a colossal waste of time. If Chee is done with the incessant chatter, then maybe he should tell his pal Larson to take the damn letter out of her story. Then it would quite literally be over.
Anonymous wrote:Clearly an unpopular opinion here, but to me this is an issue of interpersonal meanness versus material harm -- the purposeful sabotaging of a career. Yes they should walk away from each other, absolutely, and they've both behaved poorly, but one of them tried to destroy the other's living! There's just no getting around that.
Anonymous wrote:I think this story provokes a "yuck" response in a lot of people and that makes people want to say "everyone is equally culpable." I get it. This kind of intractable interpersonal conflict is so unpleasant to be around. If you've ever had something akin to this happen in your social circle or at job or in a school you attended, you can probably relate to the feeling of "oh my god, just stop."
But usually in these situations, both sides have behaved kind of badly from the start. Like one person was a bully, but the other person was also gossiping behind their back or something. At least, that's been my experience. I keep waiting to hear that's the case here too. I keep waiting to find out exactly what it was that made Sonya Larson decide that Dawn Dorland was a villain worthy of a take down. The race angle had me waiting to read that Dawn had been engaging in micro aggression, had a history of negative behavior toward Sonya or POC in general, that kind of thing. The fact that it's been weeks and I still haven't seen anything like this though, makes me think it's not out there.
And that leads me back to what we know, which is that Sonya and her friends were really, really annoyed with Dawn for talking about her kidney donation. And by my count, she was punished for this "crime" with:
- Nasty gossip and backbiting from people who called themselves her friends and were nice to her face
- A thinly veiled takedown of her kidney donation in Sonya's story
- The theft of a letter she wrote from a private FB group
- The potential mishandling of a sexual harassment claim at Grub Street
- Literal years of gaslighting from Sony and others about all of the above
- A lawsuit initiated by Sonya
- Getting dragged in the NYT and on Twitter by Sonya and multiple bestselling authors who Dawn almost certainly counts among her literary heroes
If this happened to me, I can tell you for certain I would not have gone after Sonya as aggressively. No way would I have done things like ask a publisher to pull the story or offer me space to publish my own response. But it's not because I'm nicer or kinder or more emotionally stable than Dawn. It's because I lack the self-esteem and the effing cajones to stand up for myself like that. If this happened to me, I'd probably just crawl away and stop writing and focus on treating the depression, anxiety, and PTSD this situation would definitely cause.
So, no, I don't think Dawn is now the Bad Art Friend.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm pp who just posted the AWP, and I thought for sure that it was crazy to say that Ng was somehow really crafting this, but it sounds like there is enough issue in that community, which is pretty sad. I really hope it is a productive conversation.
Eh, it will be the same conversation it always is. These conferences always have lots of panels like this and they are pretty repetitive. People are always talking about furthering the conversation but mostly people just talk in circles.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Actually, this guy waded through all the court docs and sums it up well for me:
So here I am, a person on the internet, delivering my verdict. From where I sit, identifying the Bad Art Friend is easy. In the early years, it is Sonya. She abused Dawn’s trust to mock and gaslight her, while lying to their mutual friends to make her look even worse.
In the later years, it is Dawn. Someone you considered a friend turned your intimate reflections into a derogatory short story and humiliated you in front of your social circle. That sucks, but turning your hurt feelings into a career vendetta and a years-long legal battle is sucky behavior too.
https://rottenindenmark.org/2021/10/10/identifying-the-bad-art-friend-is-easy/
Nope. This was discussed pages ago. This a rotten take from a Grub Street employee, who is sucking up to the director who is also involved in this. If he had even mentioned the word “plagiarized” or even “lifted” it would be more honest. It’s not just a cat fight. As pp explained it would all be over instantly if Sonya - right now - omitted the letter from the story.
I think you are talking about this (ridiculous) piece from Steve Almond rather than the early Michael Hobbes take: https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2021/10/11/bad-art-friend-new-york-times-steve-almond