I'm sure a lot of library-types have been following the drama associated with a library paying $45,000 to novelist/comic writer/screen writer Neil Gaiman for a speaking engagement last year, and the uproar it caused among some state politicians, including one who called the writer a "pencil-necked weasel." Mr. Gaiman has detailed (prolifically) the situation, the reason for the high fees, and the fall-out on his blog.
The short version:
Gaiman is a writer. He writes. He makes a lot of money from writing, and he enjoys writing. Every time he takes on a speaking engagement, it takes him away from his primary job of writing. Therefore, he has an agency that organizes his speaking engagements. He charges quite a hefty fee to weed out many of the requests. Consequently, this is roughly the same amount that Maya Angelou and...Snookie charge, just to give a clear indicator of how much a speaking engagement can cost. That said, Gaiman is a huge supporter of libraries, and therefore often reduces or eliminates his fee for libraries. The library in question did not ask for a reduced fee or attempt to negotiate, they simply paid it. All of this was done through his agency, and he did not have a hand personally in negotiations. The author states that he does not need the income from these engagements, and so the money was split between several charities and donated (less the agent's fees, etc).
Some time later, along comes a politician. Lets call him Representative Matt Dean, who says that Gaiman is on his most-hated list and that Gaiman has "stolen" tax money, and he is a pencil-necked weasel. Later, he says his mom made him apologize, and so he apologized for his wording, but suggested that Gaiman needs to learn how to be charitable. Yes, the same Neil Gaiman who donated his speaking fee and who assists with MANY charities, including library charities and Comic Book Legal Defense Fund.
This seems to me like an obvious case of a politician pointing his ire in the wrong direction. I don't believe that it's the author's duty to decide (without being asked) which organizations he will lower his fee for. The library was willing to pay it, and did, without negotiation. Granted, the library later admitted it was a bit naieve, and didn't realize that those prices were not set in stone.
That said, I believe the politician in question, "Matt Dean," as we've called him, should address this issue with the people at the library who spent the money in the first place. He may also want to review the rules under which that particular tax revenue stream can be used, since it appeared that the library had a very limited amount of time in which to use the money, and a limited number of things that they were permitted to do with it. This fellow seems to be barking up the wrong tree. Maybe it's easy and fun to drag an award-winning author through the mud for the sake of publicity and to incite public irritation and backlash, either at Gaiman, or the library system. now that I think about it, it's probably easier to stir up controversy than to attempt to solve the real problem.
Did the library mis-manage the funds? That is possible. Failing to negotiate is a first-time mistake that I doubt this library system will make ever again. However, they did get a top novelist whose works have been translated into hundreds of languages, who has a Newberry and other important literary awards. People know his characters and work the world over. He's written successfully in film, TV, comics and prose with everything from picture books to adult novels. If they wanted a guy to get people excited about reading, authors, literacy and libraries, Gaiman is a great writer to pick. He also spoke for an hour, took questions for an hour, and spent two hours meeting the audience. I'd say that, even despite the high price, the library system got a world-class author who gave them their money's worth.
No comments:
Post a Comment