Pretty much what Etienne said. In the second part there are lots of people whining about how hard it is to be a white person in publishing, and concerned that people might comment if what they wrote is on the spectrum between insensitive and racist. There are two things that really bothered me. One is the repeated use of the word "canceled". Nobody is "canceled" and the whole concept of cancel culture is a baton taken up by the right to try and shut down criticism.
The second is the line "The idea that writers who tackle difficult subjects cannot necessarily rely on their publishers’ backing in a storm clearly alarms some." In general, this is not about writers tackling difficult subjects. Clanchy wasn't tackling a particularly difficult subject. She was just - at best - incredibly tactless and thoughtless in her content. Publishing Mike Pence's memoir isn't about "tackling difficult subjects" in the way that the article is using the phrase. This is trying to set these people up as people willing to ask the difficult questions, which they aren't.
The second is the line "The idea that writers who tackle difficult subjects cannot necessarily rely on their publishers’ backing in a storm clearly alarms some." In general, this is not about writers tackling difficult subjects. Clanchy wasn't tackling a particularly difficult subject. She was just - at best - incredibly tactless and thoughtless in her content. Publishing Mike Pence's memoir isn't about "tackling difficult subjects" in the way that the article is using the phrase. This is trying to set these people up as people willing to ask the difficult questions, which they aren't.
Comment