Marion Zimmer Bradley

[chiqui]

Carrying over from the Current Events thread, because this whole shebangle is way too interesting to leave alone. For those new to it, read this blog post about the abuse suffered by MZB's daughter, and for more background, this story on MZB's background and her ex-husband. I for one was extremely surprised at how different she was from what I expected her to be from her writing. This includes her accomplishments as well as her mistakes. I was not a rabid fan, but enjoyed the work of hers that I did read; they well well-crafted and plotted, and made me think without being too didactic.

(I did also meet the whole family once, in 1984 at a SF convention. They seemed very normal to me, her daughters were cute and outgoing and even helped us carry in some stuff. MZB seemed preoccupied and didn't talk much -- this was the year after Mists of Avalon had been published, which had caused a stir in SF/Fantasy circles, though it hadn't yet reached the heights it would later. Like a lot of people, I find it hard to reconcile that image with what has come about the family since then.)

So, as was detailed in the other thread, the revelations bring up an interesting dillemna: at what point does one stop consuming a writer's work because of who they really are and what they've done? MZB's failures as a person have not made me give up on her work or not want to read it any more; but on the other hand, there are writers who I will never read, because I find them abhorant as people. And then, there are writers who may be the sweetest, kindest people on earth, who I will judge as people by depravity or themes of their work.

[Malle Babbe]

Yeah, I want to post an epic post of my thoughts, but I am pressed for time at work. I too look askance at the whole "Separate the art from the artist" thing because it just sounds like another iteration of the overall culture's habit of enabling the abusive behavior of its more privileged members, out of fear of what, they never say... Am I supposed to believe that Walter Breen's abuse of so many boys was an "outlet" for him? Was Jerry Sandusky going to climb onto the roof of Old Main and start shooting people if he wasn't "allowed" to rape kids on the PSU campus or in his home?

If you really want to gnash your teeth, look at the infighting among the board members of one particular convention group that actually did the right thing and forbade Walter Breen to attend. Lots of folks stopped supporting that con due to the Five Geek Social Fallacies going into overdrive.

[Auroranorth]

I read the transcripts. She knew about and ignored her husband's behavior, and I believe her daughter.

As for the Breendoggle- Jesus wept. There were so, so many people who refused to see what was in front of their eyes.

Links to MZB testimony and that of Lisa Waters

What her daughter says (TW- it's pretty brutal)

Breendoggle Wiki

The second cause was Walter's sex play with 3-year old P----------- ----------------. He had her trained up to the point where she would take off her clothes the minute she saw him. He would then "rub her down" and all that. I recall one occasion -- a fairly large gathering at the Nelsons -- in which he also used a pencil, rubbing the eraser back and forth in the general area of the vagina, not quite masturbating her. (Walter is incredible.) Many people were somewhat displeased by this -- most particularly her parents. No one thought he was actually psychologically damaging P--------- (she being so young) --- obviously ----- and ---- would have interfered if they thought he had been -- but the spectacle was not thought to be aesthetically pleasing.

If it were my daughter I'd have killed him on the spot.

[Mouse]

Bradley and Breen were utterly vile people. This is a link to Bradley's own testimony about her husband's behavior. It is vomit-inducing.

The people who looked the other way or rationalized this behavior should hang their heads.

UGH!

[ladyvorkosigan]

OMFG, those transcripts. I think I'm going to throw up.

I remember being really moved by The Mists of Avalon as a teenager, and appreciating that she put gay characters in her other fantasy novels, but in this case (in most cases) I cannot separate the art from the artist. Never again.

Malle Babbe, I think you're right, "separate the art from the artist," benefits/enables the artist. I wonder if part of it stems from our culture really buying into/overvaluing the narrative of being a "productive member of society." I've always hated the position that "value" put people with disabilities/people who for some reason aren't "productive," but I wonder if the reverse also does damage: as long as you're productive, we're not going to look too hard at the people you hurt.

[petitesuite]

I think there are two separate issues at play in separating the art from the artist, one being what you as the consumer can tolerate and one being how much the artist is enabled when people do that. I mention this because in the other thread people were posting about not re-reading Bradley's book--now, those people aren't separating the art from the artist (as is of course their right!) but they are no more or less enabling than someone who rereads her books without guilt. The only person who enables the artist is one who doesn't separate her from her books AND goes out and buys a copy of the Mists of Avalon tomorrow.

I personally don't tend to have any issue separating the two (although my lines in the sand are as arbitrary as anyone else's--I wouldn't spend money on her books, but if they were free I would read them, I won't spend money on Polanski movies but I'll spend money on movies featuring people who supported him). I do think as ladyvorkosigan said we have a tendency to romanticize creators, but also that that tends to apply more to men than to women.

[Nysha]

I've never read any of MZB's books and have no desire to, now. However, since she's dead, I personally don't think it's out of line to purchase her books while still believing she's a horrible person.

If she were alive, I'd feel differently. I've stopped reading and purchasing books from Orson Scott Card because of his public anti-gay stance. Even though I like his writing, I don't want to put money into his pockets.

[Auroranorth]

I would be unwilling to buy them because the money goes to Lisa Waters, who was aware of the abuse and did nothing.

[LurkerNan]

This is an opportunity for me to put my philosophies in play. I don't watch Woody Allen or Polanski movies, I just don't like them. But I have read MZB's books, and I still have them. So, rather then give them to a used bookstore that might lead to new fans for her work, I'll burn them or rip them up and toss them into the trash.

Bonus! More room on my book shelves.