The storm seems to have broken over the “Breaking the Silence” by Ian Wishart and Macsyna King with retailers now apparently lining up to refuse to stock the title (I am presuming, though, this is somewhat different from refusing to sell it). I have to confess to umming and aahing about my own opinion on this. Boycotting the book is the best reaction if your concern is with people profiting from crime but (as so often happens in the court of public opinion) boycotting the book has turned into a circus of calls for banning and cries of moral outrage, mixed with comparisons of people who may choose to buy or read the book to peodophiles.
While I am even less likely to buy the book than I am to read it, I’m also a little disturbed when people are so willing to embrace public-demanded censorship of a work that breaks no laws. In no way do I support anything Ian Wishart says or does (and I’d love to know if Garth McVicar will be wholeheartedly endorsing this Wishart-published title) but I wholeheartedly support living in a society where he can say and do these things and I can not only completely ignore him, I can even consciously refuse to give him money for them. And I very much do want that freedom to consciously choose for myself what books I do and don’t want to read.
I’m uncomfortable with the certainty in the minds of many that they are entitled to demand what books a retailer should sell or stock, and what books are “moral” or not. Just looking at my own bookshelves I can come up with several titles that someone, somewhere would find awful and immoral – and that are perfect examples of why I don’t necessarily want someone else to decide what I can and can’t read (or sell, as a bookseller) based on their own ideas of moral standards.
The best thing you can do if you aren’t happy the book got published is not buy it, or read it. That will be the best action you can take, that will not only directly affect the publisher and authors that you don’t agree with, it will also mean that in the future when you, or someone you do agree with wants to speak out, you still can. Boycotting a retailer isn’t going to affect the publisher, particularly if you weren’t going to buy the book anyway.
I guess in the end, what I’m trying to say is don’t be afraid to dislike a book, and vehemently, but don’t turn that into banning a book. I sincerely hope that this tide of sentiment doesn’t become directed towards libraries also.
Mostly, I guess, I want to say don’t confuse “this book” with “that crime”. Liking a Facebook page, commenting on a Facebook page or confronting retailers is going to make no difference to this particular case of child murder, nor is it going to address any problem or cause of child abuse, nor is it providing “moral justice”. Boycott the book, by all means. But just remember this debate can only ever be about the book and won’t change the crime.
17 Responses to ““Breaking the Silence” and silencing others.”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Well put, and I couldn’t agree with you more. The idea of New Zealand having become so Americanised as to start screaming for book burnings in the street horrifies me. I still have the delusion that we have a greater sense of personal responsibility (if you don’t like it, don’t buy it)
I would advise avoiding the Facebook page in that case.
I’m agree and I’m also horrified this has become a moral issue that should be decided on the behalf of others (I don’t want to buy the book so no one else should either).
Thank you.
While I totally respect the right of Paper Plus and The Warehouse to decline to sell a title (even if I think the reasoning behind it sucks arse), I think it’s also totally in order to point out a little corporate hypocrisy.
If this is so beyond the moral pale, I do hope these two major chains will also be withdrawing from sale all so-called “true crime” tites containing graphic details of (and rank speculation around) ,violent crimes against child like Jo Benet Ramsay; memoirs written by violent criminals; and the container loads of novels and DVDs they sell every year that contain graphic depictions of violence, murder and abuse perpetrated against women and children.
Absolutely – for them this is about the vocal section of the public, and taking the easier road. Which, like you, I respect their right to do.
Missing the point here guys. This is not an attack of freedom of speech, but a refusal from a large chunk of NZ who are faced with a horrendous crime, a family who refused to cooperate with Police for months and even now wont tell the coroner anything. It ain’t right then for someone to go to an independent author like wishart and spill the ‘truth’. She needed to tell the truth a long time before it got to being a commercially printed book. I simply don’t believe Wishart when he says he won’t profit from this. On radio Live today he refused to give up points that were in the book that police didn’t know, challenging listeners to ‘buy the book’ to find out. I can understand a fiction title should be up to interpretation from the reader and not blocked, but this is very different. Two beautiful kids were bashed to death, the mum refused to cooperate and now wants to ‘tell-all’ in a commercial book. Are we still in NZ? This is something from the ‘only in America’ files
Luke:
Have you actually set foot in a Warehouse or Paper Plus recently. They’re quite happy to sell “true crime” books, memoirs from sociopathic thugs (who will collect royalties) and DVD that detail equally horrible crimes perpetrated against women and children. I’m quite happy to trust the evidence of my own eyes and call hypocrisy where I see it.
My last paragraph says “”this book” is not “that crime”". There are two very distinct things here – 1. a crime that hasn’t been solved and no member of the public knows the truth, no matter what they like to think, and 2. a book that will not be spilling a “truth” in any way, shape or form.
The book won’t contain anything more than the police already know. That’s Wishart’s marketing ploy. If, by some miracle, it does then it will be great evidence. But it won’t. I’m pretty sure this is exactly the reaction Wishart wanted – in fact it’s probably gone beyond his wildest dreams.
The crime that occurred and its aftermath were awful events. People are well within their rights to refuse to buy or read the book. I advocate it. But for people to say libraries shouldn’t hold it, to vocally abuse businesses who will choose to stock it, to say anyone who reads it is just like a paedophile and to state if they see it in a bookstore they’ll set fire to it? That’s not right.
BTW in New York state (at least) they have the “Son of Sam” law which prevents convicted criminals from profiting from their crime.
Hear, hear, Ngaire!
Oh! Or Rachel!
You are so right that Wishart must be rubbing his hands with glee.
The key problem that I have with the book is the Mother’s lack of cooperation with the Police but now happy to seek publicity. That there is a huge divide between us is demonstrated by the fact that if someone had harmed my children (now or as babies) I’d be begging the Police for help no matter who I knew or suspected was behind it.
Maybe the book will help me understand her and why she chose to obstruct the Police. Who knows, but it’ll be the library copy I read when that happens.
Agreed, there is obviously a huge divide in mindset between the members of their family and the norms of love and caring that most people associate with parents.
I think choosing to read a library copy is actually a really good idea – as you say, if there is anything that will help to understand how these events happened then it shouldn’t be ignored, and if there isn’t, well you haven’t supported the publisher in any substantial way. (I’d recommend treating all Wishart’s books that way – if you dare!)
Sarah:
If you really disapprove of the right to silence, then folks on Facebook are really pointing in the wrong direction. Macsyna King may well be a thoroughly appalling human being who isn’t fit to have custody of a goldfish, but if that disbarred anyone from the shelves of our bookstores and libraries most could comfortably fit in a moderately large broom closet.
As a library manager, I will be waiting to see the book, to see if it meets our normal criteria for selection before saying yay or nay. Main criteria are: is it well-written, topical, legal, is book well-made physically, will it be popular with our community?
I imagine there are unlikely to be any new revelations in the book as if so, Ms King could be in trouble for obstructing justice previously.
Hey I like where you’re coming from Ngaire
Btw that was me!!
Thanks!