Romance Writers of America implodes over handling of criticism of racism

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by binaryhermit

I don't think Yoko Ono would have any say in it, I mean, I don't think original artists have veto power over cover versions of songs. She certainly could loudly complain, but...

This wasn't a cover. It was (supposedly) John's song, edited. I was trying to find a Snopes article or something to link to for you. But it's late and I'm tired.

[binaryhermit]

I tried to find it too and gave up, so you're not alone

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by binaryhermit

I tried to find it too and gave up, so you're not alone

Here's a version from Biography.com. But given the source, this may be the true story that led to the fake one:

Lennon was approached by the World Church asking if they could use it but change the lyrics to "one religion" instead of “no religion.” Lennon said no, explaining that that would defeat the whole purpose of the song. Since his death, Ono has been approached many times by groups who wanted to do the same thing, and she consistently refuses.

[ZodWallop]

Here's someone making the claim in a comment section a few years ago:

I haven't independently confirmed this, but in The God Delusion, Dawkins mentions that some stations in the US edited the line to "and ONE religion too" which just about makes your head explode.

He's doubly wrong. Not only is the story not true, but I read The God Delusion and I don't remember Dawkins making that claim. Of course, I haven't independently confirmed this

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by crich70

And they try to rewrite the books, which isn't likely to work. I remember a few yrs back someone was going to try to re-write the Narnia books and remove the Christian symbolism as part of it.

So anyway, a Christian-less Narnia is as likely a made up story to arouse people's passions as the 'edited Imagine' one was.

[pdurrant]

Moderator Notice
I must remind members that this thread is in the News forum, not the Politics and Religion Forum.

Please confine discussion to the events at RWA. Thank you.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

So anyway, a Christian-less Narnia is as likely a made up story to arouse people's passions as the 'edited Imagine' one was.

The story floating around was that the publishers (or somebody there) wanted to secularize them, to improve sales, but they needed permission and failed to get it. So it didn't happen.

The books won't hit the public domain for a while but when they do it'll be open season. Or it'll be moot. A lot of book controversies just fade with time.

I haven't heard much griping over LOLITA or Miller's books for a while now.
Times change and mores change. Outrage shifts to other books or sins.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by binaryhermit

I don't think Yoko Ono would have any say in it, I mean, I don't think original artists have veto power over cover versions of songs. She certainly could loudly complain, but...

People change the lyrics of songs they cover quite often. Sometimes they remove profanity so it will be played on the radio, sometimes because they forget or mishear the words, sometimes simply stylistically. For the most part, as long as those royalty checks keep coming in, it's all good.

[Greg Anos]

Assuming the owners of the previous copyright notice.

I was listening to a classical music station once, and hear the center section of Emerson, Lake, and Palmer's song Take A Pebble.

It has been composed by an Italian composer in 1940. That was never noted by anything on the album. I wonder if it was even noticed.

[hildea]

I'm a bit surprised at some of the replies here, especially the ones that seem to support Davis. I mean:

1. Someone writes a book
2. Someone else writes a harsh review
3. The author files a formal ethics complaint against the reviewer

...and some people here support the author in that conflict?
I thought it was a truth universially acknowledged that reviews are for readers, not for authors, and that it's extremely bad form for an author to complain about negative reviews (no matter how (un)reasonable those reviews are), and even worse to try to punish the reviewer.
Frankly, the fact that the ad hoc ethics committee of RWA (not to be confused with the normal etichs committee, which was bypassed in this case) didn't dismiss that complaint outright, is a pretty good indication that something's rotten in the board of RWA.

I'm also surprised that some of you seem to think that if a book describes a racist society, the book must necessarily be racist. That's not a very well thought out stance, to put it mildly. In "Gone with the wind" slaves are happy, and after the civil war, good slaves stay with their former owners, while bad slaves are uppity at best, and criminal at worst, resulting in the white gentlemen having to form KKK to defend the white ladies. That's light years away from the depiction in books with more realistic descriptions of the same time period, like "Roots", "Kindred", or "Dread Nation", to take a few.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

The story floating around was that the publishers (or somebody there) wanted to secularize them, to improve sales, but they needed permission and failed to get it. So it didn't happen.

Yes, yes. But my point is I think that is a phony story. That is to say that while 'people are saying' that it was in the works, was there ever a story in a reputable newspaper? Any interview with a publisher? Anyone directly involved in these supposed plans?

I just don't like to see a story brought up to support a point, when that supporting story is only fabrication.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Do you have any links to articles on that? It sounds too good to be true. Or maybe an Onion article.

A few years ago, people were outraged because Christian radio stations were playing a version of John Lennon's Imagine where the line had been edited to "one religion too."

Of course, it was completely untrue. Yoko would never allow that. I suspect the same is true for the imagined rewrite of the Narnia books.

Given what I've heard in other cover songs? I suspect the original writer/rights holder have nothing to say about it. There has been a long tradition of other singers modifying songs.

Look at Joan Baez's cover of David Patton's Lincoln Freed Me Today (The Slave) where the last line of the song was changed from "Lincoln freed me today" to "Now I am free to go my way". Oddly, the only point where the original line appeared in the song. Personally, I preferred Ian and Sylvia's version.

As for a rewrite of the Chronicles of Narnia? Last time I looked, they are not in PD so the rights holder would have the right to take infringers to court.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Given what I've heard in other cover songs? I suspect the original writer/rights holder have nothing to say about it. There has been a long tradition of other singers modifying songs.

Buddy, I answered that already. Post #46

And remember, we're talking about a fictitious story. It never happened. I was using the hoax story to point out that the edited Narnia books are also likely a hoax story. Something your aunt posts on Facebook. What used to be called fake news. Something designed to rile people up with no basis in reality.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by hildea

I'm a bit surprised at some of the replies here, especially the ones that seem to support Davis. I mean:

1. Someone writes a book
2. Someone else writes a harsh review
3. The author files a formal ethics complaint against the reviewer

...and some people here support the author in that conflict?

.

Do note that it is a twenty year old book.
(And a historical fiction book set in the 19th century.)

And the critics went after the author's new employer, personally.

Does that seem normal?

Me, I couldn't care less but it all smacks of ulterior motives.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

And the critics went after the author's new employer, personally.

My understanding is critic went after the author (Tisdale) based on her twenty year old novel and the fact that the author (Tisdale) was now also the employer (Tisdale employed Sue Whathername).