The June 6 roundup included a quote from Tor Creative Director Irene Gallo’s Facebook page, tweeted by Vox Day:
https://twitter.com/voxday/status/607225621475958784
The quote generated a flurry of response (11 examples mentioned in the June 7 roundup).
There also were questions raised in discussion at File 770 about evidence that Gallo’s comment must have been screencapped soon after it was made on May 11, with people wondering why it had just come to light now.
On behalf of File 770 readers I asked Vox Day “(1) how long did you hold this before posting, and (2) what is the sinister plotting, er, reason behind whatever delay there was, if any?”
He answered:
I’ve held onto this since I had the screencap, which as you correctly note was made several weeks ago. As for the “sinister plotting”, I have long been in the habit of never using all of my ammunition at once, or pointing-and-shrieking for its own sake. I am a patient man and I didn’t strike back at TNH, PNH, or even John Scalzi right away either.
So it does seem to have been timed for release just ahead of Nebula Awards weekend.
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Steven Schwartz has it right. When your rhetoric is spiced with pointedly Nazi references, don’t be surprised if that’s how it tastes to others. That’s on Beale, which is why him accusing Gallo of libel is so hilarious.
Of course, the above statement could be another one of his ‘I don’t mean it, I just say it to annoy people’ lines, but that’s the hazard of writing the way he does — sometimes, people actually believe you when you say dumb things.
And people tend to have even less patience for the boy who cries “yay fascism!” than the one just crying “wolf”.
Gallo described the Sads as far-right and the Rabids as neo-nazi. That’s perfectly reasonable. If she didn’t qualify it with a lot of “not all Sads/Rabids” weasel words, well, Facebook, land of the soundbite.
In the meantime, the Puppies have 1) brought a great deal more attention to this supposedly scurrilous claim than it would otherwise have gotten and 2) demonstrated that–despite Brad’s brave words about Sads and Rabids being separate groups–when Vox Day dangles the doggy treat they all jump for it in one big pack.
Ann: It’s 90% appreciation and 10% envy I didn’t think of it first.
This went up earlier today:
http://www.tor.com/2015/06/08/a-message-from-tom-doherty-to-our-readers-and-authors/
Excerpt:
Given that there is no mention of Ms Gallo having been reprimanded or fired, it’s probably reasonable to say that this is a legal clarification rather than tossing her under the metaphorical bus.
What she said strikes me as over-the-top, but I have little room to talk, having gone out of my own riverbanks more than once in the past. I’m glad she appears to still have a job. And I can understand how a cursory reading of PuppyWeblogs, particularly Mr. Beale’s/Day’s can lead one to Godwinning, as it were.
Before all of this, I really had no opinion of Mr. Beale/Day other than he wrote a relatively competent half-novel about a game, and that he had been polite in short e-mails I’d received. I knew he had a column on an insane website, but so did a man I respected, so I knew not everyone shared my opinion of it. Okay, fine….
However, this most recent has the look of fecal-disturbance for it’s own sake, having been held until the Nebula Award Weekend — and his given reason for doing so, which does look like a Snidely Whiplash/Dick Dastardly kind of ridiculous childishness, really drives home the point that he has so far had nothing useful to say about the Hugo Awards, nominations, definitions of what is a “fan”, supporting memberships, WSFS business, et al.
Frankly, why is he not simply shunned? Why reprint such useless and mean-spirited writing and comment on it? Just pretend from this point that he doesn’t exist.
That’s what I’m doing, effective immediately.
While no one was watching, Vox Day stole 40 nomination slots. That’s as many as four tens… And that’s terrible.
“Yet at the same time… nope, I can’t quite see it. Comic book villains usually have a more impressive ambition that screwing with genre awards.”
Perhaps if we threw Hostess Fruit Pies (IIRC) at him, he’d be satisfied and go away?
Perhaps a villain from The Tick? Next thing we know he is going to carve his puppy logo on the moon. I am sure there is some subtle and nefarious reason you would need a Hugo rocket for this.
David K. M. Klaus: Thanks for giving me the benefit of your eagle eye on the news!
@Steven Schwartz
OMG – I had forgotten all about those. Those were hysterical!
@rcade: [Day is] obsessed with Internet attention.
Y’all still don’t get Vox. It’s not about the attention, though I can understand why you’d like to think that, it’s about the careful application of pain in a long campaign. Vox has show he is indeed a patient man, and a man with a plan. Dismiss him as a petulant crank or comic-book villain as you will if it allows you to sleep better.
@David K. M. Klaus Frankly, why is he not simply shunned?….Just pretend from this point that he doesn’t exist.
Indeed, if you want to diminish Vox’s influence, ignore him. Not my advive, he’s said it himself. I note that other professionals at Tor have wisely gone radio silent on this years Hugos after an initial burst of indignation. But Tor’s responses to Ms. Gallo’s public comments have been merely trying to distance themselves from them, rather ineffectively.
Simply saying that Ms. Gallo’s post were her own opinions and not those of Tor is weak sauce. Ms. Gallo, a publishing executive, publicly posted that a number of authors her company publishes are “Neo-Nazis” who produce “reprehensible” work. (I would be interested to learn which of the nominated works she considered reprehensible.) And commenters here simply dismiss those comments as either irrelevant or actually appropriate.
So I ask, what would the response would be if an executive at, say, DAW, were to claim in a public post on Facebook that one of their authors was a “half-savage”? Would you accept the publishers response that such remarks are simply a private opinion? Would you dismiss such a comment as irrelevant or innocuous? Be honest. Because we all already know the answer.
Simply saying that Ms. Gallo’s post were her own opinions and not those of Tor is weak sauce. Ms. Gallo, a publishing executive, publicly posted that a number of authors her company publishes are “Neo-Nazis” who produce “reprehensible” work.
Yeah, no, that wasn’t what she said, we actually READ it.
it’s about the careful application of pain in a long campaign.
Then he’d better get started doing it, because all he is doing now is making everyone laugh.
LostSailor : Simply saying that Ms. Gallo’s post were her own opinions and not those of Tor is weak sauce. Ms. Gallo, a publishing executive, publicly posted that a number of authors her company publishes are “Neo-Nazis” who produce “reprehensible” work. (I would be interested to learn which of the nominated works she considered reprehensible.)
Thank you for repeating VD’s talking points like a good little parrot. Now, why don’t you fly back home and tell him that if he believes that the only acceptable answer is for Tor to fire Gallo, he should start holding his breath and turning blue to force them to do so.
Before anyone objects to Ms. Gallo’s words, I’d like them to prove they know what “respectively” means.
What she actually *said* is that the Sad Puppies are “right wing” (or maybe “extreme right wing”), and the Rabid Puppies are “neo-nazi”. I believe the latter phrase is a reference to Philip Sandifer’s post, Guided by the Beauty of Their Weapons.
Before all of this, I really had no opinion of Mr. Beale/Day other than he wrote a relatively competent half-novel about a game
If you’re talking about The War In Heaven, I don’t consider that competent, unless competent means all the words are spelt correctly and he uses the right definitions.
(I would be interested to learn which of the nominated works she considered reprehensible.)
And we’d all be interested in knowing explicitly which works the Puppies felt were only on the Hugo ballots because of “affirmative action,” which they claimed and have thus refused to produce any names when asked.
You first.
I would be interested to learn which of the nominated works she considered reprehensible.
Transhuman and Subhuman is pretty reprehensible. It is a shitty piece of writing too, but it shares that characteristic with a large number of the other Puppy picks.
“Bad to reprehensible” might have been just a bit over-broad. The Annie Bellet story (since withdrawn, but that doesn’t change the fact that the puppies tried, and in any case she hadn’t withdrawn yet when Gallo made her remarks) wasn’t great, but it was better than bad.
@jayn: I READ it as well. And it is precisely what she said. If the Rabid Puppies are “respectively” Neo-Nazis and the same parallel carries over to “reprehensible” works, and given that Kevin J. Anderson and John C. Wright were both of whom are long-time Tor-published authors and on the Rabid Puppies list, the conclusion is obvious. But nice try.
@Aaron: by all means, keep laughing.
@Gabriel F: Since my question was really directed at Ms. Gallo, not you, I’ll let her answer first. But, names have been produced, though I understand your sidestepping…
LostSailor: (I would be interested to learn which of the nominated works she considered reprehensible.)
Transhuman and Subhuman is a solid place to start, with its hatefully backwards view of women and its bizarre equating of homosexuality with gorilla screwing.
And we understand Vox Day quite well, that racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, nationalist, child murder apologist, neo-fascist that he is.
@LostSailor
I got the impression from your post that you are a Puppy and are on Day’s “side”, and that you think this:
is admirable. Could you explain why it would be admirable?
@Gabriel F: Since my question was really directed at Ms. Gallo, not you, I’ll let her answer first.
You’re posting on a public space where Gallo currently is not to be found.
You take what you get.
“If the Rabid Puppies are “respectively” Neo-Nazis and the same parallel carries over to “reprehensible” works, and given that Kevin J. Anderson and John C. Wright were both of whom are long-time Tor-published authors and on the Rabid Puppies list, the conclusion is obvious. But nice try.”
So everyone who is nominated by the Rabid Puppies group IS a Rabid Puppy by definition? Do you know for a fact that ALL the nominees define themselves so? I ask merely for information.
by all means, keep laughing.
Beale couldn’t be more of a clown if he put on big floppy shoes and smeared white greasepaint all over his face. That you take him seriously also makes you into a joke.
It’s hilarious that Day talks like he’s a supervillain.
It’s more hilarious that you talk like a supervillain’s henchman.
It’s not libel if it’s true. A lot of assholes who get called out on their assholery seem to miss that distinction.
@Gabriel F
The usual suspects: The Water That Falls on You from Nowhere, Ancillary Justice, and (for reasons best know to Torgersen, since Scalzi is straight, cis, white, American, and male) Redshirts. Probably If You Were A Dinosaur at some point too, but I think I’ve mostly seen that listed as too literary and not sf/f enough rather than Affirmative Actioned onto the ballot.
Its easier to understand if you mentally subtract points from each story’s marks out of ten every time they have a gay, or non-white, or queer, or non-American, or female character (especially if the female character is not granted as a reward to anyone). Then, take off points if the “conservative” viewpoint (or Christianity) is referenced in anything other than glowing terms. Then, remove all points if the author is known as “Scalzi”. Now you have the score the Puppies think the story should have, and you know why they don’t understand how those stories could be on the ballot legitimately, let alone win.
“it’s about the careful application of pain in a long campaign”
Sounds like a comic-book villain to me. Normal people don’t plot long-term campaigns for the sole purpose of hurting others.
What she actually *said* is that the Sad Puppies are “right wing” (or maybe “extreme right wing”), and the Rabid Puppies are “neo-nazi”. I believe the latter phrase is a reference to Philip Sandifer’s post, Guided by the Beauty of Their Weapons.
I doubt it; I never use the phrase in that piece, nor would I, as I’m aware that the inaccuracies (Beale is not antisemitic, most notably) would end up obscuring the intended point, which is that Beale is an extremely radicalized right-wing activist. I suspect the phrase just comes from a general lack of historical precision when selecting among the available synonyms for “right wing nutcase.”
So while I think Gallo was technically inaccurate, I don’t think she was the least bit over the line, and I find the efforts to strip away her livelihood in retaliation for her comments absolutely loathsome, albeit hardly unexpected.
Of course, that’s a very limited number of stories, all of which are from the last couple of years… Didn’t Torgersen say this started in 1995? I haven’t seen him cite anything any stories close to 2005 let alone 1995.
I look forward to seeing Freer condemn those attempts by his fellow Puppies. After all, he thought attacks on livelihoods were beyond the pale, or does that only apply when the livelihoods belong to Puppies?
For weeks, pros among the Puppies have been claiming that people who oppose them threatened their professional livelihoods (or called for that to happen). This charge was echoed throughout the puppyverse and prompted much gnashing of canines.
Just out of curiosity: Did any of them object to attempts to cost Gallo her job?
Meredith: Great minds think alike. We’ll always have 5:58.
Phil Sandifer:Beale is not antisemitic, most notably
Oh not this shit again.
Vox Day’s own words demonstrate his antisemitism quite well. We’ve been up and down the block with Rick Moen on this already, we don’t need a repeat.
I can answer my own question. He planned to join the boycott if he isn’t satisfied with the steps Tor take/have taken. http://madgeniusclub.com/2015/06/08/communication-subjectivity/
Sigh.
Phil Sandifer:
I wasn’t saying that you said “neo-nazi” — which, as you say, would be inaccurate. I just assumed she was using “neo-nazi” as a synonym for “fascist”, and is less aware than you of the history and construction (like you, I don’t want to say “philosophy”) of fascism.
@rcade
And our 5:58 selves will always be disappointed – see above. 🙁
Oh not this shit again.
Vox Day’s own words demonstrate his antisemitism quite well. We’ve been up and down the block with Rick Moen on this already, we don’t need a repeat.
In all sincerity, I’ve not been up and down this block previously, and had an exchange with Vox in which I asked him point blank whether or not he believed in any significant genetic deficiencies among Jewish people in the same way that he did among African people, and he said no. That was sufficient to convince me that antisemitism does not number among his racisms, and I’ve never seen any evidence to the contrary.
If such evidence exists, I would genuinely like to see it, as I’m going to eventually revise Guided by the Beauty of Their Weapons for inclusion in an essay collection, and I would like to include any existent evidence along those lines.
It’s like “Vox Day is a lot of things but he’s not antisemitic” when he goes on about how Jewish people born and raised in other countries are never fully of that country and inevitably lead to social strife and should get out and sever their roots to move back to Israel but oh no, that’s not antisemitic. Oh goodness no!
>:(
Beale is not antisemitic, most notably
I don’t know about that. He supports Israel but wants to remove Jews from every other country.
For weeks, pros among the Puppies have been claiming that people who oppose them threatened their professional livelihoods (or called for that to happen). This charge was echoed throughout the puppyverse and prompted much gnashing of canines.
Just out of curiosity: Did any of them object to attempts to cost Gallo her job?
Certainly not in any significant numbers. (For what it’s worth, I think trying to put anyone out of work is loathsome, period. I oppose the negative review campaigns against Castalia House books in order to hurt their sales, and I oppose trying to drive people out of their jobs for comments they make outside of their official capacities. I think the idea that people who disagree with me should be forced into poverty is horrifying for essentially all values of “people who disagree with me.”)
“Beale is not antisemitic, most notably”
No no, of course not. He just thinks they should all leave Europe where they don’t belong because of Jewishness means they can’t really be European, and stick to Israel.
I can’t imagine why anyone would find that anti-Semetic in the slightest. /sarcasm
Beale is inarguably anti-semitic. Check out his assorted statements on nefarious Jews in the ACLU, for instance.
@XS: where is Vox a “child murder apologist”? That’s a new one. And I get it, you find anything you disagree with “reprehensible.” Noted. And, I can also leave what I get.
@Meredith: I am not a Puppy, I’m a human being. I don’t support Vox; I disagree with him on a wide range of issues. But yes, I do support the Sad Puppies, for reasons the comment section of File770 make clear. Why is my understaind of Vox admirable? It’s not. It’s merely making the effort to read what he wrote and understand his methods. That doesn’t indicate support, merely understanding. You might want to try it.
@jayn: Your request for mere information is more properly directed to Ms. Gallo.
@Aaron: That you don’t take him seriously make you into a fool. And if you don’t understand why, I can’t help you.
@Kevin B: A lot of people who don’t understand libel miss the distinction that if you state something as fact that’s really just opinion, you don’t get to “take it back” later. Then you have to prove that it’s true, and if it gets to a court that can be very difficult to do. Just sayin’
@McJulie: Who ever said that the sole purpose was to “hurt others”? The Sad Puppies never said that. And Vox has explicitly said that the purpose is much larger. Your feelings aren’t the issue.
@rcade: No one I’ve seen (and please point it out if I’m missing something, I can’t read everything) has attempted to “cost Gallo her job.” I have seen people bringing the issue to the attention of Tor management as well as the management of the parent company Pan Macmillian. Not the same thing. Personally, I think Ms. Gallo acted in an entirely unprofessional manner, warranting at least a reprimand and public apology (and, no, her post in the comments to her offending Facebook post doesn’t really count). If you’re going to be a professional working at a publishing company, I just feel one should act like it.
But I note with amusement that no one has addressed the question I posed in my comment above. But I understand why.
And with this, I leave you all to your meandering musings….
@Phil Sandifer
This thread starting roughly at Rick Moen’s comment to Owlmirror would probably be the place to look. Lots of chatter about it.
https://file770.com/?p=22569&cpage=4#comment-263489
alauda:I don’t know about that. He supports Israel but wants to remove Jews from every other country.
There’s a malignant subset within Christianity that goes on about their support for Israel but has far less concern for the Jewish people than they are interested in fulfilling certain apocalyptic prophesies. Think Hal Lindsey and similar false prophets.
I’m actually not charging VD with that specific sin this time, but it bears noting because it absolutely is a thing.
@LostSailor
Well, it wasn’t a very interesting question, and I don’t have the time to explain to you the very large differences between a racist statement and a statement that someone is racist.
I will point out that an editor who went off on one about Mary Robinette Kowal in much more personally insulting (and considerably more inaccurate) ways still has his job. I think your assumptions might need some correcting.
Connor Cochran: JJ, the link you posted (in commenting on Charlie Petit) is a defamatory anonymous attack website set up by someone who tried to scam Conlan Press last year using a forged document.
Thank you for correcting that, Connor. Normally, when I encounter such articles in the usual course of my Internet activities, I do searching for backup sources. I did not do that yesterday due to time reasons — so I shouldn’t have posted it until I had time to look and find backup. My apologies. I’m glad that you’ve set the record straight.
I read The Last Unicorn and Two Hearts for the first time last year. I look forward to the future works you’ve described.
Okay, changed my mind.
@XS and @alauda: Wrong. Vox has, from my reading of what he’s written, simply said that, especially in Europe, Jews are in increasing danger of a rising and violent anti-semitism there and Israel, being a Jewish state dedicated to protecting Jews, is inherently safer. He never, to my knowledge, said Jews can’t be fully of the country they are born in or that he “want to remove” Jews from “every other country.”