In Praise of Anonymity
Anne Rice is not just an author, she's an Author. In the comments of a post from blogger Dawn Papuga's site about Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling's lawsuit over Harry Potter Lexicon creator Stephen Vander Ark's book project, she criticizes the manner of Papuga's assault on Rowling's lawsuit: "The rampant viciousness on the internet is hurtful to to me even when it’s not aimed at me," she writes. Rice joins a cacophony of voices attacking the tone of the Internet, which won't play by the rules of famous and important Authors. With the Internet-fighting team of Julia Allison and Emily Gould joining Rice's crusade to end being virtually criticized forever, we find it shocking that no one has stepped up to support Al Gore's greatest invention. Here's why they're wrong.
The general "tone" of the internet is Rice's main enemy in this broadside, and even though she fully supports Vander Ark's use of Rowling's material, she's not as kind to her own fans: "I do not allow fan fiction. The characters are copyrighted. It upsets me terribly to even think about fan fiction with my characters...It is absolutely essential that you respect my wishes." Her argument on Papuga's site against the current state of the Internet goes as follows:
But I would like to say this: there is a really unkind tone to your post, and I wonder why you and others write this sort of unkind letter to authors. Do you think we don’t have feelings? Do you think we don’t read what you say? Do you think we are not entitled to common courtesy? — I urge you in future to realize that writers are human beings with feelings like everyone else. The rampant viciousness on the internet is hurtful to to me even when it’s not aimed at me. I feel that we can use the internet constructively with manners. It is a magnificent means of communication, but we don’t have to attack people to make it work.
We can expect this from Rice: the 66-year old author was born without the all-consuming need for the web. After a life as an atheist, Rice devoted herself to writing "only for the Lord" in 2004. (As we know, the Lord hates the Internet.) But it's not just her. Smarter people than Rice are attacking what they believe to be the vicious tone and persistent anonymity of the Internet. The internet's harshest critic of late has been former Gawker editor Emily Gould, who seriously hurt the Internet's feelings in an Observer article on Jonathan Zittrain's anti-Internet tract, The Future of the Internet And How To Stop It.
As you can see from the Earth Day appropriate cover, the Internet is going to chew up every piece of land you own and replace them with the unending posts of anonymous commenters. No wonder Julia Allison took refuge on Tumblr, where posts don't have comments and you have to reblog people's mistakes to their "face." Yet even that doesn't forestall the most virulent of anonymous haters: Julia's anonymous Tumblr-hater hides behind the terms of service. The Internet just won't learn.
Possible solutions:
1. We give the Internet a timeout.
2. Is there an Internet whisperer, a la the Dog Whisperer? He could do that tsst! thing to the Internet. Possible?
3. We can try talking to the Internet. Why is the Internet allowing anonymous commenters to make fun of us? It could be that we pissed off the Internet somewhere back there. Look into whether we pantsed the Internet in a pool, or if we gave it a Cleveland Steamer. If so, write note of apology.
4. We leak that the Internet is too liberal. Karl Rove will do the rest.
At its heart, this anger towards the internet is all from famous or semi-famous folks. If they're brave enough to slam people under their own name, why shouldn't everybody live up to their impossible standard? They're missing the point — in this space, everyone who wants a voice, gets a voice. It doesn't matter if you're an Author or an author or a crank, you get to say your piece. A tough skin helps, but if you're important enough to be anonymously dissed, you've already won.