A complex debate (Part 1)
Lyndon McLeod wrote two books that were available on Amazon. They were ostensibly fiction and penned under the name of Roman McClay. He then went out and killed five people in almost identical fashion to what was mentioned in the books.
Situations like these raise many questions and we can’t possibly tackle them all in one post, so we will focus on one at a time. The first question is whether this even qualifies as art. This is where we have to be careful and show our work as the math teachers used to tell us. A book about killing other people is not unique. Hell, shows like “Dexter” and “Hannibal” have famously pushed those boundaries and that’s just two prominent examples.
So, what is the difference between those books/movies/shows and these two books here? It can’t be that those books didn’t inspire a crime spree. That’s an extremely low and convenient bar to clear. Besides, that’s not specific enough. “Grand Theft Auto” has had any number of iterations and people still steal cars. One could argue that the video game glorifies the act. In fact, I’m sure they have, but those video games are still in circulation.
So, the question before us is what differentiates these two books about killing left-leaning politicians and people and those books. movies, and shows? I would say the difference comes in the specificity of the subject matter. Dexter and Hannibal Lecter are fictional characters that harm other fictional characters. The story lines are exactly that: story lines.
Amazon took the books down yesterday. A search on their website won’t yield any results for these two books and even say that anything by him is unavailable. Obviously, this was based on a public outcry and the problem of a mass murderer profiting off books that described his crimes. The public has every right to protest such a thing, but one has to wonder where we draw the line.
I normally detest the slippery slope argument. It’s lazy and misleading. Yet, in this case I see the impulse. If the so-called woke crowd pulls these books then where does it stop? This is a valid question that has little to do with left and right. At the same time that liberals and progressives are protesting these books, conservatives protest books they don’t like. They want to force libraries not to carry books and art they object to. It really is about whether we put guardrails around the marketplace of ideas or not.
I would go back to the specific subject matter of these two books. The author fantasizes about killing specific people that exist in reality. That somehow blurs the line between art and reality. It is incumbent on those that want to take a book out of circulation to articulate the precise reasons why. It has to move beyond a matter of taste. A free society can be messy. The marketplace of ideas is not always tidy and respectable.
Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart once famously said he could not define pornography but he “knew it when he saw it.” The definition of politically inspired revenge porn might fall under the same category. We can’t provide an exact definition, but we know it when we see it. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck then it must be a duck. These two books are most definitely quacking.
I haven’t read the books and don’t plan to. However I am surprised that the word “masturbation” doesn’t show up in connection with them when people write about it.
1I enjoy mystery books including David Lindsay’s fictionalizing actual Houston murders, but I have never wanted to murder another person because I’m not a sociopath! I would suggest instead of reading MacLeod, get a copy of the Psychopath Test by Jon Ronson to help you identify these people and avoid them!
2The 2 books is well written may be the art of writing. And I’m sure there are those that will consider the killings as the art of murder, just as there are some that consider Picasso painting art. But I don’t see much to debate. He is guilty of murder, do as the law says. Copying the stories in a book regardless of the author is irrelevant. If you find someone who says that the murder was art, then you are looking at a psychopath.
3For those “concerned parents” wanting to remove so-called objectionable books from libraries: what do you watch on tv? What tv and movies do your kids watch? I’ll bet it’s not all Disney
4(and there’s probably violence, misogyny, and -horrors- sex in some of those). In the late ’50’s and early ’60’s there was a night of television that had Gunsmoke, Wanted Dead or Alive, Have Gun Will Travel, and then the Fight of the Week (boxing).
It’s much worse now, but it seems to be so routine.
We have lots of channels but mostly we read.
Also, Hallmark and Lifetime movies as well as HGTV are featuring mixed race couples, and even same sex couples.
I assume there’s some group outraged at that.
There are some sections of the Old Testament [both in the Torah and in the history sections] that are not only R-rated, they come close to being X-rated. Most preachers gloss over those sections.
5Perhaps we should issue an expurgated version for use in Churches. Example, let’s remove the end of Psalm 137:
O daughter of Babylon, you destroyer!
…
Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones
and dashes them against the rock!
Whether Amazon is trying to get out ahead of “public opinion” or merely acting on the advice of their legal team. Legally in many states convicted felons are not allowed to profit from their crimes. However the Amazon attorneys as is their right may have advised their client that so much as allowing an ‘alleged’ killer to finance his legal defense through them would be bad for business.
Psychos don’t require spinning music backward or even Donald J. Trump to inspire them. They just are. To me the better question what are the allegedly ‘sane’ people in Congress ready to do to keep assault rifles out of the hands of children and alleged mass murder psychos such as this McLeod. Not to play Nostradumbass with 20-20 vision or Monday morning quarterback. but really. There were folks who saw thing coming, but what legal recourses did they have?
6“wrote two books… then went out and killed five people in almost identical fashion to what was mentioned in the books.”
Sounds like a new category. Fictionalautobiography.
7Amazon removed that?
Huh. Just last night I streamed a movie. People shot in the back. People run through with swords. Heretics burned alive en masse.
The movie was on Amazon.
8The thing it reminds me of the most is Basic Instinct.
9Sharon Stone’s character was a famous author who played cat and mouse with the cops by using the methods from her books, daring the cops to catch her.
This jackwagon probably thought his version would look better on HBO.
But part of The Daily Beast’s description of him was “dedicated to alt-right philosophies, including masculine supremacy,…and targeted violence against the ‘weak’ “.
So it’s particularly satisfying to me that the police officer who he wounded by shooting her in the abdomen, returned fire and killed his worthless ass.
The badass lady got it done.
I sincerely hope she makes a full recovery.
Hmmm. I just searched “The Turner Diaries” on Amazon. I got a page that included “The Anarchist Cookbook,” “Domestic Enemies: The Reconquista,” “Turner Syndrome Diary!” “A New America: The First Novel of the Alt-Right!” and for some reason “The Federalist Papers” and “To Kill a Mockingbird,” but not the book that inspired Timothy McVeigh. Looks like it, too, has quietly been “cancelled.” Unlike certain people in Texas and Oklahoma I am not in favor of removing books for any reason, no matter how toxic or controversial. Maybe Amazon’s lawyers see things differently.
10The original Son of Sam laws preventing profiting from a crime by writing a book, etc., were struck down by the Supreme Court. However, new laws allowing victims to bring civil suits with extended statutes of limitations have held up in court so those profits can be taken. As far as Amazon removing the books, I would point out that free speech has consequences. People lose jobs, contracts, book deals and endorsements every day from exercising their free speech. We’re not required to listen to it and Amazon has the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. He’ll just have to find another distributor. Good luck with that.
11I’d say odds are 50/50 that a heavily right leaning publishing house will pick it up. He would be heralded as a victim of the woke left. If even one percent buys the book that’s 3.5 million copies sold. That’s a tidy profit and if they play up the “stick it to the libs and buy this book” I’m sure they might even manage that.
Even if we suggest that only psychopaths/sociopaths would find this redeemable, I would certainly think that fits within the framework of one percent. So, the big question isn’t whether Amazon can suppress this but whether they SHOULD suppress this.
12Halster @10, you are correct that SCROTUS struck down the original “Son of Sam” law. However, only on the grounds that it was overly broad. My apologies for not having the time to run a Findlaw search on similar state laws still standing. Or, better yet have Jane do it. But again as with any free speech issue, the restrictions would be against government entities, not Amazon.
Nick @11 is probably correct too. There unfortunately always is some scavenger ready to service the McLeod types
13Another terrific book on psychopathy is ‘Without Conscience’ by Richard Hare, probably the foundational expert on the diagnosis. It’s very readable and, in my opinion, should be read by everyone (especially young women) who’s about to start going on dates.
14I hate to post an OT but couldn’t resist. The NASCAR team and sponsers in their schmeck you Democrats wisdom decided to change the name and paint scheme of their car to “Let’s go Brandon”. Remember how this driver tried to distance himself from the politics of the phrase carrying his namesake? That was all bullshit. NASCAR is “pumping the brakes” on their new car. Too late in my book. Brandon will now go into politics and probably visit mar-a-lago, be on the steve bannon show and newsmax. A new grifter is born.
15