The only person who really benefited from this situation is the guy they interviewed because this is probably the most interest his name has generated in his career. My guess is since he writes social commentary now instead of fiction, these editors just guaranteed a boost to his career and reach as a writer, whereas if they had just ignored it no one would ever have read the damn thing and been able to experience his “harm”.
Definitely. Hilariously, the guy has ignored this entire thing. People are accusing him of freaking out and trying to cover himself, but he hasn't said anything about the controversy he caused, possibly understanding that no one cares.
I really like how you go beyond the usual cancel-culture controversy to get at the real issue, which is economic. These small publishers feel to me very much like an extension of MFA programs, not only because they’re entirely run by graduates of those programs, not only because their economic model makes no sense and relies on the support of people who can afford not to make money from their work, but also because their primary purpose is not what they say it is (producing writers and books) but rather to provide credentials.
As for all the brouhaha, it strikes me as purity culture, as you would find in fundamentalist religions. Someone becomes an outcast because they have violated a taboo, and the rest of society must shun them lest they themselves be contaminated. But at least most religions offer cleansing rituals so that the impure can rejoin the community.
I was one of the few people that read the interview before the backlash. Hobart has never been a mag I loved or even read regularly but I had seen some writers I like use it as a stepping stone, specifically Meg Pillow. Honestly, I only clicked the link of an interview of an unknown writer because he happened to have a Latine surname and that was a rarity. I pushed through the overly long q&a and came to the conclusion that he was just fishing for attention. He wasn’t even there to promote anything. Flash forward and there’s this whole meltdown happening on twitter. I look around to see if Alex Perez has new work and all I find is another interview on a podcast where he admits to playing up a character in Hobart. I’m three months late to this post, he’s still being talked about and I still don’t know if his fiction or commentary is even any good.
I respect that, honestly. Courting controversy is the best way to get attention and it seems to have worked all right for him.
Having not read his commentary I can't really respond to it, but I imagine he sounds like any random guy who listens to Joe Rogan except he's talking specifically about the niche subject of the literary community. Part of why he bothered people so much is probably because what he said is at least in part accurate. The gatekeeping is very real and the credentialism and obsession with cliques and transactional behavior makes it difficult to be around.
New to the party, sorry for butting in. As the guy who writes cheap adventure novels that never get published, I'm quite honestly, taken aback. Don't know who Hobart is, haven't read the interview, etc. but why on earth would folks do this to each other? They should be celebrating each other's work. Okay, I'll go back to my end of the pool. Best (and subscribed)!
Well, that's part of the irony of it all! They talk a great deal about supporting writers and so on, but they love to tear each other down.
Also, Samuraipunk is such a good name for a newsletter that I had to check it out. Also, seeing Vampire Hunter D right away when I click over has me interested!
The only person who really benefited from this situation is the guy they interviewed because this is probably the most interest his name has generated in his career. My guess is since he writes social commentary now instead of fiction, these editors just guaranteed a boost to his career and reach as a writer, whereas if they had just ignored it no one would ever have read the damn thing and been able to experience his “harm”.
Definitely. Hilariously, the guy has ignored this entire thing. People are accusing him of freaking out and trying to cover himself, but he hasn't said anything about the controversy he caused, possibly understanding that no one cares.
I really like how you go beyond the usual cancel-culture controversy to get at the real issue, which is economic. These small publishers feel to me very much like an extension of MFA programs, not only because they’re entirely run by graduates of those programs, not only because their economic model makes no sense and relies on the support of people who can afford not to make money from their work, but also because their primary purpose is not what they say it is (producing writers and books) but rather to provide credentials.
As for all the brouhaha, it strikes me as purity culture, as you would find in fundamentalist religions. Someone becomes an outcast because they have violated a taboo, and the rest of society must shun them lest they themselves be contaminated. But at least most religions offer cleansing rituals so that the impure can rejoin the community.
I'm always surprised by how intense fights with such low stakes can be
I was one of the few people that read the interview before the backlash. Hobart has never been a mag I loved or even read regularly but I had seen some writers I like use it as a stepping stone, specifically Meg Pillow. Honestly, I only clicked the link of an interview of an unknown writer because he happened to have a Latine surname and that was a rarity. I pushed through the overly long q&a and came to the conclusion that he was just fishing for attention. He wasn’t even there to promote anything. Flash forward and there’s this whole meltdown happening on twitter. I look around to see if Alex Perez has new work and all I find is another interview on a podcast where he admits to playing up a character in Hobart. I’m three months late to this post, he’s still being talked about and I still don’t know if his fiction or commentary is even any good.
I respect that, honestly. Courting controversy is the best way to get attention and it seems to have worked all right for him.
Having not read his commentary I can't really respond to it, but I imagine he sounds like any random guy who listens to Joe Rogan except he's talking specifically about the niche subject of the literary community. Part of why he bothered people so much is probably because what he said is at least in part accurate. The gatekeeping is very real and the credentialism and obsession with cliques and transactional behavior makes it difficult to be around.
No doubt. I even agree with some of his points. I think what’s annoying about the bit is that he still wants to be part of the club he is criticizing.
You really should do this:
https://www.copyright.gov/registration/
Thanks for the reminder!
I don't see Hobart in World Cat. World cat provides bibliographic information and tells you which libraries own it.
https://www.worldcat.org/
New to the party, sorry for butting in. As the guy who writes cheap adventure novels that never get published, I'm quite honestly, taken aback. Don't know who Hobart is, haven't read the interview, etc. but why on earth would folks do this to each other? They should be celebrating each other's work. Okay, I'll go back to my end of the pool. Best (and subscribed)!
Well, that's part of the irony of it all! They talk a great deal about supporting writers and so on, but they love to tear each other down.
Also, Samuraipunk is such a good name for a newsletter that I had to check it out. Also, seeing Vampire Hunter D right away when I click over has me interested!
Most definitely.
Thank you kindly. I'm a huge fan. I was able to meet Mr. Kikuchi in 2019 just before the pandemic shut us all down. He's a kind gentleman.
I hope I can keep your attention. I really could go for another movie, or a series would be kick ass.
Have a great one!
PS Originally from Iowa myself.