Khabib, MeToo and Misbehaving Men

ARE WESTERN MEN TOO DOMESTICATED?

AP photoJohn Locher(AP photo/ John Locher.)

While the MeToo movement has accomplished many good things, exposing an array of real sexual predators, it has also occasionally strayed over the lines, in this commentator’s estimation. Lost in the effort to properly domesticate Western men is context. Context! Meaning, the relationships between men and women worldwide.

Case in point is Saturday night’s UFC mixed martial arts fight between Conor McGregor and Russian Muslim Khabib Nurmagomedov, which Khabib won fairly easily.

Conor McGregor had been the Gold Standard for macho male misbehavior. Saturday night he was out-macho’d and out misbehaved. First Khabib defeated McGregor in the Octagon, then climbed out of the cage they’d fought inside and began beating on McGregor’s trainers. A domesticated male? Not hardly.

khabib with wife(Khabib with wife.)

Khabib Nurmagomedov comes from an ultra-macho culture, and an extremely populous (1.5 billion-and-growing) male-dominated religion in which women are manifestly subservient.

While Western Man is becoming feminized.

bora(Bora Zivkovic with friends.)

Think I’m joking? Poster Boy for Male Misbehavior on the literary scene might be Monica Byrne Target #1, 125-pound Bora Zivkovic, aka “The Hugger.” His modus operandi wasn’t jumping out of ring cages and punching out people, but being in effect “one of the gals.” Harmless– one would think.

Ah, but then those dastardly male hormones kicked in. Out with Mischievous Monica for a drink, married Zivkovic confided– as any “gal” might do– in Monica about his unsatisfactory sex life. That was enough. Outrage! Zivkovic career destroyed. The poor soul still doesn’t know what hit him. As befuddled as Conor McGregor after last night’s fight. As if Bora himself had been in the ring with dangerous Khabib.

What happened to Bora Zivkovic? Check out this article by Amy Alkon from 2015 and read the gory details.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

(NOTE: Monica Byrne’s next hapless target was discredited for giving Monica an actual hug, at the end of a night of drinking.)

Monica+at+15(Monica Byrne at 15.)

Never mind that Monica Byrne lifts weights, beats men at arm wrestling, and might give Khabib Nurmagomedov a tougher battle in the MMA cage than did Conor McGregor.

arm wrestling2(Monica arm-wrestling.)

WHAT’S THE SOLUTION?

The solution isn’t to turn Western men into walking wimps afraid to raise their voices or offer a difference of opinion to women. (Both instances used as evidence of abuse in the Junot Diaz case.)

NEITHER is it to pretend men and women are physically and temperamentally the same. (Volatile Celt Monica Byrne notwithstanding.) On the whole, by nature women are less aggressive, and more easily triggered– as events have shown– than males of the species. A distinction which can’t be wished away, no matter how many Gender-and-Feminism 201 courses are taken stating otherwise.

lindsayandmackinnon

NOR is the solution to divide men and women forever into opposing camps of incels versus radical feminists, each side alienated and angry, warring with the other everywhere but in the MMA ring.
*******

elcid2(Charlton Heston as “El Cid.”)

The solution? Perhaps the solution has been with us all along, in the chivalric ideal of knights powerful and pure of heart. Mighty in battle but behaving with deference and gentleness toward the esteemed ladies who give their quests purpose.

Such ideal is considered woefully obsolete in this unhappy period of Harvey Weinstein pigs and purge-hungry Poetry Cops. In this timid time of self-censorship and safe zones. Of sexless Mao-jacket sameness in all things.

Could the chivalric ideal of gentlemen and ladies return?

Should it return?

You tell me.
*******

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS

Advertisements

Unreason and Literature

OBJECTIVE TRUTH IN THE JUNOT DIAZ CONTROVERSY

scalesofjustice

Interesting to me is how the Junot Diaz accusers and the accusers’ supporters aren’t interested in the truth of the matter. To them, objective truth is an outmoded concept. To them, objectivity is impossible. They don’t care about evidence or the lack of evidence, because to them, evidence is irrelevant.

Most important is the cause.

An anti-Junot Diaz advocate tweeted this quote from Nietzsche:

All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.

Nietzsche

It’s a Nietzschean concept, and also a Hitlerian one.

We’re living in a post-truth age. We’ve seen this in fiction for awhile. More and more, best-selling novels are about fantasy, not reality. Fantasy of some kind, be it vampires, zombies, sci-fi– or the medieval dragons of George R. R. Martin and Company.  Quite a difference from, say, sixty years ago when readers still lived in reality and expected to encounter reality in their reading.

2010-01-C&E_Dragon(Artwork: David Revoy/Blender Foundation.)

A noteworthy example of this change is chief planner, organizer, and accuser in the Junot Diaz Controversy, Monica Byrne. Would that her novel was as well plotted as the Diaz takedown. Instead, it’s an assault of Too Much Information– experiences and imaginings jammed together with uncountable settings, characters, and ideas in a well-written but ultimately incoherent story.

Byrne classifies herself as a Christian– a style of Christianity untethered to any church or doctrine. A belief system where the individual herself determines her own beliefs, her own morality.

It’s old-fashioned Gnosticism, which gave established Christianity heavy competition around 150 A.D.

the-gnostic-gospels

-Whoever follows the direction of his own mind need not accept anyone else’s advice.

-Convinced that the only answers were to be found within, the gnostic engaged in an intensely private interior journey.

-Elaine Pagels
***

TODAY: Post-truth, post-reality, post-objectivity– spawned by postmodern philosophies which began with Nietzsche. Truth merely a construct. Who’s better at selling their version of truth? One version is as good as another– the conflict little more than a PR battle.

1979 Grammy Music Awards

Pretended truths and made-up belief systems on all sides. It’s not new. Nietzsche brought forth from his own insanities nothing new. The mindset has been with us for millennia.

Gnosticism matches the attitude toward objective truth found among the Junot Diaz accusers and their supporters. If it’s “your truth,” that’s all that matters. Your truth, your reality, accuser always believed. The accused is assumed to be guilty.
***
Responses to these remarks are invited.

-Karl Wenclas, New Pop Lit NEWS

 

Junot Diaz: Captive of the System

THE HARASSMENT CONTROVERSY VIEWED FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE

phantom monster

IF all men are monsters, then that psychic grievance needs continual proof in the form of visible examples. Junot Diaz fit that need.

THE NARRATIVE

Evidence shows the accusations against Junot Diaz to be flimsy– more a case of bruised egos or a dismissive personality than sexual harassment. Junot Diaz fans blame the accusers themselves for the controversy. (Two accusers, in fact, are ambitiously eager to exploit every opportunity to gain publicity.)

For me the matter is caused more by a politicized literary scene– and by the media which covers that scene needing a steady supply of victims and guilty. The accusers are the Id of that media– the realized expression of their beliefs and needs. Without encouragement behind the scenes, the matter would never have become a story in the first place.

THE MACHINE

chaplin_charlie_modern_times_01

One has to write outside today’s New York-centered literary system in order to see it AS a system. Those inside it have no perspective on it.

THE PRISONER

Junot Diaz’s reaction to the accusations against him has been constrained by his membership in the club. He became successful as a creature of the machine, but now the bill has come due and he’s paying it.

MUCH has been made about Diaz hiring a PR firm, and by appearing at his Boston Globe interview accompanied by a lawyer– but these are shackles on no one so much as him.

Handcuffs01_2003-06-02

Did you see the expression on his face in the photo by Suzanne Kreiter which the Boston Globe used? The expression of a prisoner. What you didn’t see are the invisible handcuffs chaining him to that lawyer. Said attorney and said PR firm exist to keep Junot Diaz from speaking his mind. From being himself.

That’s a hell of a position for any artist to be in.

BUSINESS

What was the quote from the Hyman Roth character in the movie Godfather II?

hyman roth

“This is the business we’ve chosen.”

Junot Diaz chose the world of establishment literature when he signed up for the MFA program at Cornell University he was later to write about in his 2014 essay “MFA vs. POC.”

Cornell_University_arts_quad

Diaz was one of the few writers of color in that writing program. He also may have been the only non-bourgeois person in it.

MFA programs teach students how to write in the proper upper-middle class “literary” style of long slow paragraphs of finely-detailed descriptions expressed in well-wrought sentences and it’s all very impressive to the cognoscenti but it’s also removed from the fast-paced real world lives of 95% of the American populace– a big reason why the short story, once the most popular American art form in the vulgar days of O. Henry and Jack London, is today only the delicate captive of writing programs, MFA grads, and New Yorker magazines sitting unread on Manhattan-or-the-Hamptons coffee tables.

manhattan c of alexkotlickDOTcom(Photo c/o AlexKotlik.com.)

It’s to Junot Diaz’s credit that his talent rises above the limitations– the handcuffs– of that very same refined writing style.

NOW he’s being judged by the same people he loathed when he was in those classrooms. Yes, those perfect beings currently staffing Buzzfeed, The Cut, Slate, The New York Times, etc. etc.; almost all from privileged backgrounds and in their Resistance daydreams looking for purpose, looking for causes, looking for harsh macho misogynists looking for anyone they can accuse hang and shred on the altar of their virtue signaling. Someone to nail to the wall for offending their sensibilities with too much reality brushing indelicately and intolerably against the fragile bubbles of their sterling New York City lives.

pelt on wall

-Karl Wenclas, New Pop Lit News

Junot Diaz and the Sensitivity Police

SENSITIVITY TRAINING FOR ALL NOVELISTS?

USAF_Mess_Dress

(NOT the Sensitivity Police.)

I DISCUSSED the matter months ago in the latter part of my second post about the Junot Diaz controversy. The rules and standards the writer must obey, and the lines he or she must never cross, expand by the day. Maybe the hour.

The writer’s personal behavior is subject to scrutiny in the new Orwellian literary world. But as important is a person’s writings. Fiction is no longer regarded as fiction. It will be used in judging you.

dress uni woman w knife

Case in point is this essay by Lyta Gold from the precocious characters at Current Affairs which appeared on May 8th. (I’ve covered Current Affairs before at this blog, including here.) Note how, referring to Junot Diaz, Lyta Gold has “strongly suspected, from his prose alone, that he’s a virulent misogynist.” Quite a leap. (Was the character Popeye in William Faulkner’s novel Sanctuary based on Faulkner? Who knows!)

The atmosphere of Gold’s essay is not that of literature, but religion. Current Affairs‘ peculiar pseudo-Communist/Social Justice religion.

Military_of_Hungary-welcome

The giveaway line is when Lyta Gold says, about Junot Diaz’s writing, “his work was presumptively taken to be flawless and free of sin. . . .”

Free of sin? Is this how writing is being judged?

Nun_ruler - Edited

Lyta Gold further says that “no writer . . . gets to be validated by invisible particles of virtue.”

Well, yeah. But is this the standard? Is this why Junot Diaz was validated to begin with?

Virtue?

David_A_Christian_in_dress_uniform(Literary awards– for virtue?)

Or because of his writing? Why are writers published? If all that will be accepted, after thorough personal screenings and background checks, are virtuous writers, the art of literature will be in even more trouble than it is now.
***

current affairs staff

(Current Affairs staff, from their website.)

PART of what’s happening, ironically enough, is the imposition of bourgeois morality. The Current Affairs staff, like many such staffs, is completely bourgeois in background and sensibility. When expedient– in feeding their own selfish needs and conveniences– they’re as egoistic as Ayn Rand. In the case of Current Affairs, ambitious careerist ladder climbers. Harvard grads, most of them.

The happenings which Junot Diaz puts into his stories and novels are outside their experience. Not surprising, then, that they’re thrown by them. Which doesn’t justify an easily applied label like “misogynist” (a clinical term). If we start judging writers by their musings, their fantasies, and their fictional characters, we’re all in trouble.

This could be the future, if the Sensitivity Police have their way. A kinder, gentler literature– innocuous, harmless, and irrelevant.

The_Bow_(11106700545)

Comments are welcomed.
****

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS

Where’s the Evidence?

LATEST NEWS FROM THE JUNOT DIAZ CONTROVERSY

DNA-evidence

The latest news from the Junot Diaz controversy is there is no news.

FROM THE MOMENT the Junot Diaz alleged harassment controversy broke big-time on May 4th, two of the three original accusers, Monica Byrne and Zinzi Clemmons, have made numerous tweets promising everyone that more stories would be forthcoming. Zinzi Clemmons has said she has “receipts”– emails from Junot Diaz documenting the fact he’d harassed her. Monica Byrne has mentioned time and again “39” other accusers waiting in the wings. Those who’ve been covering the story, including ourselves, have been waiting, and waiting, and waiting. (Alisa Rivera came immediately afterward with an incident from a date gone awry 15 years ago, as did ex-girlfriend Alisa Valdes with her experiences.)

THE ASSUMPTION– in my opinion the wager by the original three– was that Diaz was unquestionably an abuser and that many more accusers would come forward after the coordinated presentation on May 4th made international headlines. Monica Byrne had been through this twice before (see this), and based on those experiences, believed enough other women would come forward to remove Junot Diaz from his positions at Boston Review and MIT. As we now know, both institutions held the line.

HOW LONG had the planned revelations been under consideration?

Here is their genesis, in a few of the tweets exchanged between Monica Byrne and an initially reluctant Carmen Maria Machado– dating from 2015:

THE THIRD member of the trio was brought on board beginning in December of 2017, at the same time MeToo stories were breaking everyplace. See this, and this, and this.

MEDIA BLITZKRIEG

Ausbildung, Überrollen durch Panzer

GIVEN the intensity of the criticism, Junot Diaz should’ve been completely destroyed. The calculation with any such maneuver is that the target will be. It’s analogous to Germany’s “Operation Barbarossa” invasion of the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941. After a string of easy victories, Hitler believed the rotting structure of the world’s first Communist regime would collapse in on itself, as a result of a strong push. Didn’t happen. He didn’t count on the enormous fortitude of the Russian people.  What followed was a long, slow slog. Which is what’s been happening the last several months between both sides of the Junot Diaz controversy.

Bora Zivkovic and Raphael Martin, obsequious liberals unprepared for their personal idiosyncrasies to be exposed to the world, immediately apologized and resigned in the face of accusations. What happened in the Junot Diaz matter was that a recording of his verbal exchange with Carmen Maria Machado was produced– and completely changed the dynamic of the controversy. This led us, and others, to look further into the matter.

question mark

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? We’ll see.
*******

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS

Should Writers Be Purged?

LITERARY EDITORS AND PUBLISHERS are divided over the question of whether or not a writer’s work should be purged over misbehavior imagined or real taking place outside the sphere of the art itself. We may well be in the minority for answering, “No.”

Another question inevitably arises during such censorious periods: Where does the purge end?

Ezra_Pound

For instance, should Ezra Pound, founder of literary modernism, be deleted from memory banks and lit-history books? Should every award granted him be expunged?

(We addressed the question here in our yet-to-be-resumed All-Time American Writers Tournament.)

What do you do with a host of classic-but-problematic writers whose lives or art would today be considered beyond acceptable bounds?

American_Psycho_by_Bret_Easton_Ellis_first_US_paperback_edition_1991

ARE WRITERS BEING BLACKBALLED?

We have the case of poet Joseph Massey, accused earlier this year of harassing women. According to Massey,  this was based on anonymous, distorted, and fictitious allegations. His chief accuser is a poet who had a two-year affair with him. I haven’t looked into the substance of the claims. Massey did admit, in a Facebook apology which was later taken down, to having issues.

WE’VE SEEN in the Junot Diaz controversy that an apology isn’t enough.

Joseph Massey, well-regarded though he’s been, lacks as big a name and reputation as Diaz. After the allegations, accompanied by an article or two about the matter, Massey’s work was deleted from The Academy of American Poets website, including an essay written about his work. Joseph Massey was also deleted from The Poetry Society of America, where he’d been announced as “New American Poet” in 2009. Down the memory hole.

NO DOUBT there are many flawed individuals within the walls of the literary scene, as there have always been. Some seriously flawed. As there have always been in the arts, period. History shows that many of the best artists, writers, composers, musicians, have been in some ways disturbed, wrestling with demons in the world, and within themselves. An argument can be made that it’s part of experiencing the world with more intensity than the rest of us. To feeling, raging, and suffering more than “normal” people.

van-gogh

(Some will regard this as mere excuse making.)

Do we delete them and their work, all of it?

HOW MANY of the rest of us writers and poets have misbehaviors in our backgrounds which could someday be exposed? A few of us? All of us?

Do we all submit to background checks before submitting our work, just in case?

In this hyper-regulated day and age is the following statement obsolete– or does it still have relevance?

Let the one among you without sin cast the first stone.

stones
*******

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS

How to Create Media Frenzy

THE JAY ASHER STORY

worldnewscollage

DID THE MEDIA MOB CONSUME ANOTHER PROMINENT AUTHOR?

A few months before the Junot Diaz accusation story broke across the globe, there occurred another media meltdown over an author accused of misbehavior– this one generated by a statement made to two media outlets which did little-to-nothing to investigate the story the statement was about. The person who made the statement, director of a writers organization, was at the time herself being pressured from an online mob to “do something” about the issue of sexual harassment. She did. An author’s career was all-but-destroyed as a result.

The writer? Jay Asher, author of the #1 best-selling novel 13 Reasons Why, which was the basis for the popular Netflix TV series.

Thirteen-Reasons-Why

New Pop Lit NEWS first covered the story in a general way last February, in an article we titled, “Publishing Industry Feeding Frenzy.”

(NOTE THAT the key part of the matter, an article at School Library Journal which received 199 comments, has been taken down. This is a story in itself, which we may or may not address in a separate report.)

The January 3 SLJ article can be considered THE CRUX OF THE MATTER, because this was where, for all intents and purposes, the story about Jay Asher’s behavior originated– via anonymous comments to the article. As our NPL NEWS post indicates, SCBWI Executive Director Lin Oliver felt herself under pressure from those comments.

Lin_Oliver_-_2015_National_Book_Festival_(2)

( Lin Oliver)

Indications are that Oliver and her staff were, at the time, unable to investigate the matter. She reacted regardless, making statements to Buzzfeed News, then to Associated Press, that Asher and another writer had been removed from her organization. (Jay Asher denied he’d been removed, and denied the harassment allegations themselves.)

That was it. A face-saving response to two media outlets. The result? A media feeding frenzy.

media3

How bad was it?

Here’s an incomplete list of media stories run on the matter in a three-day period, from February 12th through the 14th. (Many of the outlets reprinted the Associated Press article verbatim, with-or-without attribution. Others modestly reworded it while saying the same thing.)

buzzfeednews.com
apnews.com
people.com

vanityfair.com
businessinsider.com

indiewire.com
ew.com
teenvogue.com
theguardian.com
publishersweekly.com
usatoday.com
thoughtcatalog.com

nme.com
mashable.com
nylon.com
independent.co.uk
narcity.com
popbuzz.com
slate.com
bustle.com
seventeen.com
fortune.com
jezebel.com
nydailynews.com
hollywoodreporter.com

vulture.com
hellogiggles.com
foxnews.com
globalnews.com
clevver.com
billboard.com
mynorthwest.com
sltrib.com
wtnh.com
perezhilton.com
wionews.com
popculture.com
thewrap.com
country105.com
kare11.com
tvweek.com
mtv.com
9news.com
canoe.com
enstarz.com
lifezette.com
triblive.com
complex.com
ksby.com
wpxi.com
wtop.com

cosmopolitan.com
ibtimes.com
wftv.com
post-gazette.com
zimbio.com
chron.com
bookstr.com
wbal.com
refinery29.com
deadline.com

videtteonline.com
fox23.com
tristatehomepage.com
tvguide.com
betches.com
thebookseller.com
popcrush.com
girlfriend.com

cbc.ca
popstaronline.com
booksandpublishing.com/au
breitbart.com
yalovemag.com
sanluisobispo.com
cuestonian.com

Talk about destroying a career! All of these sites prominently displayed a photo of Jay Asher, with properly hyberbolic headlines: variations of “13 Reasons Why Author Jay Asher was booted from a writing organization over sexual harassment claims.” One of them picked that up a notch, with: “13 Reasons Why author becomes literature world’s Harvey Weinstein.”

THIS, over a disputed dismissal from a writers organization because of anonymous comments on a blog!

AS A RESULT, Asher’s Philippines tour was called off, numerous other speaking appearances and book signings were quickly canceled, his literary agent dropped him, and at least two bookstores stopped carrying his books. (See Westbrook bookstore dumps books by author.”)

Jay Asher’s somewhat-less-widely-circulated defense can be found at his blog.
*******

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS

 

The Removal of Junot Diaz

ORWELLIAN BEHAVIOR IN A POLITICIZED LITERARY WORLD

removedjunotdiaz

While looking into another matter, we stumbled upon this article by Matthew C. Winner. Or rather, a note from Mr. Winner about an April 24th podcast involving Junot Diaz and Leo Espinosa, “The Children’s Book Podcast #435,” which on May 5th was removed.

AS Winner’s own comment states, the removal took place within 24 hours of accusations of sexual harassment being made against Junot Diaz– a knee-jerk action after no reflection, no investigation, no waiting for any dust to settle.

WAS Matthew Winner caught up in the media hysteria over the matter?

Note that he refers to “an overwhelming number of women” making such charges. (There were four by this time. An ex-girlfriend chimed in ten days later.)

Winner also says,

I, Matthew Winner, and The Children’s Book Podcast will not support the works of individuals accused of misogynistic acts, sexual predation, or any other offense against women. That behavior is intolerable. . . .

Do you catch the jump in logic? He goes from “individuals accused” to “That behavior.” For Michael C. Winner, the accusation is enough.

To make his point he slaps a large “REMOVED” over the image of Junot Diaz.

Flushed down the memory hole?

banned****

-Karl Wenclas, New Pop Lit NEWS

The Andre-Zinzi Combine

A COMBUSTIBLE MIXTURE

lab

Objective observers ask about the Junot Diaz accusations: How could they happen without being real? Did all these women lie or exaggerate?

I’ve been looking specifically into the three chief accusers– one of whom we know for sure, Carmen Maria Machado, did lie or exaggerate, based on the audio recording of her exchange with Diaz. We also know one of the others, Monica Byrne, has a well-documented history of spreading rumors and making allegations.

I BELIEVE the entire matter– leading up to and culminating in the explosion of press attention on May 4th– was like a classic reaction of combustible chemicals, placed in a laboratory “perfect storm” of pressure which resulted in the public denunciations of Junot Diaz, and the press nuclear reaction to those claims the very same day.

An outlandish theory?

KEY to it was the addition of Andre Naffis-Sahely, husband of Zinzi Clemmons, to the mix. A mild exterior, but his tweets reveal him to be quite the volatile personality.

naffissahely - Edited

I’VE BEEN TRYING to look at the matter from their perspective. Zinzi, Andre, and Monica Byrne are true believers in their cause. All of them fully believed the gossip and rumors– as well as their own experiences– revolving around Junot Diaz and Donald Futers. They became convinced that all were full and true instances of sexual harassment. Around them at this time were daily news stories of harassers being outed– Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer. Every day filled with more revelations. Completely logical to believe such malignant creeps existed in the publishing scene.

Harvey-Weinstein-headline-in-NYT-10-5-17

At the same time, members of the media found themselves under increasing pressure to participate in the breaking of news stories. Study the tweets of journalists Dara Levy, Anna Silman, Lili Loofbourow, and others who’ve covered the Junot Diaz issue. You find true believers in the cause of toppling the male patriarchy– by any means necessary. So we had Buzzfeed‘s Dara Levy contacting Zinzi Clemmons this past December. A tiger cub reporter eager for a story.

AT THE TIME this happened, Zinzi Clemmons was riding high from the extensive media attention she’d received a few weeks prior as a result of her break with Lena Dunham and Dunham’s band of what Zinzi called “hipster racists.”

lenadunhamandcast

INTERESTING that Zinzi’s husband Andre Naffis-Sahely cited (in a tweet) December 3rd as the time he became interested in the allegations about his then-editor, Donald Futers. Rumors swirling everyplace.

IF Dara Levy put Zinzi in touch with Monica Byrne, which seems likely, adding volatile Monica to the Andre-Zinzi combine took their own Volatility Index off the charts.

laboratory-test-tubes-4

Again, a conjunction of forces. The opportunity to receive massive publicity, which they’d had a taste of, at the same time outing misogynist miscreants. Doing good and helping career at the same time– the best of everything.

This explains the near-hysteria all three have maintained right up to the present time.

Think I’m joking? Here’s Andre Naffis-Sahely going after a journalist after both stories broke:

Or this tweet:

On May 4th he sent a series of tweets to Boston Review and its editors encouraging them to fire Junot Diaz. Such as this one:

MORE REVEALING are a series of tweets sent out by Naffis-Sahely and Clemmons at two UK poets who’d apparently discussed the rumors about Donald Futers, but wished to remain uninvolved and anonymous. Here’s a quote from one of them to Naffis-Sahely:

This isn’t public knowledge. Any action I took was in support of Amy and conducted deliberately in private so as to let her dictate what becomes public knowledge. I’d appreciate it if you remove me from this list.

And a follow-up from the same person:

There have been lots of private conversations on the phone, via email as we both know. But it has always been understood the survivor did not want to go public. Your own statement didn’t name names.

Was Amy K. Blakemore pressured, by Naffis-Sahely, into coming forward with her accusation against Donald Futers? Sure seems that way.

One can understand Andre and Zinzi’s viewpoint. They’d put themselves out there in accusing two important literary personages, Diaz and Futers. Now that they had, others they’d been counting on– rightly or wrongly– to join in had seemingly backed-out. It’s like walking into a fight with a tough gang and discovering most of your buddies have fled. Not a pleasant feeling.

west-side-story-jets-vs-sharks

AS RECENTLY as June 28th, Zinzi Clemmons was attempting to bully the other anonymous poet:

You call yourself a feminist but you are nothing but an opportunist protecting a monster (Donald Futers) in hopes that he’ll help your career. Would you like me to share those emails you sent to ?

On May 6th, Zinzi had tweeted the following to the same poet, in response to the person’s book being released:

Yeah, it’s too bad you had to trample all over other women in order to get it published. I know everything.

To what does this refer? Regardless, it’s literary infighting at its dirtiest. (And you thought the book world was all sweetness and light?)

On July 19th, Amy Blakemore herself felt forced to tweet out this statement:

also i have no fucking time for anyone creating drama ostensibly at my behest. you do not have my blessing. you are un-blessed. i have nothing but respect & admiration for

–then Blakemore proceeds to name the second of the two anonymous poets, the bullied one, along with another, better-known poet who apparently is being dragged against his will– by Andre and Zinzi?– into the controversy as well.

Cary-Grant-and-Martin-Lan-001
I’ll have a follow-up to this post by early next week, possibly sooner, attempting to tie together the threads of the two controversies and give a bigger overall picture. (Before that, we’ll have a post about more New Pop Lit happenings.) Click on the upper right hand corner drop down to follow this News site– that way you won’t miss a thing.

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS

The Other Harassment Case

THE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST DONALD FUTERS

futers3(Donald Futers in 2011.)

MORE COORDINATION BY ACCUSERS?

Curious or coincidence? On May 4, the very day his wife confronted Junot Diaz at the Sydney Writers Festival, her husband, Andre Naffis-Sahely, confronted Penguin UK poetry editor Donald Futers on twitter, referencing Junot Diaz in so doing:

TO WHAT did these inferences apply? Two days later he added this:

THE NEWS was breaking as he tweeted this. The person making the accusations: A.K. Blakemore:

Among the many articles in the United Kingdom about this controversy, most prominent may have been this one which appeared in The Times.

blakemore2

(Poet A.K. Blakemore.)

At least one journalist in England was skeptical about the accusation:

WE at New Pop Lit NEWS haven’t looked deeply into the Donald Futers/Amy Blakemore issue. We’re unable to offer a judgement, or even an opinion, either way. What’s interesting as regards the Junot Diaz issue is that one of the principals there, Zinzi Clemmons, along with her husband, Mr. Naffis-Sahely, were instrumental in bringing Futers/Blakemore matter also to light. (For what it’s worth, Naffis-Sahely, like Ms. Blakemore, is published by Penguin UK.) More coordination? At the least, many conversations behind the scenes.

The following three tweets show Clemmons to be very much the activist on sexual harassment:

What’s the back story to this particular part of the expanding story? Far be it from us to say. What Futers is accused of doing (which he denies) remains vague. All we know for sure is that he and one of the writers he edits, A.K. Blakemore, went on a date in 2015. We also know that– as with Junot Diaz– his employer has not fired him. We know Zinzi Clemmons has been actively involved in both controversies.

andre naffis-sahely(Andre Naffis-Sahely.)

Keep in mind that both controversies are battles within the established literary scene, in the U.S. and the U.K. Donald Futers, like Junot Diaz, has been vocally and vociferously progressive. Which makes us think our second post on the Junot Diaz affair may have been on the money.

THERE IS YET another personality apparently involved in some way in the Futers/Blakemore issue. More, perhaps, about that upcoming.

-Karl Wenclas for New Pop Lit NEWS