At the beginning of March, Hachette Book Group announced they were going to publish Woody Allen’s autobiography. The book was titled Apropos of Nothing, and was immediately a bestseller on Amazon. By the end of that same week, because we live in the dumbest possible timeline right now, the publisher made a follow-up announcement: they would not be publishing it anymore.
The two main (irrelevant) factors that led to this asinine, ass-backward decision were basically:
1. Ronan Farrow is another one of their authors. He was left in the dark about Hachette’s plan to publish Woody’s work, and was upset about having to share the same publisher as Woody Allen.
2. There was an employee protest.
As a fan of Woody Allen’s work, I may be biased in writing this. However, I should also say: every Woody Allen fan will tell you they have gone down the rabbit hole looking for truth. I’ve done that numerous times, and I believe Woody Allen is innocent. I have read every single scrap of evidence I can over the years, and that’s the conclusion I’ve come to. There is so much talk surrounding the story, but when you sit down and read both sides the thing that seems to add up is that: Woody Allen is most likely innocent. (It’s too much to get into here, but here’s an important distinction: he took a lie detector test and passed, and Mia Farrow never did).
Anyway, that is immaterial. The point of this is not whether or not you believe Woody Allen is innocent, it’s to discuss the cancellation of the book itself regardless of the author. Because that’s all it is: a fucking book. Over the past week I’ve read some different takes, but one I keep seeing is the idea that this “isn’t censorship.” If he wants to go with another publisher, he has the freedom to do so. He can also self-publish if he wants.
Both of those two last statements are true. This is not the 1950s, Woody Allen is not a martyr, and his book is not Catcher in the Rye. It’s not like the government has stepped in to say, “This book is banned!” But to ignore this is still avoiding a big conversation. This is still a form of censorship. The fact that a small number of employees were able to protest against a book from being released, and actually alter their plans is definitely not nothing. Those employees should not have a say in who gets published under any circumstances; they should not matter at all. If they disliked the idea of the book being published so much they should have quit. Why should employees of a company, or anyone really, have a say in what I have access to?
I am against that idea completely; if an incel or a guy who shoots up a school or something writes a book and posts it online, as the general public we should have access to that. We should have an access to everything written ever: we might learn something! That’s the whole point of fucking books! The stopping or interfering with the publishing of this in anyway sets a weird, arbitrary precedent. Thought control is thought control, regardless of who it is. Again, I have to remind you: this is not a snuff film in which gross, illegal acts are committed on film for the purpose of LiveLeak weirdos to watch for some reason. We’re talking about a printed book with fucking words.
The protest was not some kind of heroic or noble cause. I really can’t believe people that call themselves progressive are actually patting themselves on the back about this. Book people are supposed to be smarter and better than that. What this is, is a protest against a man who was never proven guilty of anything. This is all for film director who was found innocent we’re talking about here. Not a guy who got on an airplane to escape the law the moment he realized he should (like Roman Polanski). It’s a guy who went through the justice system and won fair and square.
It’s a little alarming how fast a small group in our culture has tried to change the narrative to “Woody Allen is definitely a criminal,” despite the fact that he was never proven guilty. Just 12 years ago, in a 2008 review for Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Ebert wrote: “Allen has directed more than 40 movies in about as many years and written all of them himself. Why isn't he more honored? Do we take him for granted?”
Because it was never proven Woody did anything, his detractors are doing the next best thing they can: censorship via the court of public opinion. Public shaming is the next best thing for these people apparently. He may still have the option to do what he wants with his book, but don’t be mistaken: this is still censorship. You can say all you want about how he’s a wealthy man that has lived a great life and needs nobody to defend him or whatever, but this is bigger than just Woody: do we really want to live in a world where a person can be found innocent in a court of law, yet still be affected by things that have nothing to do with anything? I mean, what’s next: an employee protest because one of the employees had a bad break-up with the author? I don’t understand why their opinions have any sway in the matter here. Their opinions are irrelevant: as a society we shouldn’t censor anyone, regardless of what you think about them.
This isn’t even about Woody Allen, or Me Too, or anything like that. It’s about Ronan Farrow being a cash cow for Hachette, and them pissing him off personally. He saw an opportunity to flex and he did it. The argument that publishing this book is disrespectful to survivors of abuse is a bit of a reach. It feels like it has nothing to do with that and more to do with people trying to silence others - something Ronan Farrow claims to be against, I might add.
In a piece for Vanity Fair, Cameron Esposito ends her article about Woody’s book cancellation with: “Wouldn’t it be great if things were just a little more difficult for him?” In other words, this isn’t about justice at all: it’s about people just not wanting the book out because it bothers them personally. Ronan Farrow has mentioned the book has not been “fact checked,” but would that really make a difference for him? What are the facts you’re so worried about being published? The fact that he was found innocent and he’s allowed to publish his life story?
The truth is: they just don’t want this book out there because he pisses them off. Free speech used to be a thing regardless of who said what, but we’re now apparently living in a time when your personal feelings matter more than the greater good. One author of a thing using his influence to mess with another author of a thing is scary no matter who is involved. Even Stephen King chimed in on the matter, “The Hachette decision to drop the Woody Allen book makes me very uneasy. It's not him; I don't give a damn about Mr. Allen. It's who gets muzzled next that worries me.” Regardless of your feelings toward Woody Allen, you have to admit: if STEPHEN KING, the man who wrote a book in which a person tortures a writer, is uneasy….you know Hachette is probably wrong. They should have simply let the staff to quit, amicably part ways with Ronan Farrow, and published the book anyway.
An opportunity was lost! Oh well….hopefully some European publisher puts the book out and we can have it translated or something. This is the type of shit that happens when people allow their feelings to get in the way of logic. :( :(