Lionel Shriver: ‘Few writers are willing to put themselves on the line for free speech’

The full text of her Brisbane speech on cultural appropriation:

[quote]In the latest ethos, which has spun well beyond college campuses in short order, any tradition, any experience, any costume, any way of doing and saying things, that is associated with a minority or disadvantaged group is ring-fenced: look-but-don’t-touch. Those who embrace a vast range of “identities” – ethnicities, nationalities, races, sexual and gender categories, classes of economic under-privilege and disability – are now encouraged to be possessive of their experience and to regard other peoples’ attempts to participate in their lives and traditions, either actively or imaginatively, as a form of theft.

[quote] Few writers are willing to put themselves on the line for free speech.

It's because of the fear of losing power and what is generally associated with power like money, fans, followers, access to endorsements [bold] and good relations with publishers, [/bold] etc.

[quote] I just lost my Swedish publisher, who has published every book since We Need To Talk About Kevin. There is a sub-theme in The Mandibles about immigration, and anything that is negative at all about immigration is toxic in Sweden. It’s very disappointing.

Interesting article; thanks OP!

Thanks, OP. It's good to know there are a few reasonable minds still out there. Very brave ones. Of course Datalounge will soon cross you out.

About 10 years ago i dressed my daughters in a Cbinese dress. They are now grown and rag mw about cultural appropriation. I just dont understand why it is an issue.

Most writers (expect those who have more money than God) are afraid to speak the truth because they're afraid of idiots giving all their books on every website nasty one star reviews and being attacked at book signings.

Who?

Oh, she's a libertarian. Fuck this tard.

Pick up a book now and then, R7.

It's not that I don't believe you, R8, but some links would be useful.

And right on cue comes R8 and his lynch mob.

R10.

Haters hate and usually they hate the ones who really want to have an adult and open discussion about things.

Alt-Right, SJWs, trolls, Russian Bots ... they all want to limit and destroy the very nature of free speech.

Thanks, R12. But I realize that you are both R7 (not having a clue who Shriver is) and R8. You must have done a quick search on the internet and picked out one thing about Shriver you can bash her with without giving a single thought to my original post.

"We Need to Talk About Kevin" is one of the most truly unsettling books I've ever read. It disturbed me so much that I almost regretted reading it, and I NEVER think that about anything. Years later, I'm glad I finished it.

Dismiss Shriver's opinions and activism if you want (personally, I believe she has a point) but please do not dismiss her talent. She is an extraordinary writer (which alone makes me think she may have a point here).

P.S. The movie version of "Kevin," with Tilda Swinton, is a very good adaptation...not especially narratively, but thematically. A perfect example of how tone can be more important than slavish devotion to the plot when adapting a work. (Can I say "slavish"? Or, because my ancestors were not slaves, is that not my word to use? This is why we need people like Shriver!)

The best was when The Guardian printed the "response" from Yassmin Abdel-Magid. Yassmin stated she was so offended she had to flounce out of the room. Her friend texted her, "make sure they see your face!" Her mom thought she was being oversensitive.

There were PEN writers who wouldn't even speak up for the cartoonist shot to death in France

I meant cartoonistS

I think some were writers, too.

That one really turned my stomach. Writers in a writers' organization who do not speak up for people exercising free speech. Shot at their place of work, a newspaper.

LOL she’s at it again! And got dropped from a prize ceremony. Gotta love this fearless bitch 🤣

“From now until 2025, literary excellence will be secondary to ticking all those ethnicity, gender, disability, sexual preference and crap-education boxes,” she wrote. “We can safely infer from that email that if an agent submits a manuscript written by a gay transgender Caribbean who dropped out of school at seven and powers around town on a mobility scooter, it will be published, whether or not said manuscript is an incoherent, tedious, meandering and insensible pile of mixed-paper recycling.”

Again but translated into SJWese

An interesting aside from the article linked at R19:

[quote]The most interesting statistic in the survey shows that women are vastly overrepresented in the publishing industry: 84.6% of publishing workers are female. Funnily enough, this didn’t come up much in the reaction to Shriver. Penguin Random House has included gender as part of its new diversity pledge – so can we expect it to cut over three tenths of its female workforce to achieve equal gender representation?

From the article linked at R16:

[quote]If the world were equal, this discussion would be different. But alas, that utopia is far from realised. It’s not always OK if a white guy writes the story of a Nigerian woman because the actual Nigerian woman can’t get published or reviewed to begin with. It’s not always OK if a straight white woman writes the story of a queer Indigenous man, because when was the last time you heard a queer Indigenous man tell his own story? How is it that said straight white woman will profit from an experience that is not hers, and those with the actual experience never be provided the opportunity? It’s not always OK for a person with the privilege of education and wealth to write the story of a young Indigenous man, filtering the experience of the latter through their own skewed and biased lens, telling a story that likely reinforces an existing narrative which only serves to entrench a disadvantage they need never experience.

Thanks, R19. That article was refreshingly reasonable.

r21 of course not... if it's 50% women that's diversity, and if it's 90% women that's even more diversity!

Hilarious, R21!

Oh, this idiot bitch again. Can't get any recognition for her work so has to go on the "I'm an Idiot Anti-SJW Bitch" tour to make a name for herself.

I forgot who said it, but they nailed it. The ASJWs are just as stupid and obnoxious as SJWs, even more so. It's like what happened with atheists, where in the beginning they made reasonable arguments about religion and then became even more shrill and obnoxious the more they carried on. I say, let the idiot ASJW go on her tirade; she's six months away from ranting that Hitler had the right idea or getting a personal invite to the WH. Then she'll be done.

I read "We Need to Talk About Kevin" and it was gripping, but I was disappointed by her offensive, stereotypical portrayal of the gay kid (one of the protagonist's targets).

When I read her author's note at the end - full of complaints about how long it took the publishing industry to recognize her greatness, among other musings, I realized, Oh, now it makes sense - she's a self-righteous conservative pig with a very high opinion of herself.

This new brave stance of hers is just more self-righteous conservative piggishness.

Good article by a Rational Lefty (we still exist!} addresses this and also the transactivist assault on free speech

[quote]she's a self-righteous conservative pig with a very high opinion of herself.

Give it a rest will you.

She wrote about the benefits of the struggle to be published, by the way.

Get off the cross, tedious, overrated bitch. We need wood.

Firstly, you’d sell more books if you spelled it Lionelle.

And would it kill you to fix your hair once in a while?

[quote]About 10 years ago i dressed my daughters in a Cbinese dress. They are now grown and rag mw about cultural appropriation. I just dont understand why it is an issue.

Um, what?

Is she trans? Why is her name Lionel?

Lionel Shriver's pussy stinks!

She writes for right-wing rags such as "Standpoint", which I won't link here since I'm not an alt-right shitstain. She's Milo Y. with some literary talent, albeit basically a one-hit-wonder ("We Need To Talk About Kevin".) However, she's pretty much indistinguishable from him in every other way.

I've read everything she's ever written. She's great. Don't know about her political affiliations since I stay away from politics, but her interviews and speeches appeal to me. I don't see an agenda there, only common sense. And balls.

Ooh, so much courage spewing vaguely right-wing shit in Trump's America in 2018! She's a fucking Rosa Parks!

[quote]Get off the cross, tedious, overrated bitch. We need wood.

[quote]She writes for right-wing rags such as "Standpoint", which I won't link here since I'm not an alt-right shitstain. She's Milo Y. with some literary talent, albeit basically a one-hit-wonder ("We Need To Talk About Kevin".) However, she's pretty much indistinguishable from him in every other way.

[quote]Ooh, so much courage spewing vaguely right-wing shit in Trump's America in 2018! She's a fucking Rosa Parks!

We get it, R30. You hate her.

[quote] Is she trans? Why is her name Lionel?

She changed her name when she was a kid. She has no children of her own as far as I know.

I hate all you fucking right wingers (you included, R37). At this day and age, you are the enemy.

[quote]I hate all you fucking right wingers (you included, [R37]). At this day and age, you are the enemy.

R30, etc... calling someone a right-winger, while foaming at the mouth, does not make your argument any stronger.

But let me guess, R39, you're a fierce defender of a trans "woman" right to attempt to appropriate the DNA, as well as the lived experience, of biological women?

Go, fuck yourself, you Breitbart-playbook identity politics right wing troll. This has nothing to do with trans, you obsessed loon.

r16

[quote]The stench of privilege hung heavy in the air, and I was reminded of my “place” in the world.

These people are beyond parody. Just had a look at her twittert, she seems a barrel of laughs...

R42's SPANX is cutting into his micropenis.

Lionel Shriver certainly triggers the SJW haters. That alone makes me want to read her words.

May she be blessed by God

May her haters be blessed by Marx.

R28 Thanks for the link, that was one interesting yet depressing read. What a world we live in.

[quote]That alone makes me want to read her words.

You realize that no one really believes this nonsense that you posted, right? You sound like a shill. Are you this dumb broad herself, her publicist or someone working on her behalf?

I read We Have to Talk About Kevin and can't imagine what this woman would have to say that wold be of interest to me.

R50 Did you read all of 'We Have to Talk About Kevin'? Did you read to the end?

r51 they only read as far as "We Need To Talk..." and felt abused by the demanding tone and had to stop before they were further triggered

Actually, they had to stop on the first word of "We Need To Talk..." as "we' should have been "ze/zir".

Yasmin is stating her boundaries... again! The thought of round 2 with Shriver is making her MOIST!

^. That Nairobi woman is a ridiculous joke.

She is as incredibly over-entitled as that dopey Monroe Bergdorf creature.

Great comment from the article at R28

[quote] Mike Morgan 18 hours ago The best trick the right pulled was to distract the left into obsessing about identity politics while they got on with extending economic apartheid.

[quote]Good article by a Rational Lefty (we still exist!} addresses this and also the transactivist assault on free speech

Aaronovich is just another hypocritical "lefty" taking to task a safe target. He would have been far more sincere in his concern about the assault on free speech and shutting down debate by taking to task The Times and The Guardian, who regularly shut down debate by closing Reader Comments on selected topics.

R57 The Guardian CLOSES comments on all controversial topics.

They are so weak.

R58 They're protecting their fetishes.

Yasmin is a joke.

Very interesting, her POV on the Corona >

Lionel Shriver is an immigrant, weird that she's complaining about the immigrant view.

She kinda negates any credibility she had by associating with the idiot Brendan O' Neill, as at r61.

Brendan O'Neill's arguments against same-sex marriage - telling Australians to vote against it, even though he's not Australian.

O'Neill is just a right-wing "libertarian" version of Yasmin, they're two sides of the same coin.

[quote] telling Australians to vote against it, even though he's not Australian.

I don't see that.

‘Few writers are willing to put themselves on the line for free speech’

And yet, writers who are willing to put themselves on the line for hate speech are as common as muck.

R27: The stereotypical offensive portrait of the gay victim comes from Eva, the protagonist, and let's be clear, Eva is not a pleasant character. Yes, Kevin is a psycho, but Eva is cold and a bad mother, and sometimes blatantly stupid (she was surprised when the trees look exactly the same in Spain than in the USA).

We need to talk about Kevin is a clear case of unrelieable narrator, it's not clear if Kevin is such bad seed since he was a baby or it's the partical vision of his mother what makes him look that way.

It's an uncomfortable novel that touch a lot of differente (and uncomfortable) subjects.

Character's opinions don't need to match the writers opinions. That leads to some uncomfortable misleads like the fact of a book like M, the son of the century (winner of the Strega prize) is embraced by some far right italians when the writer Antonio Scuratti is an antifascist, but like he said he is not responsible that some people who read the book are not inteligent enough.

Shriver likes controversy, but in terms of cultural apropiation she is totally right. The fact that a white male writers about a nigerian woman doesn't prevent a nigerian woman to write her novel. Cultural apropiation debate is totally against literature. Of course if someone writes about other race, other country, other gender, other religion or other sexual orientation, he or she should document him/herself and be accurate.

But if this cultural apropiation nonsense is successful we'll be in a world a writer is destined only to write autofiction, which frankly is a pathetic destiny for literature

Shriver is a good writer, We need to talk about Kevin was gripping. But I'm beginning to tire of the narrative of the opressed straight white writer, just as the most over the top sjw twitter screeds have become tiring. The truth is somewhere in between. While I think great writers can capture lives outside their own there are a lot of these writers who don't and still become hugely successful. Sometimes in place of someone who has actually lived the type of life they are writing about. And there is a certain type of straight white upper middle class writer who will always manage to convey a level of condescension/ pity when talking about the "other ", even when they try to disguise it as empathy.

R64, he posted an article addressed to Australians and attacking same-sex marriage in the run-up to the referendum in Australia on same-sex marriage...

To be honest, I've never actually heard any complaints about "cultural appropriation" in literature. Have any white male authors actually been attacked for writing from the perspective of a Nigerian woman? The only time I've heard about that there have apparently been attempts to ban "cultural appropriation" in literature have been Lionel Shriver complaining about it, even though she doesn't give an example of such a thing happening.

Criticisms of "cultural appropriation" tend to be more about Kendal Jenner getting her hair braided.

Sorry but are you living under a rock? There was a huge cultural appropiation controversy just a couple of months ago with the publication of American Dirt.

I think some of the criticism was legit, but some was quite lazy on the level of twitter criticism

You never read the Guardian, then R69. All coverage of non-white writers is laced with more or less subtle appropriation references and 'having our voices heard at last' comments.

That's "representation" r71, not "cultural appropriation".

R70, I thought the American Dirt criticism was about stereotypes, not cultural appropriation. In any case, that was now and there are few similar cases. Shriver was whining about the strawman of cultural appropriation several years ago.

Good article, OP. I'm just surprised The Guardian published it.

'I meant cartoonistS

I think some were writers, too.

That one really turned my stomach. Writers in a writers' organization who do not speak up for people exercising free speech. Shot at their place of work, a newspaper."

People don't want to speak up about Muslim extremism because they don't want to get murdered.

YA Twitter is all about this.

Immigration is really about poverty and wealth.

It's also about control. It's about fear. It's about belonging. It's about connection. It's about human relations. It's about human emotions.

If people could sit down and honestly talk about their feelings without shouting, being shouted down, and edited down to brief clips, we might be able to come to understandings.

She's the female version of Mark Steyn; someone born in North America who ran away to the UK to be a big right wing fish in a little pond.

She refers to gayness as a sexual preference which is usually code used by anti-gay people.

[quote]“[T]o say that you are not allowed to project yourself into the minds of characters who have a different race or gender or sexual preference than your own is… it’s not only limiting for the author… it means that the fiction is going to be very narrow.” Lionel Shriver on Q&A, 2 September 2019.

[quote] President Barack Obama has asked members of his staff to draft an executive order that would make it illegal to discriminate against LGBT employees of federal contractors on the basis of their "sexual preference"

^^^Six years ago R80. What's your point, twat?

R80, "sexual preference" is the Atlantic's choice of term, not Obama's. Obama used the term "sexual orientation".

[quote]In a few moments, I will sign an executive order that does two things. First, the federal government already prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Once I sign this order, the same will be explicitly true for gender identity.