Literary Clusterfucks 2013

...So Dawn the Kidney Person comes off as a washed up writer desperate to validate her sad existence with Facebook likes. Which okay...but she did deliberately limit her kidney news to a small private group (30 out of 1,000+ friends)... pic.twitter.com/iOaaC9sxbK

— Dan Nguyen (everyone you love decomposing to bones (@dancow) October 8, 2021

this resulting in larson getting her story reviewed and panned by the new yorker is hilarious

hah yeah.

I don't think this from Michael Hobbes has been posted yet, but I thought it was good: https://rottenindenmark.org/2021/10/10/identifying-the-bad-art-friend-is-easy

I will admit that my initial sympathies leaned toward Larson, based in part on the way Dorland was depicted in the NYT article. Like, it seemed like she was haranguing everyone she knew to ask why they hadn't asked her about the kidney donation, and I thought "Chill out, no one has an obligation to you." But some of the evidence revealed in the lawsuits suggests that Dorland may have specifically reached out to Larson because she suspected Larson was "lurking for the lulz" (as someone else put it).

Yes, the fact that this was a limited audience changes things a lot.

Oh, "lurking for the lulz" is from that Dan Nguyen thread.

Btw, the size of the Facebook group is in dispute. Hobbes: "Dawn says this group contains 20-30 people, Sonya says it includes 250-300 and a screenshot in the legal filings (from years after it’s set up) shows it with 68 members."

Weirdly, I think this kind of matters! If it was really only 20-30 people, and most people were close friends/family who were actively interacting with the posts, I don't think it would be weird to reach out to someone who wasn't and say "Hey, are you actually interested in this, I can't tell." If it's 250-300, then there are probably a fair number of acquaintances, most people probably aren't interacting with the posts on a regular basis, and it would be weird to contact any one of those people to say "Yo, what's up."

Since Dorland seemingly didn't contact Larson until Larson had already started working on the story, maybe she just has a sixth sense about evil people

She didn’t trust her and with good reason

Keyes otm

it's definitely apparent that the NYT story was structured in a way to do exactly what it did - maximize virality by setting larson/dorland on some sort of equal ground and encouraging everyone to treat it like a moral puzzle, and it did so by playing into the public's natural tendency to ostracize weirdos and cling to nasty social groups. plaxico/james/others itt were right about that. and that honestly seems designed to play into expected twitter social behavior, but it sort of flipped around and now the sleuthy twitter obsessives are probably leaning too far into "dorland is the hero of this story and can do no wrong." people are really eating up every single lawyerly thing dorland's lawyers are putting out and ignoring things she actually said/did on record, and constructing their own canon narrative based on hunches - things twitter people are known to do when it comes to these social scandals. for example, i don't think there's actually much proof at all that dorland approached larson because she was suspicious larson was using her facebook posts for some evil, but that's become canon in some quarters now. including this thread apparently lol. it's still possible that larson is a horrible bully of a person and dorland is still an emotional vampire narcissist, you don't need to rewrite any of that for larson to still be the bad guy in the story.

larson and her friends certainly come off worse and worse the more their chats are revealed though, just awful people and an awful dynamic, another reason i'm glad i gave up on trying to be a 'writer'

the thing that really gets me about the chunky monkeys is how this behavior is all filtered through the toxic positivity of emotional/friend/career support, the idea that this is all warranted because it's friends and colleagues SUPPORTIVELY SPEAKING IN ALL CAPS and having each other's backs (because the serious literature writing industry is a hellscape and this sort of soul-sucking social grouping is the only thing people can do to try to get a leg up in it i guess)

I like the Hobbes piece that jaymc posted!

I had an early-morning dream of an SNL sketch where Bill Hader, Jason Sudeikis and Andy Samberg describe escalating acts of altruism around a water cooler-- "hey guys I just got back from a marathon!" "hey guys I'm a year sober!" "hey guys I just participated in an anti-racism march!" "hey guys I just donated 25% of my net income this year to help trans people!" and the punch line is Samberg screaming "well I just donated a kidney to a stranger!", and the room gets quiet and Hader says "you are so going down for that"

That will never ever happen to you, because you are actually self-aware!!!

this could be a perfect parody of all the writer group-chats i'm aware of, it's incredible

So much so that if you wrote a satirical short story about toxic intra-writer dynamics it would be a shame not to use that line

It’s just too good

Tbh, I think that my bias against Dorland mostly has to do with my utter antipathy toward overly performative "acts of selflessness." Throughout my life, having dealt with chronic illness both as a witness and as the afflicted, I've seen a lot of people engage in this kind of behavior, and it is abhorrent in the extreme, to my sensibilities. As far as she is an outcast from this group of writers, I feel some empathy for her. But it ends with this public kidney waving bullshit.

I like the Hobbes piece that jaymc posted!

I had an early-morning dream of an SNL sketch where Bill Hader, Jason Sudeikis and Andy Samberg describe escalating acts of altruism around a water cooler-- "hey guys I just got back from a marathon!" "hey guys I'm a year sober!" "hey guys I just participated in an anti-racism march!" "hey guys I just donated 25% of my net income this year to help trans people!" and the punch line is Samberg screaming "well I just donated a kidney to a stranger!", and the room gets quiet and Hader says "you are so going down for that"

― kermit the grouch (flamboyant goon tie included), Monday, October 11, 2021 8:51 AM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

lol

this thread is good again

honestly I think fgti's sketch is the story that Larson should have written ...

Tbh, I think that my bias against Dorland mostly has to do with my utter antipathy toward overly performative "acts of selflessness."

yeah, I don't know if my antipathy is "utter" but it is something that definitely grates on me from time to time. I have to tell myself, "at least they aren't bragging about doing something shitty."

But I think it's interesting (to me at least) that people feel compelled to take sides, that the "moral puzzle" requires side-taking.

It reminds me of like an episode of Judge Judy or People's Court where both parties are chastised, required to make amends, and sent on their way and advised not to pursue this further and waste the court's time

Actually -- wait -- I know exactly what specific thing this reminds me of -- and it was a case before the San Francisco Planning Commission Board of Appeals involving a two-member HOA and whether one of the owners was allowed to modify the garage to their unit without permission of the other

I can only imagine how bitter that fight must have been and the very thought makes my whole body want to pucker.

neither owner was present at the hearing -- only the lawyers

Now imagining Amanda Palmer donating her kidney.

Now imagining Amanda Palmer donating her kidney.

― jaymc, Monday, October 11, 2021 11:55 AM (twenty-seven seconds ago)

it would destroy the internet tbh

I don't think an actual narcissist would ever donate a kidney

And: I was told today that "starting a Facebook group to keep your friends updated" is precisely what the living organ donor people recommend that you do lol

i am guessing that this is meant for people that are actually friends in the, "we take turns driving carpool, have monthly potlucks, exchange gifts on birthdays and holidays" sense ... and not like in the "professional networking" sense.

it's more of like a "in case you were wondering if I'm going to be up to hosting book group at my house next week" and less of a marketing strategy. ... otoh, people can choose to leave FB groups

I think mentioning it on LinkedIn is what you're taught to do, in order to inspire other people to donate. she got criticized for that too but that's something they actually suggest you do.

various religious denominations teach you to mention your affiliation publicly and encourage others to join ... like, yes, of course, they are going to suggest you essentially proselytize ... it's up to the individual to determine when they should actually do so.

I don't think an actual narcissist would ever donate a kidney

on the bright side i do think that dorland being received as the hero of this story will actually lead a few more people to consider living organ donation.

the dumbest and grossest thing about larson and friends were the "what do you expect me to do, GIVE AWAY A BODY PART??" conversation.... like yeah that's what living organ donation is and what its boosters are trying to get more people to do

Gary Gilmore donated his eyes to science iirc

narcissus fell in love not with himself but with his reflection

Narcissism is a slippery word. People use it to just mean “self-involved” but it also evokes narcissistic personality disorder in people’s minds. Sometimes there is a motte and bailey aspect to this.

The Living Donor Program should really just be like "Donate a kidney! Impress your friends Save a life!"

But anyway, the Facebook stuff is moot. Dawn believed Sonya's lie. Later she found the truth — was hurt enough to quietly unfriend Sonya — and yet for TWO YEARS didn't bring it up. How is Dawn "obsessed"? She only went ballistic when she finally saw how much plagiarism there was pic.twitter.com/NBE2MZlT1e

— Dan Nguyen (everyone you love decomposing to bones (@dancow) October 8, 2021

yeah it’s outrageously craven

They seem to not know how fucked it is too. Just kinda one of the tools in their bullying toolkit, and it’s justified because dorland is so bad omg

This is perhaps the “richest” literary clusterfuck we’ve had. It provoked real discussion.

I mean did it tho

Different supposedly factual facets of ppl that serve as mere caricature aide memewars for our own often questionable recollections of ppl we didnt like once emerged and changed and in the end here we are treesh, annoying ppl exist and sometimes they form writers clubs and somewhere along the line they realise not everyone else is there to tell only them how wonderful they are full kidney complement or not and it turns toxic

I mean its the oldest story known to man rly

this is where my third-kidney request hits, join me in a better society

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/kidney-donation-online-dating-site_n_6162fbd6e4b06a986bd09b73

A Chunky Monkey says sorry

Whew, this is a hard thread, friends. Here goes. I have been a member of the Chunky Monkeys writing group, as featured in the now-famous Bad Art Friend saga. As of today, I am no longer a member of this group.

— Becky Tuch (@BeckyLTuch) October 11, 2021

Oh shit they lost becky

that is so perfectly written in that stupid twitter thread tone i can't even believe it

“I am sorry for the role I played, a role that I am too humble to specify here, right now, exactly, but, suffice to say”

“We tortured some folks”

I haven't been around much but this story just gets more infuriating; as someone with roughly as much claim on being nonwhite as Larson, I think the racial angle in this is horseshit but also no one seems to be really addressing it

like, there's a lot of emphasis on "she can't be a white savior, she didn't know the race of the recipient" but that's not what Larson is saying -- she's saying that white people tend to latch onto people of color and assume they are better friends than they are, and that that's what was happening here. and yeah, in general, this happens. however:

1) Larson was actively presenting herself as a friend, and kind of effusively too! if someone emails you with stuff like "I think so highly of you, and yet you say you're not feeling it. I have always encouraged you as a writer and a person, and I would not stop now, or ever," it seems like a reasonable assumption that that person is at least on good terms with you?
2) it's not like she just communicates this way with people of color -- there's a very charming email from Chip "#PublishingPaidMe an $800k advance" Cheek in which he is shocked, shocked! that Dawn was really friendly to him when she moved to LA. this just seems like the kind of person she is, in general, to everyone.
3) there are other things that can make someone unaware of social cues, such as childhood trauma -- you know, the thing mentioned literally at the start of the article
4) that whole gross "don't worry, you can always recruit PoC as your personal army to draaaaaag her" thing

there's also a "only white people are saying this" narrative which can be disproven in like 5 seconds of looking. it's actually kind of weird how the sides are shaking out, on dorland's side you have a bunch of seemingly ok people and also j*sse s*ngal

LOL her background image pic.twitter.com/EwonpTjiJv

— Cersei was right (@MoviePrograms) October 12, 2021