cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/22187363
Neil Gaiman’s The Sandman had the longest of mistiest paths to becoming a TV show, three decades after the DC Vertigo comic’s debut. The hesitation was down to the fantasy author resisting several awful movie attempts, and too much could have gone wrong in adapting the infinitely layered fantasy story, but Netflix brought a lugubrious and stunning spectacle to screens (full of Life Amid Death) as the first three graphic novels were initially adapted.
The second season has taken years to come together, which isn’t unheard of for a Netflix fantasy series with heavy VFX. Sadly, this could also conceivably be the final season, given that several Gaiman projects (like Amazon’s Good Omens) have been cut short, cancelled, or apparently indefinitely paused in the wake of sexual misconduct allegations against the author (as initially reported by Tortoise Media). Those accusations do make the show’s bonus “Calliope” story hit differently than when the episode first surfaced, but that’s not a discussion for today. The Sandman‘s second season is still coming, so let’s (awkwardly) sift through what we can expect.
…
How many episodes will we see? The first season brought 10 initial episodes and a bonus hour, but Netflix has not offered a count for the second season. However, Redanian Intelligence has passed on the rumor that we could see 12 new episodes of The Sandman when the show returns. This seems too good to be true, so we will await official word on that note, but the second season will leap headlong into Season Of Mists, the fourth graphic novel (considered the favorite volume of many The Sandman fans).
I still can’t get over this guy writing stories about women empowerment and preaching 24/7 on social media only to turn out a sexual abuser.
An aging millionaire writer has admitted to having rough sex with young women he is employing. So, even in the most positive reading of this, the difference in power makes this problematic (on a similar level to the accusations made against Warren Ellis). The fact that the women say they didn’t consent further compounds the problem. Unfortunately, in a lot of sexual assault cases, it can come down to he-said-she-said, which us why securing a prosecution can be really difficult. It doesn’t mean we can’t ignore statements from two women about it. I suppose the problem is, like Ellis, the is no real resolution.
The problem with claims made or modified decades later on a antiwoke right wing podcast that has spoken out against women’s empowerment is that they can’t be taken seriously. Yeah, sleeping with someone you’re paying is bad, ideally no one ever has sex with anyone, ever, but realistically things happen and decades later someone might change their mind about what was consensual for money.
Not to rationalise his alleged actions, though given how likely it is that he has had goth women with various kinds of kinks and personality disorders throwing themselves at him for several decades, it’s conceivable that he started as a perfectly decent guy and gradually got debauched by circumstance, gradually becoming a monster in imperceptible steps.
Kind of like the Buffy show being good with lead women actors and what not. It’s been recognized as a strong feminist show, but the creator still treated the women he worked with like objects. You could kind of tell with Joss Whedon though when you see certain storylines with Xander as his fill-in character. And Joss working on more shows after Buffy helped confirm, through many sources, that he’s an asshole.
At least I haven’t heard that Joss crossed any line sexually though.
I am definitely pissed that he turned out to be that sort of person.
Sometimes people hold their own behavior to a different standard than they hold others, or don’t internalize how profoundly weighted the power dynamic actually is.
If you don’t see yourself as having as much power as you actually do in a dynamic, then you might behave in a way that’s abusive without seeing it as such, even if you’d readily take issue with the same situation in circumstances where you did see the disparity.
Or just cynically playing a part for reputation. Neither excuses anything, but it can be helpful to know how some people find themselves doing bad things without thinking to themselves “today I’m gonna be a shit bag”.
Going back to Stranger in a Strange Land I’ve loved enough books by great and terrible authors, I’ve firmly landed in the camp of love the art not the artist.
They’ve done a fantastic job with this series so far. I want to see it completed. The ending is too important to leave it unfinished.
I’ve landed firmly in the other camp that I cannot separate the artist, once it’s shown they are useless human garbage, from the outward false pretense of their art, made to make themselves appear other that what they truly are, and knowing what I do about the author, for me to celebrate their pretense makes me contemptible, pathetic, and conspiratory in continuing to celebrate their and it’s perceived “brilliance”, squarely in the face of those to whom they’ve harmed. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Human garbage is still human, we must accept the darkness in us to overcome it. The meaning and value of art is not determined by the author’s intention, but rather by the viewer’s interpretation. We can recognize that a great piece of art was created by a flawed person but also recognize the value and richness it has provided to countless others.
In the case of Gaiman, his work got me interested in diving deeper into literature through his portrayal of Shakespeare and his modern interpretation of mythology in American gods.
Not sure why you imply Heinlein is terrible as a person, he seems pretty benign, especially comping from a military background.
He was a pretty hard core libertarian and misogynistic. Even for his time. He said himself, he only wrote Stranger as a joke making fun of the hippies. Still one of my top 5 favorites though.
However, given what we now know about the other two pillars of the Golden Age of Science Fiction, his reputation is the least tarnished. A low bar, perhaps, but still…
Libertarian , sure, but more old school one before Ayn Rynd and co ruined it? Misogynistic? I thought he had female characters achieving things and mixed gender militaries in his work?
I might be remembering things wrong, I read his stuff decades ago
What’s wrong with libertarians? I think they get a bad rap and some of their ideas might be unworkable but their hearts are in the right place.
I liked the first season although I have not read the source material.
That death episode really stood out for me. It was so poignant.
I didn’t either but here’s the wikipedia page and here’s a page with Death, she is written similarly to the Netflix character
the actress did a good job, the writing was good.
It’s unfortunate that she didn’t look the part, also that they didn’t make the endless unnaturally pale.
Yes yes, screen tests , etc. Find a way.
given that several Gaiman projects (like Amazon’s Good Omens) have been cut short
What a weird example, given that Good Omens ran out of source material in season 1.
Loved the first season
