Harlan Ellison is an Asshole
Harlan Ellison...wondering, "When did I start looking so old?"
Harlan Ellison is an asshole. He is probably America's most prolific science fiction writer. He's written zillions of short stories, several novels, and many scripts for the TV series The Outer Limits, Twilight Zone and Star Trek. He's so good, in fact, that James Cameron, the co-writer and director of the blockbuster movie Terminator admitted he ripped off two of Harlan Ellison's The Outer Limits stories, Soldier and The Glass Hand, to write the story of Terminator. Of course, Ellison sued him, got about $75,000.00 in an out-of-court settlement and an acknowledgment at the end of the movie. That was only fair.
Harlan Ellison...thinking, "I look so literary."
I detest science fiction. Always have. You sci-fi buffs out there: it's nothing personal, and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with you because you like all that crap. I'm just not interested. I never watched The Outer Limits or Star Trek; I liked the first Star Wars movie for the characters and the pioneering special effects, but the sequels just don't interest me.
Harlan Ellison...demonstrating how writers pose.
Okay. So why is Harlan Ellison an asshole? Not because he writes what I detest--I've never read one word he's written. He's an asshole, because of what he says and how he says it. In a November, 2007, interview called "Pay the Writer," he talks about not getting paid for an interview that Warner Brothers wanted to use on a DVD. He was appalled at the underling who called him for permission to use it and who expected for him to allow it to be used for free. Fine. Good point. But watch the video of this interview on YouTube.
Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE.
I agreed with what he was saying up until the last minute. Then this loud-mouth turned his venom on amateurs. Did you notice? He blames amateur writers--writers who haven't made any money yet writing--for creating the climate for big wigs in Hollywood and publishing to expect writers to write for free. I believe writers should be paid for their writing, too, but to say that professionals are "undercut by the amateurs" is just pathetic. Yeah. 20th Century Fox would rather have Tom Eubanks write their next Star Wars sequel for free, rather than have Lucas and his team write it for millions. Huh?
You know, a wise man once said, opinions are like assholes: everybody's got one and they usually stink. This opinion reeks.
I was paid to write the screenplay for a feature film I also got paid to direct called Open Spaces. I'll receive royalties for my play being produced at The Elite Theatre Company in April, 2010, and for sales of my book, Worlds Apart. But I still see myself as an amateur. By one of its definitions, I am "one who engages in an activity for enjoyment rather than profit." The word "amateur" is French, meaning "for the love of." I want to make money writing. But I'm not going to stop writing just because I'm not getting paid. And if Harlan doesn't like it, tough. Yeah, that's right, cry all the way to the bank, Mr. Ellison!
So if amateurs do it for the love of the activity, who is Harlan Ellison to say that a person can't do it for free? I'll tell you: someone who cares more about money than the art. If you go to YouTube and put in Harlan Ellison, you can view other interviews with this pompous ass. In an interview from what is probably the 1980s about Cameron's plagiarism for Terminator, he says at the end that all Cameron had to do was come to him and say he liked The Outer Limit stories and wanted to turn them into a movie. He claims that he would have allowed Cameron to use the stories "for nothing." He goes on to say that he'd let "anyone...have it for nothing" if they just asked him.
Flash forward to "Pay the Writer," and what does he say? He spouts off for nearly four minutes about writers getting paid. But 20-odd years ago, he was willing to give his work away for free. He made fun of writers who just want to see their writing published or produced, but he was willing to have his ego stroked, too, if they just asked him.
In other YouTube videos, he espouses his atheism, demeans those of us who believe in a higher power, and rants against any kind of religion. But in a stupid exchange between himself and Robin Williams, he raves about L. Ron Hubbard's inventing a religion, Scientology, which, if you know anything about it, routinely devastates peoples lives.
Some writers should keep their mouths shut and just write.
Yeah, maybe Harlan is an asshole. When I met him and had him sign a book I'd picked up at the used book store, he made a comment about it being a Book Club edition. WTF? I never bought another book of his, used or otherwise. Sold that one, too, on ebay. Now, Ray Bradbury, he's class.
Reply to this
In the late 1980s, I was president of the Ventura County Writer's Club and had the great pleasure of meeting Ray Bradbury at a reading our organization had sponsored at the library in Thousand Oaks. He signed the book I bought and chatted with everyone. He was a joyful soul to listen to and a real person to meet.
Reply to this
Good point Tom. I have never liked Sci-Fi as a genre either and Harlan is the effing Clive Cussler of Sci-Fi.
Reply to this
So far so good. Enjoyed everyone!
Reply to this
Hi Tom, Interesting article on Harlan. I'm not sure I would refer to him having Cranal rectilitus, but I get your point about being able to write for free. Keep up the blogging!
L.A.
Reply to this
Let me make myself clear. Not only does he suffer from Cranal rectilitus, but he is an anal cavity. Just look at the top picture!
Reply to this
We see the same kind of thing in the world of music. Its pure arrogance and elitism.
Reply to this
Errors:
"He's written zillions of short stories, several novels, and many scripts for the TV series The Outer Limits, Twilight Zone..."
Harlan Ellison never wrote for The Twilight Zone.
"He's so good, in fact, that James Cameron, the co-writer and director of the blockbuster movie Terminator admitted he ripped off two of Harlan Ellison's The Outer Limits stories, Soldier and The Glass Hand..."
The second Outer Limits episode ripped off by Cameron was titled DEMON WITH A GLASS HAND.
Harlan Ellison knows of your screed.
Good luck.
Kim Smith
Reply to this
Kim, you are correct. Mr. Ellison was creative consultant on The Twilight Zone for a while. He didn't write any episodes. And I did mis-type the name of Demon with a Glass Hand. I appreciate your comment, which allowed me to correct my errors.
If you know Mr. Ellison knows of my "screed" (good word), you must know him...or are him. Are you wishing me or warning me with that Good luck?
Reply to this
Tom,
Actually, in my hasty corrections I mistakenly forgot to qualify one part. Harlan Ellison never wrote for the original Rod Serling hosted 1960s The Twilight Zone. The 1980s revival version, on which he was indeed "Creative Consultant" he did actually write for. Offhand I recall MOTHER, PALADIN OF THE LOST HOUR andpI believe there were more.
So actually you were right, I was wrong, confusion ensued, etc. It all came out in the wash.
I am not Harlan Ellison. I don't "know" Harlan, but I have met him at signings and conventions, screenings. I've had a little friendly contact here and there with him. Just the barest of casual acquaintances. I like his work. He's always been kind and decent to me, while still being himself, which is sui generis.
I read a mention of your screed on Harlan Ellison's own website (by a regular poster thereon), and followed the posted link to read it myself. I assume by now Harlan knows of it, or soon will.
As for the "good luck": a little of both. I like Harlan, and wish you had not called him names, etc. But, he's his own man, and he can defend himself. It's not my job, and his writing speaks for itself. I noted that you did not attack his skill as a writer. That, though, is probably in this case going to be like the reporter that asked, "Other than that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"
So, Good Luck!
Kim Smith
Reply to this
Kim,
I am a man who rarely uses harsh language. I am not generally a "name-caller." But I was affected by his comments in the "Pay the Writer" piece and other videos I viewed. After I wrote this post, I actually wondered if I had been too harsh on Mr. Ellison, so I began to research him more. I was amazed at the chasm between the acknowledgement of his skill as a writer and his disfavor as a personality.
I don't regret calling him a name. It was in line with his own crass way of talking about other people. That he treats you kindly is a good thing. It's good to hear that he's not an asshole all the time.
Thank you for expounding on your first comment and I do hope you'll continue to read The American Writer.
Reply to this
Kim Smith is one of Ellison's toady hanger ons who is a regular at Ellison's site. What he means about Ellison knowing about your "screed" is that another of Ellison's Toadies posted a link this blog with a comment about possible libel(Seriously).
Smith is also wrong Ellison wrote two segments of the 1980's Twilight Zone "Crazy as a Soup Sandwich" & the adaption of the Steven King story "Gramma".Ellison also had three other stories that were used as segments on TZ.
Reply to this
Jay,
As a private eye by day, I'm enjoying this mystery unraveling. Whomever posted a comment on Ellison's Web site about libel should first find out the definition of libel.
libel n. to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others.
The keyword is "untruth." As you obviously figured out "(Seriously)": I wrote nothing that wasn't true. I made a mistake on the name of a TV episode Mr. Ellison wrote, but that's not libelous, since it doesn't do harm to him.
Reply to this
Interesting use of "toady" here. One would think that someone is frustrated that respect is being aimed at someone other than themselves. The image of toady, of course, evokes some slobbering gollum like sycophant with no thought of their own.
I do not need to defend Harlan Ellison, he can do that quite fine by himself.
But I would like to point out that if you have not read some of the masterpieces of science-fiction, and only seen it's bastardized and dumbed-down versions on the silver screen then I feel for you as you are missing out on one of the key components of modern culture, and some brilliant literature.
Harlan himself has always been dissatisfied with the term Science-Fiction, and has utilized terms such as speculative fiction and imaginative literature which come closer to the mark. Actually, his tales are brilliant pieces of fiction with the trappings of such tropes more or less there, but the stories are much more human than that.
And, in fact this IS the crux - if you have never read a word of what he has written or the lengths he has gone to to in and out of print to encourage writers and help get great pieces of art out into the world unadulterated by the hands of fools in Hollywood then you simply will not understand where his attitude is coming from.
So he does not suffer fools gladly - big deal. Since when was being congenial all the time a prerequisite for being a great artist?
As for the amateur bit, well - the guy is 75 years old. If you had your children raped for most of your life, don't you feel like you'd be a little bitter and cautious about letting them go out and play again? I feel as if this might be what Harlan might feel about his works. Maybe not. I'm not him. I'm probably just some toady following Harlan around trying to steal his golden ring.
And all religion is manmade - has the potential for good or harm. Perhaps as an atheist, seeing a contemporary figure create a religion would delight the part that sees the artificiality in such a structure thrown into sharp relief.
Again, I don't know. I don't speak for Harlan. Just throwing out possibilities.
Perhaps some directors should just keep their minds open and read?
Reply to this
Kris,
I did not use "toady" to describe Ms. Smith or any of Mr. Ellison's fans. If you re-read my blog, my point was that he is a good writer and that it was what he says and how he says it that created the emotional response in me. (I admit it: I have a feminine side!)
I've been paid to direct one film and many, many plays, but I am not a professional. It's not how I make my living. I did more than watch a few YouTube videos. As an actor and director in community theater, I work with many actors, stage managers and directors who are working to become professionals. They work for nothing, unfortunately, to get their experience. Artists have always struggled to make a living, and I agree with Mr. Ellison's point of view about infringement and getting paid. But in the "Pay the Writer," he blamed amateurs and I, unlike him apparently, respect amateurs for the struggle and sacrifice they are making to learn their craft and one day become a big-shot in Hollywood or a famous author. He's been doing it so long, perhaps he's forgotten what it's like to be looking for the open door.
It was his arrogance, his displaced blame and an obvious hypocrisy that stirred me to write what I did. Amateurs didn't "rape" his "children"; Hollywood big shots did. And amateurs had nothing to do with it.
So you believe it's not a big deal that Mr. Ellison does not suffer fools gladly. Some of us don't suffer successful, arrogant writers gladly.
I don't think what I wrote had much to do with having a closed mind. It had to do with my perspective. And I read all the time. But I have to admit this: before all this bickering about the harsh opinion of one lowly, West Coast writer, I did not have the interest to read anything he's written. I do now. Let's see if I'm a convert to your man-made religion.
Thanks for your well-written comments. I certainly appreciate and respect your point of view.
Reply to this
Tom Eubanks is an asshole.
I've never read anything Tom has written, except this blog. I'm sure Tom is a decent writer, as it's very hard to become a professional writer - which, however he perceives himself, is what he is. If you get paid for your writing you are a professional.
What else would you call someone who derides and denigrates the personality of someone he has never met? I might understand his diatribe a little better if he had actually had a run-in with Harlan - there have been a number of people who have crossed him in one way or another, and Harlan doesn't suffer fools, gladly or otherwise. To make a sweeping judgment about his character, however, having never read any of his work or spoken to him, based upon a youtube interview, is to join the ranks of the great uninformed yahoos who take regular potshots at him apparently because they think it makes them smarter or cooler than he.
I am a fan of Harlan's. His work (and you do him a serious injustice when you say he's a "Sci-Fi writer" - that's like saying Ernest Hemingway writes fish stories) has inspired and uplifted me for most of my life. It takes a lot of people that way. I have met him several times and he has always been gracious, kind and coke-snortingly funny. All of this doesn't make me a toady, it makes me a fan.
And, since I called Tom an asshole, I guess that makes me an asshole, too. I think I can handle that.
Reply to this
You bet I'm an asshole. Just not all the time. And I'm fairly certain Mr. Ellison is not an asshole all the time either. I respect his work. My "sweeping judgment" was not of his character. I judged his opinion and behavior. He is quoted as saying that we don't have the right to an opinion but only an informed opinion. I simply concluded that it had been so long since he was an amateur that he was no longer informed about what it was like. His displaced blame on amateurs ticked me off.
(See my reply to Kris for more, if you care to read it.)
I used to be an intolerable SOB to people in the theater community. I did not suffer fools and arrogantly set them apart from my station as an experienced director with grillings that would shrink actors to dysfunction. After an actress in a show I was producing died and I watched the community come to her memorial and for hours speak of her graciousness to other actors, I had an epiphany.
I love actors again. And I love writers. But in this case, after viewing multiple videos and reading blogs and profiles about Mr. Ellison, I came to a conclusion: he's an asshole. But maybe I should have titled it, "Harlan Ellison is an Asshole Sometimes."
And you are not an asshole for calling me one.
Reply to this
Tom, let me state up front that Harlan is a friend of mine. Your main point seems to be based on Pay The Writer and his response to Cameron and Terminator.JC was not using his stories themselves and Harlan has let writers ( i.e. Kevin Anderson) use his work if he's asked. As a courtesy to him. The "amateur" concept ? A writer is what Harlan is and he takes the work seriously and demands that a writer is treated as you would treat any tradesman. George Lucas would probably use Star Wars fans for free set construction if he thought he would get away with it and in many cases you can get spec writing from someone just thrilled to be asked. I just don't think those cases you stated proves your point. Yours, John Zeock.
Reply to this
John,
I appreciate your taking the time to comment. (Read my response to Kris, if you care to understand my position better.) I don't hide the fact that my response was initially emotional. I have an appreciation for amateurs struggling to get where Mr. Ellison has been for a long time. Blaming and mocking amateurs didn't sit well with me. Mocking people of faith in the thing with Robin Williams, and then making light of L. Ron Hubbard inventing a religion, apparently because he respected his Sci-Fi stories, didn't help either.
I recognize when a person is being an asshole, because I used to be one, too.
Reply to this
It seems that what you really seemed bothered about is that Harlan isn't superstitious, and believing that some great invisible being created humanity is superstition. Isaac Asimov referred to religious books as occult books. His comments on Scientology were about how Scientology is no more valid a "religion" than any other, and he happened to be there at a party when L. Ron Hubbard announced that he was going to create a religion and make a million dollars, and he did.
Reply to this
I would love to comment more about how demeaning the term "superstitious" is to people of faith, but I promised myself when I started this blog on Christmas Eve, 2009, that I would avoid opining about religious and political topics.
I will say, however, that, unless you know something about Scientology, the flippancy of making a million dollars on inventing something that acts like a religion but by no stretch of any Science Fiction writer's imagination is one, you may not understand the gravity of Mr. Ellison's light-hearted reminiscences of the party.
Reply to this
So...you found something on You-Tube that you disliked so intensely that you went out looking for more?
Why?
Then you lambaste Harlan for stating one opinion twenty years ago and stating a different opinion recently. Does that mean that you've never changed your opinion on anything, ever?
As for Harlan's views on amateurs doing work for free, look around and see how many people are now writing reports and providing photos and video to news corporations for free. Don't you think that that's the sort of thing that's likely to affect the revenue of professional writers and photographers as it becomes more and more prevalent? That's a small example of how amateurs can erode markets for professionals who charge for what they produce want to make a living at it. Maybe they love their work, too. Nothing better than being able to make a living doing what you love, is there?
Reply to this
I can understand how you might think that my reaction was to go looking for more bile. Perhaps you know by now that I have made my living as a private investigator for 35 years. I care about what people have to say. I care about facts. My conclusions may not always be correct--I'm human, for crying out loud. But to answer your question: no. I didn't know much about Mr. Ellison, but the "Pay the Writer" piece created an interest in him, so I went looking for what I could find. Perhaps all the negative stuff about him rose to the top, but that's what I kept seeing and reading.
Of course I've changed my opinion about things. But I would respectfully say that you've mis-defined what this really is. About fifty years into his career he blames amateurs for what, to some degree, at least, he was willing to do 20 years ago. That's not changing an opinion; that's hypocrisy.
As for the rest of your comment about working for free: yes, I acknowledged that it affects professionals. But I also understand why amateurs do it. They don't do it to reduce professional's revenues, they do it, because they're looking for an open door. When I was 22, I decided I wanted to make a living as a private investigator. The man who hired me did so only if I worked for free for two weeks. What he did was illegal. I was willing to do it, though, to get my foot in the door of a profession that is hard to break into. I didn't see it as compromising myself or reducing the profession. I saw it as an opportunity.
Nothing better than being able to find an opportunity to make a living doing what you love, is there?
Jan, thank you for your comments.
Reply to this
Tom-based on your example I think that the problem arises from a disagreement over "amateur". Harlan is not yelling about the 17 year old working as an unpaid intern on a local newspaper. I don't read that rant of his as referring to those people. I see that as Harlan talking about people who ARE professional but who don't act as such when dealing with studios. On the other point , Harlan is an athiest but I've never heard or read him deride a genuine person of faith. I read his L.Ron Hubbard tale as a black humor commentary on how easy it is to delude people. Yours, JZ.
Reply to this
John,
I appreciate your insight and for taking the time to explain it to me. As Fagin sang in Oliver!: "I'm reviewing...the situation..."
Reply to this
Tom,
You may want to look up the definitions of "superstition" and "religion" before getting haughty about people who use the first word to describe the second. If you choose to believe in magical, unseen forces that control the world, knock yourself out. But don't get huffy when people label your irrational beliefs properly.
I have no idea what the clip you saw was, but if you think Harlan Ellison would ever, in any way, endorse Scientology (or any superstitious belief system), you are genuinely out of your mind. Sarcasm is wasted on the dimwitted.
As far as the rest of your rant, it's little more than the bitter ravings of an ignorant child. To those of us who love it enough to do it for a living, "Writer" is a profession. That you choose to take an amateur's approach to our job is, of course, your prerogative. That you would have the audacity to dictate to professionals how they should behave regarding their profession, however, is unconscionable.
And in that spirit, I would request that you change the name of your blog. You are NOT THE American Writer. You are, simply, AN American Amateur.
Reply to this
Thanks. I love hearing from professional writers who think it's a club. It reminds me why I still like getting paid for writing without having to join. You miss the point about amateurism, just as you miss the point about "magical, unseen forces." God bless you.
Reply to this
It's not a club, genius. It's a PROFESSION. It takes training, it takes dedication, and it takes passion, just like ANY skilled profession. You don't see idiots running around saying, "I'm an amateur doctor," because even the dimmest bulb recognizes that that requires training.
I have no idea what you do for a living, nor do I care. But if it's something that actually takes skill and training and commitment, imagine being accosted by people who can't be bothered to do the actual work telling you how you should do it.
If your repulsive perspective on this subject didn't actually make my job harder, I wouldn't give a crap. But it does. People like you hurt writers, pal. Your attitude is that of the know-nothing, and you reinforce the ignorance of other know-nothings, who, unfortunately, are often the people we have to deal with to get our work out there.
Reply to this
For 35 years I've worked as a professional private investigator. I own an Agency here in California. I have worked off and on as a professional theatrical director, screenwriter and novelist. I work with professional investigators and those who are trying to break in the business. I work with professional actors and those trying to break in. I work with professional writers and those "amateurs" you have such disdain for.
I do hope you make lots of money writing. This genius know-nothing won't stand in your way.
Reply to this
The only amateurs I have disdain for are the ones who have no respect for writers. Like every pro, I started out as an amateur. I also started out with respect for the craft and for the job.
And I DO make lots of money writing, thanks. More than you can possibly imagine. There are few things in life as gratifying as being paid to do what you love. Comments about doing it for love instead of money are pig ignorant, Tom, and they degrade this noble profession that you claim to love so much.
As for undercutting professionals, every time a writer does something for free, they're making it harder for professionals. That you don't respect writing or writers is fine, but that you spread that message as though it's noble is morally indefensible.
You've been given a chance to learn something from one of the masters of the craft, and instead, you've chosen to attack him personally. The level of arrogance in your initial post is mind-boggling.
You lack enough character to be ashamed of yourself.
Which makes you the asshole, bubba.
Reply to this
Josh,
I know perfectly well you make lots of money writing. I happen to be a fan of your work. You're making a whole lot of assumptions about me, and, frankly, it bothers me only to the extent that I respect your writing, as I do Mr. Ellison's. I just think some of you guys treat amateurs like crap. That was my only point.
I'm done bickering about this.
Reply to this
For the record, Josh Olson is NOT an asshole. He's a prick. Unless one is an Academy Award nominated screenwriter, then you apparently don't know anything about screenwriting, or anything about professional writing. Nevermind that Olson will probably never have another produced credit (unless it's a cartoon), he's a paid writer, don't you know.
It's a shame 'cause I probably agree with Olson on about 90% of what he says, it's just that...well, he's such a dick about it. He can't just disagree with you, he's gotta call you names. But, hey, he makes more money than all of us so he can do that.
Anyway, I just wanted to confirm the fact that Olson is a prick, not an asshole.
Full disclosure, I've been banned from Ellison's site so read whatever bias you want into that.
Oh, and as far as an opinion on the actual merits of what Olson and Ellison said: They have a point. However, as you said, Tom, everyone has to start somewhere, and, unfortunately, the system is set up in a way that almost demands the aspiring writer work for nothing in the beginning of their (maybe) career. Ask the WGA if they've figured out a way to solve the conundrum of "assignments" for an aspiring writer.
Reply to this
Tom, as a professional writer and friend of both Harlan Ellison and Josh Olson, I offer a little perspective. Josh Olson and I first encountered each other on WORDPLAY, a site for screenwriters, both professional and aspiring, run by Terry Rossio and Ted Elliott also professional screenwriters, where professionals, newbies, wannabes, and amateurs of all stripes intermingled and were given the advice and benefit of the professionals' experience...it was always practical, pragmatic, no nonsense, honest, opinonated, passionate, full of conviction, ocassionally conflicting, and often cutting and intolerant when met with stupidity and arrogant truculence. Fools were not suffered gladly. But there were fools. Amateurs who would rather get defensive and argumentative than maybe learn something from someone who had actually been in the trenches. But there were a great many more who avidly lapped up the advice from those who had achieved what they sought. Those who get it appreciate truthfull sometimes harsh advice. Sadly, the ones who get it are usually the ones who don't need it. It's the ones who don't get it.
I met Mr. Ellison at a convention for fans of another author. He saw my name in a programme and called me over to the dais to tell me how much he enjoyed a movie of mine When I complained about how the movie had been diminished by the director, he laughed and said, "You sound just like me, come up to the house. We'll be friends." Later that night, I gave him a novel I had written of the movie. He opened it up and made a quick negative critique about a particular passage. Many people -- non-writers -- who witnessed it were outraged by it. I laughed and said, "I should consider anything a writer as great as Harlan Ellison says about my work...after all, he's not some studio executive who doesn't understand writing." But I also recognized the jokingly acerbic tenor in which the remark had been made and I was confident enough in my own work not to be shattered by an opinion, even one as knowledgeable and informed as Mr. Ellison's. The next day Harlan called me and said, "In spite of my remark last night, I've been reading through this and it's fine work." I went up to the house, we became friends. The best of friends. I have seen Harlan indulge amateur writers with great kindness, patience (more forbearance than they often deserve), and, to those who are serious, great encouragement.
Through our mutual friendship with Mr. Ellison, I have become re-acquainted with Josh. Both he and Harlan are greatly admired, respected, and looked up to by a great many amateurs who seek their wisdom and knowledge.
Reply to this
Charles,
I admire both Mr. Olson's and Mr. Ellison's accomplishments. I agree with most of their points of view about writers being paid for their work. But I don't agree that successful men as these need to be arrogant, condescending, abrasive, and hypocritical. I know it doesn't come with the territory, because some of the comments I received from Ellison's fans and friends--yours included--were not.
In re-reading my original blog post, I have to admit I was unnecessarily derisive of Mr. Ellison. But in reading and listening to some of his comments, I figure he understands how someone can piss you off and the emotional response it can create. That said, if someone blasted a friend of mine who had helped me greatly in reaching success as Mr. Ellison apparently was able to do for you, I would come to his defense, too. Mr. Ellison is fortunate to have friends like you.
Reply to this
A clarification, Harlan did not in any way help me greatly in reaching success. I was already in the midst of a highly successful career when we met. We appreciate each other as professionals and we share pretty much the same world view on most things, particularly writing and the professional ethic. We have both been fierce fighters for writers' creative rights and windmill-tilters against often unjust studio politics, the auteur myth, and simply the general idiocy and lack of common sense that dilutes a writer's work.
As professionals, neither Mr. Ellison nor I have ever asked each other to critique or vet each other's work or help each other with our career. I have a few writer's rules, foremost of which is: "A professional knows when he's done good work."
I have been lucky enough to be one of a select few present when Harlan has shared with us a reading of one of his latest stories and it's always a privilege to be among the first ears ever to hear it. Harlan has a few times asked to read a script I've written...never with a mind to a critique or giving notes, merely for his own edification and enjoyement.
As for all this silly name-calling about pricks and assholes, Harlan, Josh, and myself have all at various times been branded "difficult", because we dare to stand up for our work, own our opinions, call a spade a spade, know the difference between capitulation and collaboration, and don't make it easy for people to take advantage of us. I wear the term "difficult" like a badge of honour. We all respect our profession, do it well, and don't suffer fools and dillentantes and poseurs gladly. If that makes either of them an asshole or a prick...or me for that matter...than so be it. We've all got enough friends, fans, healthy egos, and we figure if someone dislikes us, that's their problem.
Reply to this
Mr. Pogue, I doubt that many people admire or respect Josh Olson. His reputation in the industry, such as it is, is based on a movie made five years ago with heavy involvement by the director on the screenplay.
Since then, Mr. Olson is chiefly known for proclaiming to anyone who will listen that he is a professional writer. These protests are like a rash all over the Internet, this site just being the most recent, and if anyone doth protest too much, it's Josh Olson.
Reply to this
Brian,
If you'd like to discuss the ins and outs of my career, try coming at me from somewhere other than behind a wall of anonymity. Of course, then you'll have to deal with the possibility that what you say is demonstrably libelous, which really sucks, dude.
Your post exhibits my two favorite aspects of the internet - the ability it gives cowards to hurl shit at people without fear of consequence, and the podium it gives to people to expound on subjects they know jackshit about. "I haven't seen a movie by this guy in a while" automatically means they haven't been working, at least in the world of the ignoramus.
I will give Tom credit for the fact that at least when he posted his ignorant twaddle, he did so under his own name.
Reply to this
Brian T, I feel like I'm getting suck into a debate I really don't need to be having with, pardon me, folks who don't have a clue. Josh certainly doesn't need me defending him. Nor does he need to be defended.
Are you an industry insider who has some special knowledge of Josh's reputation? Or are your perceptions just fuelled by the usual inaccurate internet spewings, assumptions, and, frankly, idiot misinformation that inevitably spills out on the internet?
Any glance at IMDB will show you Josh has plenty of credits. And he works on several movies even as I write this. He, like most A-list writers in the industry, can command hefty fees to write scripts whether those scripts eventually get made or not. I sincerely doubt you have any insider information as to his working relationship with director David Cronenberg...and that this assumption is also stoked by more internet rumour and innuendo or, worse, the PR blather that invariably gets blabbed on DVD extras. Though I have found Mr. Cronenberg to be a gentleman.
Josh's protests are hardly a rash on the internet. Any he does make are usually very cogent and intelligent.
The one that you might be attempting to turn into a "rash" was his brilliant and dead-on essay, entitled "I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script" which was picked up by film websites and blogs everywhere, lauded and applauded by professional screenwriters everywhere, and despised by disgruntled amateurs everywhere with an axe to grind against an industry that they perceive as keeping their genius out and a Writers Guild they feel unjustly excludes them because they are not professionals. In fact, this very witty, accurate essay of Josh's was eventually published in WRITTEN BY magazine, the publication of the WGA. I've yet to find any professional writer who disagrees with the sentiments expressed in it.
So despite your doubts, sir, I have no doubt that Josh is both admired and respected. Nor do I doubt he's losing any sleep over your wishful thinking that he isn't.
Reply to this
I have to admit: "I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script" was not only dead-on right, but hilarious. I read it twice: once for his perspective of what a successful, professional writer thinks about this intrusive phenomenon and a second time just to laugh. It was crude and probably pissed off a lot of people, but I enjoyed it.
Reply to this
Tom, I'm glad you enjoyed the piece, but I'm mystified as to how you could enjoy it, and get it, and still write this twaddle about Harlan. We're both talking about the same people - people who devalue what it is we do by treating it as a hobby, as something that any schmuck can do.
The answer that's starting to make sense is somewhat disturbing - that you don't grasp the meaning of the word "amateur" in the context Harlan uses in the piece. That's somewhat born out by your inability to grasp the obvious disdain he holds Scientology in in the other clip, though, and I wonder if you're an absolute literalist, which is NOT a good thing for someone who aspires to create fiction.
Watch the clip again. Specifically, Harlan talks about "amateurs" who will do things like talk on DVD commentaries without getting paid. How many amateur writers do you think are being asked to talk on DVDs?
I should let this go, but it continues to infuriate me. Harlan Ellison has done more, and fought harder for the rights of writers than you or I ever will. He's risked his career and his reputation to win battles that most of us are too complacent to fight. For someone who doesn't even do this for a living to attack him on these grounds is obscene, and, like I said, you should be ashamed of yourself. You do not do this for a living. You do not know, first hand, the struggles we all have to go through. You continue to perceive writing the way many amateurs do - you think we should all be so dazzled by the fact that we get paid to do it that we should take any and every ass-reaming that comes our way.
You wouldn't talk that way to a brick layer, or to a skilled auto mechanic, or to a doctor. But writers? We should just be happy with what we've got.
You can treat your own work with disdain. That's your business. But when you preach a philosophy that encourages the degradation of OUR work, that's when you cross the line.
Like I said, I'm glad you enjoyed my article. But you do need to realize that its target was you.
Reply to this
I don't understand how the "fucking script" article was aimed at Mr. Eubanks. Has he ever tried to shove a script in somebody's face and pestered them to read it?
Reply to this
No, I haven't.
Reply to this
I just read the exchanges on here. Tom have you read the interesting blog article at holywood 2.0 Matt Pizzolo gave on Josh Olsen?
http://hollywood-2point0.com/blog/by-matt-pizzolo/why-josh-olson-is-a-fucking-douchebag
Reply to this
Yes. Pretty slam-dunk piece. But it doesn't inspire me to lower myself to his level either. My piece about Harlan Ellison was an emotional response to things Mr. Ellison said in three YouTube videos I viewed. If you read my blog, you'll see that I don't generally call people names, I don't write crudely, and I'm not writing to denigrate but to elevate writers. That Josh Olson has chosen to be a jerk doesn't affect me one bit. Frankly, I agree with some of what he says and I liked the movies produced from his script. I just think he's crude and arrogant. Writers who have mastered the use of the language don't need to be so crude and arrogant. But I have a soft spot in my heart for Josh; after all, he did call me "Genius."
Reply to this
correction: "Josh Olson"
Also, my name is Frank. I wrote in Matt Pizzolo because that is the author of the article (my apologies --I've just pulled an all nighter working on my thesis and I'm very bleary eyed and tired).
Anyway Matt replys to all comments at his blog-->
"Why Josh Olson is a fucking douchebag" by Matt Pizzolo
http://hollywood-2point0.com/blog/by-matt-pizzolo/why-josh-olson-is-a-fucking-douchebag
Reply to this