EDIT: Someone is maintaining a timeline with links.

So...Neil Gaiman makes the news. I'll have to listen to the reporting, but I can't imagine a circumstance where digitally penetrating the kid's nanny on the first day of the job(?) is not creepy AF, consensual or not. He is doing himself no favors by (victim) blaming, minimally this comes across as a master story-teller trying to tell a story... and he should know better than to try to control the narrative at this point.

Unless the other woman (the "fan" from Florida) is also the people that have been low-circulating publishing their other encounters with NG (and this is possible, considering the time frame) it is almost guaranteed that there are going to be more women who come forward... and he won't be able to spin every negative encounter. He's been pretty lucky that his public reputation was not harmed at the end of his first marriage, and that despite Amanda Palmer's initial semi-public dismissal of him, she's been pretty polite (publicly) through their relationship.

I'm hoping that NG's public friends and colleagues don't hand wave these two women away as consensual relationships that have soured... because by many, many accounts NG has been creeping on young fans for decades, and none of his associates have hinted at it in public. Even Harlan Ellison (who ran in the same circles) was well-publicized as a lothario, including public stories involving fans... but I never heard of or witnessed HE being ungentlemanly towards female fans after his marriage to Susan. Somehow NG has gotten a pass.

It really, really sucks to like creators these days.

Or rather. It probably always has, but now people are being brave enough to say “no” and come forward. But damn if this one doesn’t hurt.

I'm going to be selfish and worry that this is going to derail the Sandman Audio adaptations. yet...

... NG's behavior towards young women was well-whispered, going back to before the time of the fan in question. I can't say for certain when I was made aware of his behavior, but I know that by the time he was publicly fawning over Tori Amos (so maybe 1994?) I was having trouble appreciating the artist. I only met him once in person, and had him sign a collection, but I've never been a pretty boy, and he doesn't seem to go for the boys, plus I was also a 21+ adult. His public pursuit of Amanda Palmer also struck me as weird, but I kinda shrugged that one off because she appeared to be going in with eyes wide open.

The public victims, as well as others that may or may not yet believe themselves to have been exploited or worse, have my sympathy. The first responses seem to be victim blaming, and criticism of the source, I'll guess that the next beat in the pro-NG narrative will be accusations of pearl-clutching about open marriages... and I wouldn't be surprised if someone clouds the issue by bringing up polyamory (which I don't think is appropriate here).

As someone who practices ethical non-monogamy: It still requires honesty and full informed consent. Polyamory is not an excuse to be a cad.

-J

Exactly. I have a bad feeling that there are going to be simplistic attempts to overlap "(quasi) agreed-upon non-monogamy", "randy behavior", "hey, adults" with the small (so far) number of interactions NG has publicly admitted to. The guy has had so many personalities advocating for him, I'm going to be rubber-necking to see what these folks have to say about his admitted behavior. There is zero chance that his comic-book collaborators have been unaware of his proclivities, and somehow I doubt that his work in other media have been free of them as well.

One thing I'd forgotten: NG has strong and deep ties to Scientology, between his parents and his first wife... plus it appears that he kept his own active ties (among other things, he was an auditor) for much longer than he was open about. I always assumed that he wasn't being vocal about his connections so as to maintain a relationship with his older kids, but reviewing some pieces about his connections it all smacks of him maintaining a bunch of different self narratives.

It’s not getting better. https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2024/0...ult-and-abuse/

Over the next week I am going to try to give the podcasts a listen. I don't expect these to be very comfortable. I was expecting more stories to surface along the lines of him being a sex pest, and sleeping with younger fans and students... and possibly (again, my personal expectations) some kink-adjacent side-eyes because of the early self-reporting of the Palmer-Gaiman marriage.

However: The most recent reports indicate very clearly abusive behavior, which IMO move needle from "definitely creepy, possibly abusive with a very poor understanding of consent" into "definitely creepy for some, absolutely abusive for many others." The most recent report (the one with the housing-for-sex, plus NDA) certainly paints NG not as a guy with a mere kink, but as a guy with horrible appetites and a malignant sense of sexual entitlement.

For a long time I simply thought of him as the sort of sex pest similar to college faculty that start sexual affairs with students, or much like certain other artists/creators I observed/drank with at various types of conventions. It honestly never occurred to me that what I observed could be a tip-of-the-iceberg situation until post-usenet social media started to be a thing.

I'm not torn up about my relationship to his art... I will probably write more later.

How does that work for you? Not trying to be antagonistic. But there's a lot of art that I like and I can't stand the artist, and I'm having a real hard time going back to it. Whedon and Ellis wrote some killer comics, Manson and Disturbed have some great songs, etc etc. I've mostly cut them off entirely. But I do somewhat miss going back to their work.

Hell, I've got two kids that are prime Harry Potter age, and JK can take a flying leap.

One route I've seen from the Potter fandom is that they refuse to put another penny into the creator's pocket. They don't disavow the stories they loved, but that doesn't mean continuing to support the creator.

-J

I've "known" NG to have been a sex creep for decades, which has certainly colored my opinion of him for a long time. Certainly since the bitter end of the Sandman run... and like I wrote above, I didn't think it went beyond (what I considered to be) extremely poor choices on his part and the part of whatever "partners" (as if there was much like "partnership") he was having in his presence. I've worked with a number of people that have made extremely poor choices in pursuing sexual adventures with coworkers... and I don't think those people know (or care) how that affects other coworkers not in the relationship (not referring to myself) let alone whatever other partners they may have... so maybe I have mental constructs ready to move into place? I'm not exactly a prude, but I don't take a job to casually try to find sexual partners... there are plenty of other places for that.

I didn't (and don't) want to pass judgement on the young women (and girls!) that flocked to him, but he has long had the vibe of someone who was weirdly into young women... again, that was the vibe I got from his intensity about Tori Amos in her Little Earthquakes period. I always assumed (bad on me!) that he chased after Amanda Palmer because she was going to be the musical artist he added to his "collection". Folks have been reposting links to his weird (and in hindsight, creepy) "ice bucket challenge" video. Even during his WTF interview with Marc Maron NG was emphasizing how important Sandman was for getting girls and women to come to comic book shops (and events were he did signings). He also went out of his way to talk about his "fatherly" advice to Kirby... and I swear he goes out of his way to name check other younger actresses (e.g. Jenna Coleman, Karen Gillan, Adria Arjona) he works with or has a tangential connection with.

As for the art... I enjoyed the heck out of Sandman... to a point. The only future investment I intend to make in that is the HeroClix piece (which shouldn't really benefit NG) and a purchase of the audio adaptation if that is ever released. Despite NG's heavy involvement, I think of that as a Dirk Maggs joint, which is how I'm going to rationalize purchasing any future versions of those. It would be possible to swap out the Gaiman voice-overs of course.

There have only been a handful of non-collaborative efforts of NG's that I can say good things about: (most of) the American Gods novel, Anansi Boys, and a couple of short stories (many fewer than one might guess)... most of what he's written has landed "cold" for me. Some of the audio adaptations of his works have been much more enjoyable (again, many by Dirk Maggs) and I'm not going to have trouble enjoying them although I am under no obligation to recommend them.

Longish writings on a topic that I think has gotten too much discussion lacking nuance....


I know that NG was 'triggering' for some folks because of his "woke" attitudes... but honestly whatever I've seen people point out about as evidence of his "wokeness", but such things never landed as "woke" as much as they landed as "clumsy". I still think his somewhat simplistic representations of gender identity and sexual preference in the original Sandman comics are fine, even though he's received some criticism on that front.

The race-changing of Death (in TV Sandman) is a non-issue for me... Kirby (Howell-Baptiste) has IMO been much better in other TV shows (The Good Place, Sugar)... which makes me wonder if someone on Sandman gave her some craptastic notes that she tried to follow. I like the race changing of Rose Walker... but as I wrote elsewhere there was literally no need to ALSO race switch Unity Kinkaid, because pink grandmothers can have brown granddaughters... without even having to use magic or imagination. IMO a true color-blind forward thinker would have absolutely kept Unity Kinkaid as a whitish woman.

I do think the gender swapping of Lucien, John Constantine, and Lucifer was over-the-top. I understand the supposed rights issues around JC, and I can almost understand why try for a twofer with Lady Johanna... but Jenna Coleman was not right for the modern spin... and this felt to me like it was NG trying to get the actress close, rather than find an actress that could hew closer to a classic JC and also be a Lady Jo. Lucifer was modeled on David Bowie... and so surely there is a female actress that channels a modern Bowie vibe (ehem, Lady Gaga)... I think Christie's performance was flat. No notes for Acheampon's Lucien... except that she gets lumped in as another gender switch, for why?

All those Sandman casting choices seemed designed to invoke (casual, reflexive) criticisms from trollish elements that would be easy to dismiss. I vaguely recall that many criticisms of the American Gods TV show (which was objectively bad) were deflected by focusing only the trollish critics who got agita over the depictions of same-sex love and non-white deities. NG explicitly leaned into same-sex love for Good Omens 2, even though he originally expressed shock and skepticism of fanfic shipping Aziraphale and Crowley back when Good Omens was a fresh property. (I state casually without attribution, based only on memory.)

The gender-focus seems to be a new thing, but I remember how peculiarly vocal he had been on the race front. I remember how he's gone out of his way to never let people forget how he wrote Anansi Boys specifically for his "black friend Lenny Henry". Nobody in the UK wouldn't know that Lenny Henry was black, and nobody familiar with Anansi Boys wouldn't know that almost the entire cast of characters is dark skinned... I want to give NG some credit for making the choice to not explicitly reveal Shadow Moon's racial heritage... but at some point in that novel it is clear that the author's extreme lengths to avoid stating it (which does not reflect any version of "America") is a gimmick... and by the time I recognized the gimmick I felt like I was supposed to be doing some self reflection on my personal attitude about the racial choice rather than reflecting how the author's gimmick made the book's narrative unnecessarily clumsy.

All these self-advertised "well-motivated, creative choices for inclusivity" always struck me as sound and fury, signifying nothing more than the author's attempt to direct conversation.

---end of 'wokey' topics'

I admit I may have been overly sensitized to think NG was a PoS, but he was at the tail end (for me) of a rather important invasion of British talent in the comics industry and so I was paying attention. NG never struck me as being as sincere as the hermit/wizard Alan Moore, or the manifestation of the singularity Grant Morrison... two Brits who I would have suggested had weirder lives than NG, but both of whom seem much more well-adjusted (and trustworthy) than NG. Other contemporaneous British comic creators I can still regard well, because they've not been jerks. Heck, even Warren Ellis problematic behavior has been self-recognized and is (my opinion) less abusive (certainly less physically abusive, although I recognize I can't gauge emotional abuse felt by others).

Making people sign NDAs about personal relationships always seems like a red flag.

I've got no connection to Gaiman's art, having never read the Sandman stuff or pretty much anything of his, but I'm well aware that he had a strong fandom and was revered as Glorious Writer of Glory. But this thread reminded me of Tori Amos and that "Tear In Your Hand" was one of my favorite songs of hers, and that has the line "If you need me, me and Neil'll be hangin' out with the Dream King" and now that will be soured for me. Of course it's all about me.

The greater 'art from artist' issue. Never liked Potter much so no problem cutting out Rowling. Warren Ellis is harder because I really liked his books a lot. Of course, I grew up with Bill Cosby records forming a core of my sense of humor as a kid, and I can't really laugh with that man anymore. It sucks, but I'm not sure what we're all to do going forward about stuff like this. Pluck whatever good influences you can get out of their work but don't bother crediting them or talking about them?

Perhaps it's the job of decent people to take the good art of creeps and fashion it into something new and better. But moreso to actually be decent. I don't know.

I did have a co-worker who said he wondered how much trouble NG had growing up with "Kneel, Gay Man" as a name.

Wait, what did Disturbed do?


To build off of your question. I have Harry Potter Books, Iced Earth CDs, Neil Gaiman books and others. I will keep them and cherish them for as long as I please as they were part of my life and fond memories of times with friends and loved ones. I will not support anything new from them.

I personally think it is unhealthy form me to just cut out the arts by a single person. That is denying me something I enjoyed previously and probably own as well because of what they did after I read/listened/enjoyed their art.

I dunno about you but as for music it would be hard to not to listen to Michael Jackson's Thriller Album as well as Pink Floyd albums. I have them already, same with Simpson DVD box sets.

Draiman has said some pretty awful things about Israel and Palestine. I know he’s Hebrew but he’s right there with his buddy Netanyahu. He also went heavy for GamerGate during the height of *that* idiocy.

Gotcha. Thanks

This stuff about not giving money to Jk and not listening to this or buying that is wearying on my personal level.
If I think hard enough and look hard enough there are extremely few things I could support wholeheartedly.
In practice if it occurs to me I steer clear, but mostly don’t think about the person or business and every facet of everything they’ve ever did.
Truly saddened to hear about NG and victims.