So we are "nutcases" in a country filled with

"white supremacist institutions" which are driven by "hypocrisy and cowardice"?  If this is what you believe then why would you accept an invitation to speak at Writers' Week...unless you plan on using the occasion to say more along those lines?

I still believe this state's Writers' Week should be about writing. It was about writing once. I looked forward to that biennial event, to meeting friends, listening to writers talking about writing, publishers talking about publishing, people asking questions, discussions about the development of plot or character and any number of other issues related to the art and craft of writing. I was fortunate and I know it. I managed to learn a great deal about writing. My failure to apply it all is entirely my own fault. I still have the bad habit of simply diving in and then paddling like crazy until I hit the end. The result is often a mess but I still do it.

What I no longer do is go to Writers' Week. I have occasionally slipped in to the live-stream of a session at the local library but I have not been to the many open air events. They may be free to attend but, if I am to spend time there, they must be potentially worth my time.

The problem? These events are almost always not about writing. The week has gone from being about writing to being about "issues". The sessions are about social issues, woke issues, political issues. Some of those who appear as "writers" have not actually written the books themselves. The hard work has been done by others. The writing may be grammatically correct but it often lacks style or life. There are not many "issues" writers or politicians who can write in such a way I will remember their words.

I try to read a diverse range of material but when someone is being deliberately provocative and holds views that are potentially harmful then why should I use my limited time to read that writing? This is how I feel about the person who has apparently said we are "nutcases" and that the country is filled with "white supremacist institutions". Even the editorial in this morning's paper is calling for her removal from next year's program. Her inclusion in this year's program caused the week to be cancelled altogether. It says something about the line up that so many "writers" withdrew in support of her. The first to do so were likely those who had not written the books they were there to promote. 

A little controversy is a good thing. It can stimulate ideas and add to the discussion. I see no harm in that at all. I would, and still will, encourage it. I will not encourage someone who uses an event like a week supposedly about writing as an event to call for harm to others. I will not encourage someone who deliberately repeats propaganda designed to do that harm. 

How is it that someone who apparently holds these views is able to retain a Research Council grant and a position as a "Fellow" and "Researcher" at a university? There are people who have lost their positions for holding far less controversial views. There are people who have not been able to obtain research funding because they have not supported the "correct" thinking on unrelated woke issues. How can this happen and yet someone who holds views many find offensive and distressing is able to obtain not only research funds but be invited to speak?

Research funding comes with responsibilities. Freedom of speech comes with responsibilities too. Failure to acknowledge those things will cause harm. We all need to take responsibility for that.