In the past month, I have had two situations in which I felt a former colleague was not telling the truth, and in so doing that colleague was harming my reputation - if I have one.
In one case, it was a matter of what was NOT being said. There was information posted on FaceBook which did not tell the whole story, and when people responded to the information in ways that showed they misunderstood the chain of events...the original author did nothing to correct the misunderstandings - instead choosing to write tasteful thank you notes.
In the meantime, I was getting e-mails from several other people who were puzzled by the situation (as I was). So, rather than add fuel to the controversy, I arranged to meet the former colleague for a drink. We met, and we had a really good and interesting discussion. I expressed my concerns, my colleague expressed some concerns, I pointed out what damage was being done - and I found that in fact the ramifications had not been considered. Fine; a genuine error in judgment that arose from a logical sequence of events. You could consider it a matter of perspective.
The other case is more disturbing. A writer I once worked with, and with whom I had an excellent relationship, has written some things in her blog about the publishing company I used to be a part of, the company which published one of her books.
Unfortunately, what she wrote contained material which I do not believe to be true.
When I read the material in the blog, I submitted some factual corrections - provable, concrete material. I thought perhaps the author's memory of what happened all those years ago is perhaps...unreliable. The author initially did not approve the corrections for posting, instead sending me an incendiary e-mail. My positive comment, on a separate part of the blog post, was approved. So someone could be forgiven for thinking I agree with them. When I drew this to her attention, she agreed to withdraw the positive comment as well. She also agreed to amend a couple of the points - all the while insisting that she was right, even regarding discussions to which she was not privy and I was, and threatening me with legal action unless I amended this blog.
I was once on a grant jury and thus privy to a scathing and bitter letter this colleague had written to accompany her application. I understood the source of the frustration for this colleague, and I defended her when the other members of the jury took exception to what they saw as a lack of professionalism. I fought for her, because I believed in her as an artist. Now I am more worried about whether or not there is something wrong there. Perhaps she is facing a medical issue. Or perhaps there is something else behind the anger. She flatly insisted in her e-mails that the people who disagree with her are wrong, even when I am offering reasonable proof that they could well be right.
One of the questions I have struggled with, off and on, is this: What is the relationship between the art, truth, and the artist? It was one of the themes touched on in the essay in my first book. Now, as I am faced with these situations, I must ask it again. I do know that an artist who refuses to face the consequences of his or her own actions faces a very tough road.
No comments:
Post a Comment