||"dawnbreak in the west"|
Saturday, January 30, 2016
Neil Gaiman's malign influence
Neil Gaiman has a new collection out: Trigger Warning. In its introduction Gaiman takes aim at "triggered" crybullies. Today I have dug around here and found that I still haven't written a coherent Gaiman post. So I'll take a go at that now.
Over the 2000s I was a fairly avid follower of Gaiman's work, especially Sandman; but Stardust, Mirrormask, and Coraline also got read and/or watched 'round here.
Sandman was original. Stardust and Mirrormask were attempts at the magic of Princess Bride / The Neverending Story, and The Labyrinth, respectively (explicitly so with the latter; I watched Mirrormask's authorial recap). That much is all fine. I want my authors to flip between original-work and homage. Homage is the school you attend to teach yourself about the canon and about your own authorial talents. As to what I do not consider fine: Gaiman used Sandman as a vehicle for attacks on Western culture and morality.
This started early with his transgender character who, at the end when he dies, is buried as a man by his intolerant family. But his ghost ends up female! Yay! Another "LGBT" character, of the Harmless Old Bugger archetype, showed up in a later comic.
In between we had the award-winning (I think) "Ramadan" comic; which contrasted Harun al-Rashid's dream palace with the ruined "reality" of 1990s Iraq. (You know I wasn't going to let this slide...) Harun's world was one of beauty and wonder, pulled from Alf Layla wa-Layla. Here is Gaiman's dream of the Caliphate, a land of multiculturalism over which Islam benevolently presides. Beneath Harun, as for the Jews and the Christians - well:
As for the western Papacy, later Gaiman would deliver his take on mediaeval Rome as well. The Pope, sorry "Psychopomp", is a greedy hypocrite who seeks temporal power as well as spiritual. Muslims are allowed a caliph and Christians aren't, due to their own books of rules.
Whether Gaiman was historically correct or not isn't my point - I say up front that, besides the intentional deviations, he did a (literally) wonderful job researching the Arabs' Harun romances. My point is that these are Gaiman's dreams. He deliberately chooses to make the transgender's family intolerant. He deliberately contrasts the best in Islam against the worst in Catholicism; he deliberately enforces Christians' rules on the Christians and neglects to challenge the Muslims' book and shari'a at any level.
So when Gaiman signals for transgenders and homosexuals, all within white Christian households at that, I get the impression he doesn't care about these for their own sake. What he cares about is subverting organised and self-confident Christian households. Why that should be, I shall leave to other bloggers.
(Oh, and Gaiman is also a thief of your tax dollars, and his donations are donations to his own kind. Just thought I'd remind everyone.)
So, recently, I learnt that a transgender has adopted the name Coraline, and that this transgender has become a Social Justice Warrior. I suspect we shall find in this broken man's blog that Gaiman's oeuvre was a strong inspiration for his journey into diabolic advocacy.
Now Gaiman is worrying about the djinn that has been unstoppered from its bottle. To that I say, the cork is in Gaiman's own hand.
On this site
Property of author; All Rights Reserved