Sign in with Facebook
Marquise's Reviews > The Sandman, Vol. 1: Preludes & Nocturnes
The Sandman, Vol. 1: Preludes & Nocturnes
by
by
I had planned to read this for my #mangacomicsgraphicnovels goal for this year that's halfway done by now, people kept telling me I'd love Morpheus and, from the samples I've caught here and there, I'm inclined to believe it might as well have been true.
But . . .
How do you separate what Neil Gaiman has done from his writing? Some might be able to, but this kind of horror affects women differently beyond the statistics showing them as disproportionately represented as victims. I can't do the "artist =/= art" compartmentalisation in these cases. It's as simple as that. I reacted the same way to the Pablo Neruda case (curiously, also with house helper staff).
So I guess this goes to one of those reject shelves. Not that I lament this, exactly. Gaiman is very hit or miss for me, with more in favour of "miss," so for all I know I might've not liked this regardless of what the author did or didn't do in his personal life. We'll never know, indeed, but I'm at peace with expelling Gaiman from my to-read list permanently.
But . . .
How do you separate what Neil Gaiman has done from his writing? Some might be able to, but this kind of horror affects women differently beyond the statistics showing them as disproportionately represented as victims. I can't do the "artist =/= art" compartmentalisation in these cases. It's as simple as that. I reacted the same way to the Pablo Neruda case (curiously, also with house helper staff).
So I guess this goes to one of those reject shelves. Not that I lament this, exactly. Gaiman is very hit or miss for me, with more in favour of "miss," so for all I know I might've not liked this regardless of what the author did or didn't do in his personal life. We'll never know, indeed, but I'm at peace with expelling Gaiman from my to-read list permanently.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
The Sandman, Vol. 1.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
February 17, 2024
– Shelved
February 17, 2024
– Shelved as:
to-read
August 5, 2024
– Shelved as:
reviews-steered-me-away
Comments Showing 1-15 of 15 (15 new)
date
newest »
newest »
Théo d'Or wrote: "Try " Mein Kampf ". No. Not today."Too late, mon cher, waaayyy too late. I already did. 🤣
I don't think I can separate the person from the books. I've read and liked several of his books, too.
Michelle wrote: "I don't think I can separate the person from the books. I've read and liked several of his books, too."No shame in having liked his books before knowing what he had done, my friend. I did, too, and as I was telling another friend I don't believe in retroactive punishment like I've seen some folks do here (like when they come to 1-star a book in 'retaliation' towards the author for whatever or those that run back to change their ratings when negative news break out). The important thing is what you do AFTER the knowledge, not before.
I don't blame you. Gaiman has been very hit or miss for me too, even ignoring the allegations about him.Personally, I've made my peace with a lot of the creators I like with "issues". My interests don't reflect their moral core and I don't care enough about the random judgements from people in online spaces to determine who/what I can enjoy.
H.P Lovecraft, Warren Ellis and Salvador Dali were all creators that defined my artistic/creative interests. They also all did/believed in scummy things. But their sins aren't mine. Their stupid actions don't define me. And I don't think - despite what a broad portion of online discourse believes - that they should define others either.
Steven wrote: "And I don't think - despite what a broad portion of online discourse believes - that they should define others either."Yeah, I agree with that. I'm not into looking up authors myself, the great majority of times all I know about them is their name and nationality, and that's it. Because of that, I've got some nasty surprises when information about them reached me. Sometimes, you can guess their troubling aspects from their writing, but often you don't because as you noted there are authors whose artistic output is free of their personal scandals/beliefs.
I'm sure there are more people like me who don't bother to look authors up, and simply don't know. I don't judge those. I don't judge those who loved Gaiman and still love his books, it's those that defend his actions outside of his artistic output what I do judge. I'm seeing a disgustingly large number of those online, who somehow seem to think that they have to defend his personal life in order to continue liking his books.
Marquise wrote: "Steven wrote: "And I don't think - despite what a broad portion of online discourse believes - that they should define others either."Yeah, I agree with that. I'm not into looking up authors myse..."
Yeah I've seen that. That being said, I've also seen a sizeable chunk of people in online spaces do the opposite, condemn people for not falling in line and agreeing to condemn the guilty party or follow the online zeitgeist, oftentimes not even related to books.
Just as an example, back in the early 2010s, when a split happened in the online atheist movement, one group tried to create Atheism+, what was to be the Atheist movement going forward, free of sexism, racism, bigotry etc. But when people declined the offer of joining - regardless of the reasoning - those people were dismissed as bigots.
So often I've seen ideological positions get reduced to high school politics. There's no complexity, only heroes and villains and sacrifices to throw into the volcano.
Steven wrote: "So often I've seen ideological positions get reduced to high school politics. There's no complexity, only heroes and villains and sacrifices to throw into the volcano."Indeed, it's this kind of reductionism that keeps me away from certain topics of discussion online. But sadly, many of those spaces that are supposed to be serious and respectful have their share of people who hurl personal insults at those who disagree.
That's online life in general. :(
I have trouble separating art from the artist. Happy to kick Gaiman to the curb. He can join Sylvia Plath. Bye, Felicia! I know some people can compartmentalise. Each to their own :)
(I am a contradiction though because I still read/love Harry Potter, and found out about the author years later).
Esta wrote: "I have trouble separating art from the artist. Happy to kick Gaiman to the curb. He can join Sylvia Plath. Bye, Felicia! I know some people can compartmentalise. Each to their own :)
(I am a con..."
At least you're willing to acknowledge that hypocrisy. A lot of people - especially in online spaces - refuse to out of fear for their online image being tainted.
Esta wrote: ".(I am a contradiction though because I still read/love Harry Potter, and found out about the author years later)."What Steven said. And also, we can't be blamed for liking stuff without knowing/before knowing about the authors extracurricular activities & opinions. It's very likely there's authors whose books we like that are problematic but we don't know yet for whatever reason.
I mean, Gaiman wasn't made famous yesterday. He has a decades-long career...
Ah the good old argument of art vs the artist. Not sure we'll ever solve it.
The sad truth is that many well-known writers, artists, etc. were pretty reprehensible people. I find it easier to overlook the sins of the long dead (nor am I a fan retrospectively imposing current standards on them; they lived in their time not ours). Living writers who are creeps are a different matter. The only Gaiman that I have read (and now the last) was his retelling of Norse myths. I won't be putting any more money is his pocket.
Morphing_kashi wrote: "Ah the good old argument of art vs the artist. Not sure we'll ever solve it."Yeah, it's always going to be divisive. It's not even new, but now that we have the internet, more people are on it arguing. And not civilly either.
Fred wrote: "I find it easier to overlook the sins of the long dead (nor am I a fan retrospectively imposing current standards on them; they lived in their time not ours). Living writers who are creeps are a different matter."Yes, exactly. Culture evolves, and mores with it. We can look back at artist from past centuries with more understanding, their world wasn't ours, but modern artists that share our world and mores. . . what's their excuse? None.
Now, wouldn't be ideal for the authors to have numbers, instead of names ? I know, it would remind us of the author of " Mein Kampf ", again. But let's ignore that. Wouldn't it sound more tender when you say " You know, I read 67890765's book. It's great ! I wonder what this guy is like in his private life " ?