Interviewing the AH Community: Chris Nuttall of Changing the Times

[Gary Oswald]

This article has deleted.

 

[Alexander Rooksmoor]

I hope it is tight knit or am I missing something from being bald and still in the AH community?

 

[Gary Oswald]

I hope it is tight knit or am I missing something from being bald and still in the AH community?

Oh goddamn it, this is the 4th interview I've put up, with six more complete and ready to go up and because I've copied and pasted the introduction, they all have that typo and I can't fix them until tomorrow because I'm away from my computer. Thanks for pointing it out, I'll get it fixed as quickly as possible.

 

[Thande]

Don't worry, I can't publicise it till this evening anyway so I'll just wait longer.

 

[Gary Oswald]

Right I have managed to find a computer, I am allowed to safely use and five minutes of frantic editing later, we are no longer a community united by our headlice.

 

[Thande]

Right I have managed to find a computer, I am allowed to safely use and five minutes of frantic editing later, we are no longer a community united by our headlice.

OK, I'll publicise this one this evening then.

 

[Japhy]

Not going to lie considering the misogynistic and racist causes Chris has allied himself within the speculative fiction community, I thought the political question was way too pat.

 

[Japhy]

Like I get he's on the site and some folks here love him and probably agree with the cause but be did use his platform and his blog to praise a lot of gamergate era stuff and the Sad/Rabid Puppies movement that tried to hijack the Hugo Awards because they were mad that women, poc, and queer writers were winning more and more and that "sci-fi was being stolen" though political correctness.

 

[ChrisNuttall]

Weirdly enough, the first time i looked at the interview on my laptop it crashed ... is that a good or bad sign <grin>

Chris

 

[Japhy]

Weirdly enough, the first time i looked at the interview on my laptop it crashed ... is that a good or bad sign <grin>

Chris

Ignoring me doesn't change what you've written on your blog. There was no moral case to be made for the Sad/Rabid Puppies and you endorsed them never the less, Chris. They were a movement built on and spawned from hate and a belief that our community is the preserve of white men.

 

[Sulemain]

Weirdly enough, the first time i looked at the interview on my laptop it crashed ... is that a good or bad sign <grin>

Chris

You've got a... reputation Chris. A reputation for having some pretty extreme views and saying some pretty extreme things. The idea that you've not refuted or abandoned them is disturbing.

 

[Japhy]

I've been thinking about this for the past day and to be frank, it's making me rethink this community and my participation in it. If we're going to be providing a platform for people like Chris to brush off their political beliefs and activities in the SF/F community, like I don't know if I want to keep writing here.

 

[Gary Oswald]

I'm not even going to lie to anybody. I've been thinking about this for the past day and to be frank, it's making me rethink this community and my participation in it. If we're going to be providing a platform for people like Chris to brush off their political beliefs and activities in the SF/F community, like I don't know if I want to keep writing here.

To make one thing entirely clear. The decision to do and put up this interview was one solely and entirely of my own. Nobody else was involved in it. So if that decision makes you rethink anything, let it be clear that Tom Black and anyone who actually benefits financially from this site had no part in this decision, and were not consulted in it.

So that decision had two parts. One I decided I wanted to talk to Christ Nuttall and two I decided not to ask him about his support for the Sad/Rapid Puppies.

Now why didn't I ask about the latter? Well, simply because I didn't know about it. I don't remember ever encountering Chris on from AH.com and I had not previously read this blog. I saw from his posts on here that he was a full time writer who was soliciting work for short story writers and decided he'd give an interesting perspective, as someone who'd made it, who'd be of help to those within this writing community. Before asking him questions, I read some pages of his blog and looked up his sites so I had some background, but I didn't go back several years, so while I learned enough to know he was politically very socially conservative, I didn't know those exact details.

If I had known, I probably wouldn't have asked about it regardless. Because a) there's no incentive for him to answer or for me to post a hostile interview and b) the context of the interview was about writing and I wanted to keep it there. I felt the question about the extent to which boycotts happened was interesting enough devoid of context but I didn't want to provide a platform for any political grandstanding by directly getting into it.

Which brings essentially to that second part of that decision. Why interview him at all? Why give a platform, small as it is, to someone who was supported reactionary causes with his blog? Ignorance here is no excuse because I knew enough from my reading of his blogs to know he was very socially conservative and even if I didn't, I could have chosen to delete this upon your first comment and I didn't.

To an extent, ultimately I didn't feel like what was I doing had the capability of much harm. I wasn't recommending him for a political position, giving publicity to a political campaign or giving him a soapbox to talk about politics. I was asking him about his writing and linking to his written work, nothing else. And with an audience of about 20 people, I didn't feel the responsibility of a major platform.

I might have been wrong about that. All I will say is that was a personal decision, made by myself that noone else is responsible for and that noone else should be judged on.

I will message @Meadow to ask his opinion on this and I am quite happy to step down from my position if he thinks that would be a good step to resolve this.

 

[Japhy]

Honestly Gary I'm not trying to have you step down or something.

If you didn't know you didn't know. The political question definitely sounded to me like it was a known fact but I'm certainly glad to see I'm wrong about that. This is a small platform, there aren't enough readers here. I still don't feel comfortable but under no circumstances do I want this to be a "Either you go or I leave" situation. But I can't pretend I like that this happened, even understanding how it happened. But this is my personal.issue that I am going to be struggling with. But any decision I take is mine and mine alone.

 

[Meadow]

I have told Gary I will not require or accept his resignation from a volunteer role he does very well, and that I accept this was a mistake borne of ignorance, not malice. This article has been deleted.