2018 School Spending Survey Report
AILA Rescinds Sherman Alexie's 2008 YA Book of the Year Award
An honor for The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian, winner of the 2008 National Book Award, has been taken away by the American Indian Literature Association, after multiple accusations of sexual harassment against author Sherman Alexie.
In a bold move, the American Indian Literature Association (AILA)is rescinding Sherman Alexie's 2008 YA Book of the Year Award "to send an unequivocal message that Alexie’s actions are unacceptable." 
Photo courtesy of
Little Brown
Alexie won the 2008 AILA award (and 2007 National Book Award) for The Absolutely True Diary of a Part Time Indian, but the legend in the AILA community and once-revered member in the children's literature world has been accused of sexual harassment by multiple women as the #metoo movement swept through the kid lit community in recent months. On February 28, Alexie released a statement apologizing and admitting to doing unspecified things that "have harmed other people," but denied the specific accusations of author Litsa Dremousis, and said he did not remember threatening anyone or their careers. AILA president Naomi Bishop did not confirm the action and contents of the note, but said via email that the American Library Association (ALA) would "publish the statement publicly for AILA" later this week. The note, sent to AILA membership via its listserv, was shared with SLJ by someone who received it. Here it is in full:
Dear AILA membership, The Youth Literature Awards Committee and the Executive Board write to express full support for the people harmed by Sherman Alexie. We believe and commend the writers who have spoken up and extend our heartfelt compassion to those who have chosen to remain silent. As librarians we have a significant influence on books that schools and libraries select. The AILA Youth Literature Awards were established in 2006 to honor Native authors and illustrators. The books we select represent the very best for our kids and our communities. We believe that writers are members of our communities who we can look to as role models for our youth. We cannot, therefore, recommend Mr. Alexie’s books, and we have decided to rescind our 2008 Best YA Book Award for The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian. In rescinding this award, we hope to send an unequivocal message that Alexie’s actions are unacceptable. Sexual harassment and abuse are not easy to report and discuss. If you or someone you know is experiencing sexual assault or harassment, one resource you can turn to is the Strong Hearts Helpline at http://www.strongheartshelpline.org/about/ Hope and healing can be found in books like #NotYourPrincess: Voices of Native American Women. We selected it as our Best YA Book for 2018. #NotYourPrincess is a powerful anthology by Native American and First Nations women sharing their experiences through poems, essays, interviews, and art. It is one of many that AILA has selected for its awards. See information about the 2018 winners at http://www.ala.org/news/press-releases/2018/02/2018-aila-youth-literature-awards-announced The youth we serve today are here because their ancestors fought for their future and the well-being of their nations. It is in that spirit with which we write to you today. Sincerely, AILA Youth Lit Committee AILA Executive Board
Added To Cart
RELATED
RECOMMENDED
CAREERS
The job outlook in 2030: Librarians will be in demand
CAREERS
The job outlook in 2030: Librarians will be in demand
ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER? LOG IN
We are currently offering this content for free. Sign up now to activate your personal profile, where you can save articles for future viewing
ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER? LOG IN
Thank you for visiting.
We’ve noticed you are using a private browser. To continue, please log in or create an account.
Add Comment :-
Comment Policy:
Comment should not be empty !!!
Nomenclature
NCTE New Jersey has created a new code of conduct evidently designed to prevent Alexie-alleged incidents, that is frighteningly vague. Here is an excerpt: "Harassment includes, but is not limited to: Verbal comments that reinforce social structures of domination related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age, and/or religion." WTF? Does that mean if a person makes a comment that uses regular gender pronouns, or refuses to zhe or "they" a person in a private conversation or comments at a session, he or she will be evicted from the proceedings? https://www.njcte.com/njcte-code-of-conduct/Posted : Apr 25, 2018 08:35
rsuilo
this article was written about litsa trying to get a native woman fired she shouldn't be involved in the investigation or reporting she is driven by a personal vendetta and dangerous to the victims https://theestablishment.co/no-white-women-i-will-not-be-voting-for-hillary-9d1dec35a482Posted : Apr 16, 2018 08:54
CReao
Litsa has a long history of attacking POC women. If the motto is believe women read this article about how she attacked a POC woman over a petty argument online then tried to have her fired from her job. She should not be anywhere near the victims her motives are suspicious. Litsa's name was changed here but it's about her https://theestablishment.co/no-white-women-i-will-not-be-voting-for-hillary-9d1dec35a482Posted : Apr 16, 2018 07:54
Don Reynolds
Let’s agree at the outset, the American Indian Library Association has every right to do whatever it wants with its book selections and awards. However, they do not have the right to expect automatic respect for/agreement with their actions, especially when they disregard their own operating award selection criteria. The basic question remains unanswered: are AILA literary awards about the quality/content of the writing or the lifestyle of the author? Having served on a variety of children’s and young adult award selection book committees, I have some questions about applying not-specified criteria to award selections, especially when applied retroactively. Applying new criteria 10 years after a book has been selected to add that an author should be living an exemplary, virtuous life or being a writer “that writers are members of our communities who we can look to as role models for our youth,” is terribly unprincipled and unprofessional, not to mention ethically questionable. Do any of us think our work product should judged by how we’re treating our mother? (BTW, were those original committee members involved in selecting the Alexie book consulted in making the decision to rescind the Award they gave? How has his book lost its award-winning qualities because he harassed women?) AILA has an important voice to share in our discussions about how we treat each other and how we select appropriate materials for our collections. However, to be respected, we all must take actions deserving of respect since we will be known forever by the tracks we leave. As several of the 190 Comments above show, AILA and some of its members appear not to like its action being questioned and play the Native card to assert that folks not Native are not able to understand, then equate support for the harassed women to approval of their rescission: in point of fact, to question the AILA action is not to disbelieve the women nor to condone or accept Alexie’s despicable behavior. And Mr. Alexie’s behavior appears to be truly abhorrent. To be perfectly clear, let me repeat, to disagree with the AILA action is not to disbelieve the women. Please read TJG’s March 27 post from a woman who was there - she sums up the variables in the accusations, particularly wondering how someone who chooses to have an affair with married man thereby disrespecting his wife, can then claim to be a victim. As Eleanor Roosevelt said, “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” Martin Luther King, Jr. said that, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” It matters that it is inappropriate to demonize folks for different opinions or to question their motives, especially with ad hominem arguments. Some of the assumptions and false equivalencies in the preceding Comments are breathtakingly inaccurate. To the AILA Executive Board and the AILA Youth Lit Committee: in the name of the integrity of your mission, coupled with the ethical and moral treatment of others, reverse your decision to restore your professional respect. If you want to select future books based on an author’s personal lifestyle, rewrite your selection criteria for future awards. From an earlier time, when there were questions about who could write for whom about what, here are several concepts to keep in mind: Well, you don't have to be a chicken to recognize an egg. ~ Mary Richards (on the Mary Tyler Moore Show) Poor Flaubert, can’t write Madame Bovary. ~ F.N. (Ferd) Monjo, late children’s book editorPosted : Apr 02, 2018 11:10
TJG
T., thanks for your comment. I think it was a wise to remain anonymous, mostly because I continue to be amazed at how poorly all of this has been handled beginning with Litsa Dremousis’s involvement and NPR’s coverage of the women’s stories. I met Sherman almost ten years ago, and the email correspondence I’ve had with him, including me breaking things off with him after a one-time consensual encounter at his hotel, would probably support his defense. He was married so it didn’t feel right to me (yes, I think there’s some personal accountability in that kind of situation), but there was no coercion or anger expressed in person or through any correspondence with him. After, I continued to attend his readings when he came to town, and he would still sometimes email me from the airport on his way out of Spokane, for example, to ask how I was doing. That said, I understand that one person’s relationship with someone doesn’t preclude someone’s involvement or perceived entitlement with other people. In case you think my only purpose here is to protect Sherman, you should know that I reported what I considered to be my personal relationship with him to SCBWI through the link posted after the anonymous allegations came out against him in the comments section of the SLJ Children's Publishing Reckons with Sexual Harassment in Its Ranks. (I used the email address that SCBWI probably has on record with my former last name, same initials as above.) Although I made it clear I didn’t consider myself a victim, I felt it was important to share in case something in my story with Sherman fit a larger pattern of more troubling behavior with other women. While I’m interested in the well-being of the women involved, from the outside, there are many problems with the way this whole situation has been handled. For what it’s worth, here’s my opinion so far: I think AILA has every right to make decisions for their organization based on the objectives they hope to meet through their recognition. It’s also possible they have additional information that influenced their decision to rescind Sherman’s 2008 Book of the Year Award. As for the rest of us--we lack enough clear information to draw many reasonable conclusions from this mess. Sadly, Litsa Dremousis, who was not forthcoming from the beginning about her own consensual sexual relationship with Sherman has only hurt the credibility of the women choosing to speak out against him. Whatever the motivation, Litsa chose to insert herself into this narrative and we have little indication what she alleged has been proven. She claimed to have verified dozens upon dozens of harassment stories as “100% credible,” while receiving emails from women she was (for some bizarre reason) funneling to NPR. Is this their typical reporting procedure? Based on their own NPR accounts, none of the three women that spoke on out were sexually assaulted by Alexie. But were they sexually harassed by him? Bullied or threatened? The accounts need to be looked at individually. Jeanine Walker seemed surprised that Sherman was interested in her beyond her poetry and basketball skills, yet she also admitted her only real interest in him was to advance her own publishing ambitions. He asked to kiss her, didn’t when she said no, and later apologized. Doesn’t seem to fit the definition of harassment. Erika Wurth traveled to one of Sherman’s readings upon his request, walked back to a hotel with him and agreed to go to his room after he kissed her in the lobby. In his room things ended when he picked up on her non-verbal objection to his advances. Yet, several years later she had another sexual encounter with him that ended badly? My inclination was to dismiss it because it seemed that she chose to put herself in that position with him again. A series of consensual choices hardly sounds like harassment, but maybe he was bullying and threatening in the angry email exchanges afterword...we didn’t really know. Later on her twitter account, however, Erika filled in some essential details about their second encounter. Sherman apparently lured her around her apartment building and pushed her up against a wall. How did NPR miss THAT critical piece of verifiable information? It involved a chipped tooth for heaven’s sake! And yes, that’s assault. Of the accounts given on NPR, Elissa Washuta’s seemed the most problematic. Sherman’s vulgar comment to her at the restaurant could absolutely be perceived as threatening. Hopefully he said it loud enough that someone else at the table witnessed his reprehensible behavior. Worse, Sherman and Elissa later worked together as colleagues at IAIA. On NPR she said he tried to lure her to his hotel room at a conference they both attended. Jacqueline Keeler later wrote an article in which Elissa described Sherman’s pathetic attempt at seduction--sending a picture of the bed in his hotel room with a box of condoms on the nightstand. Fortunately, that’s easily verifiable. Unfortunately, NPR didn’t seem to verify it. So if Litsa and a handful of other women had the intention of rallying grievances of every kind against Sherman--they succeeded. Among them, criticism of his writing, his speaking topics to adult audiences, his perceived arrogance, and his supposed obligation to promote other Native writers. However, these things have only detracted from the harassment/assault allegations. That said, it’s good that some blatant problems have been addressed, including Native American tokenism in publishing and the dependency of Sherman as a gatekeeper in the literary world. Also obvious--the need for dependable reporting options for all women writers, but especially Native American women who statistically run a higher risk (2.5 times other racial groups) of sexual harassment and assault. T., I understand many of the concerns you mentioned in your comment, but without more information, I honestly don’t know how I--or anyone else--would evaluate your experience with Sherman. I do know that in order to assess any harassment/assault situation, women deserve the best reporting methods and most complete, verified coverage possible from dependable sources. As ground-breaking and necessary as the Me Too movement is, I worry that some people are giving in to blind belief based on hearsay that is easily distorted, manipulated and magnified in our digital age. And I do know this: poorly handled news coverage with ill-fitting personal accounts of perceived harassment will only hurt the Me Too movement in the long run. We all need to do better.Posted : Mar 28, 2018 02:33
Rachel
"Good writing" does not negate sexual assault/abuse. I stand behind the AILA's decision to rescind the award. I support the women who have spoken out; I cannot imagine how hard it is to do so.Posted : Mar 27, 2018 11:02
Kim Graff
I fully support the women who Alexie has hurt and think descending the award was a good move. Simply because someone was not "convicted in the court of law" doesn't mean what they did isn't horrific. What he did? It's horrific. He should no longer be published and, frankly. It's rather disgusting that the publisher is willing to continue to make money off the suffering of women, especially women of color. He has made it clear he's not really sorry for his actions and even if he was it would not change all the hurt he has done. Apologizing halfway is as good as never apologizing at all.Posted : Mar 27, 2018 07:36
Jennifer Mann
I support the women who came forward to speak. I support the American Indian Literature Association in their decision.Posted : Mar 27, 2018 04:50
Angry Cassie
I stand with AILA’s decision and commend them for taking this necessary and exemplary action. Let it be known: SEXUAL ASSAULT IS NEVER OKAY. It’s time the perpetrators start to face some of the life-altering consequences of their own actions. Imagine that?!Posted : Mar 27, 2018 07:27
Sam Bloom
I very much appreciate the work of the AILA Executive Board, and I support and admire their decision. To the mostly white people who used the same tired arguments in a total pile-on against member of AILA and the Native women who were abused by Sherman Alexie: stop talking. This is not a conversation that we should be part of; we can listen, and believe the women. Many thanks to folks upthread, like Debbie Reese, Laura Jimenez, and many others who have spoken so eloquently in the face of ridiculous comments about due process/insert straw man created to deflect blame off of Alexie. Finally, I believe the women who have spoken up against Sherman Alexie, as well as those who could not come forward.Posted : Mar 27, 2018 06:15
Megan
Believe women. How is this so hard for people? People lose jobs all the time over sexual harassment without having an actual criminal conviction in a court of law. Quit caping for a man who is abundantly not qualified for this award. He has hurt the indigenous community deeply and that should be sufficient to withdraw your support. Once again, believe women here. They have a ton to lose by coming forward.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 10:29
Melinda R. Cordell
I want to read the books that these women would have written if they'd had the editorial support that Alexie had if they'd had the adulation that Alexie had if they'd been encouraged as Alexie had been for two decades. I want to read those books. If you people would believe them and encourage them and lift them up I have not even the tiniest doubt in my mind that their books would be every bit as good as his if not better! And also you'd be supporting the right people and the right books AND THIS WOULD DO GOOD IN THE WORLD SO MUCH GOOD, PEOPLE ... I mean, that's what we want of children's authors, right? And for the children as well. (When I say children I also include the grumpy sleep-deprived teens who are at this moment trying to save society from itself) *Buy* books from these women *Support* these women **Let these women write their stories** This shouldn't be that hard, really.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 08:25
Heidi Heilig
I'm horrified by those questioning the choice of the AILA. Not only because i find their choice admirable, but because it is their choice. They have every right to rescind an award they gave. Moreover, I'm disgusted but unsurprised at those who value the art of a serial predator over the safety, humanity, and art of the people he abused. My support and admiration to the women speaking up against him, as well as to the AILA. My condemnation to the derailers, the minimizers, the enablers and defenders of the abuser, and the abuser himself.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:48
Kate Rodbro
The comments in this thread in support of the AILA and the women are well stated. As I was reading All of the comments I kept wondering about what filters and unconscious motivations may be driving those who are challenging and angry with AILA’s decision. What was very mysterious was the denial of the experience of these women. The difficulty empathizing and truly understanding what they went through. T’s words explain it all. And I stand behind her and all of the women who spoke up. Anonymous or not, taking action and speaking out about harassment by a powerful and beloved figure takes courage. For those women, I believe you and I applaud you.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:39
Brianna Zamborsky
Women who have spoken up against Sherman Alexie, I believe and support you.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:35
Deva Fagan
Thank you to those who have spoken up and shared their stories. And thank you to the AILA for listening.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 04:15
Ebony McKenna
Awards can be given and awards can be taken away.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 11:52
Beverly Slapin
I stand with AILA for their brave and necessary decision. I stand with the courageous Native women who have spoken about the abuse they have survived. And I stand with the Native women who have, for now, been silenced. Because all over the US and Canada, Native women are disproportionately murdered and disappeared. Because all over the US and Canada, upper-class white women who dare to speak out about rape and sexual harassment are referred to (in different ways) as “brave,” while Native women who dare to speak out about rape and sexual harassment are referred to (in different ways) as “sluts.” Many Native women writers have come forth and accused Sherman Alexie of, among other things, sexual harassment, bullying, and threatening their careers. After what must have been much painful and difficult thought and discussion, the American Indian Library Association rescinded their award for his middle-grade novel, THE ABSOLUTELY TRUE DIARY OF A PART-TIME INDIAN. Until today, this comment section was nothing less than a whiteness gang-up on Native women, victim-blaming that revealed more about the commenters than it did about the accusers or the accused. They referred to the accused as a “regular horny guy” who sometimes “made women uncomfortable.” They excused his predatory behavior: “He made unwanted sexual advances. If there are sexual advances, some of them will be unwanted. Merely asking for consent is a sexual advance.” They accused the accusers of “envy,” “anger,” “animosity,” “self-aggrandizement,” “crass opportunism,” “vindictiveness,” “pettiness,” and “playing the victim card” or the “race card.” They called the accusations “gossip started by a bitter ex-lover.” The comments are full of “whataboutisms” (“What about my friend who was falsely accused and whose reputation could not recover?”), false equivalencies (“rescinding an award is the same as banning books”), and ad absurdum arguments (“Please agitate to pull back Rev. Martin Luther King’s Nobel Peace Prize”). I thought I knew Sherman Alexie. Although we were never "friends," he signed his books to me, "in friendship." He showed me photos of his young children as they were growing up, and he invited me and a few other women, mostly Native, to go out with him for coffee after his readings. During these times, he often made obnoxious remarks that we all but ignored. He’d wave his hotel card around, for instance, and invite women up to his room, singly and as a group. I suspected that there might have been more to his behavior, but I pushed back the suspicion. Maybe we all did. I was asked to write the Discussion Guide for ABSOLUTELY TRUE DIARY OF A PART-TIME INDIAN, which I did. But I stopped communicating with Sherman after his book, FLIGHT, was published. It was full of horrendous stereotypes about Native peoples, and about Muslims as well. I felt that Sherman felt that he could do anything he damn well pleased and no one would dare come up against him. In his writings and in his talks, Sherman insisted in portraying all Native people as alcoholics, thereby scoring white points for honesty. Sherman referred to himself “Indian du jour,” and to his white fans, Sherman was the only Native writer whose work spoke to them. And all this time, Sherman was betraying and abusing Native women writers. Once more, I believe and support the Native women who have come forward and spoken of the sexual harassment, threats and bullying that they endured at the hands of Sherman Alexie. I believe and support the women who could not come forward. I honor their courage as well. And I honor the American Indian Library Association for their decision that spoke to their core values as a Native-focused organization. I BELIEVE YOU. I SUPPORT YOU. I STAND WITH YOU. And I thank Laura Jimenez, Debbie Reese, Jacqueline Keeler, Deborah Miranda, Tiffany Midge, and all the other women who do the sometimes painful, always necessary, work.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 11:45
Anonymous
There's a lot of very shaky binary thinking underway here this Sunday, and false binaries make for weak arguments. A person can believe the factual allegations of the women as reported by NPR and elsewhere and still think that AICL made an error in rescinding its award to the book. A person can also support the work of the AICL and believe that it erred in this instance.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 08:45
Daniel Mauleon
Not sure what I can add that hasn't already been shared more eloquently by many of the women in this thread. But since some of you have a hard time taking women and their word while gladly trusting statements from men let me add to the chorus: 1. I believe the women who have come forward. 2. The AILA is beholden only to their members, and even then should be respected as an institution to choose who to associate. 3. If you think the court of law justly cares for women's issues, please do some research.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 08:44
Ryan Swanson
This is the right decision ALIA. Thank you for listening to women when they speak out!Posted : Mar 26, 2018 08:24
T
I truly hope I'm not derailing the conversation at hand. I’m one of the women that anonymously came forward for the NPR article. I didn’t reveal my identity, and I'd like to tell you why. 1. Many people do not believe women. I have grown up with people waving away things that I have found uncomfortable and disturbing. When I was a kid (9), I had an issue with a boy who was ‘in love’ with me, who kept getting close to me even though I kept asking him to stop, and when that didn’t work I would physically remove myself from the space, and THAT didn’t work because I was a child and he kept following me around. I can hear the chorus of you all out there saying, ‘That’s so innocent! You are being too sensitive. He was a little boy, what was he going to do to you?’ In that moment, I realized that my discomfort meant less to the people around me than the comfort of this boy. It made me aware of my body in a way that I hadn't thought of before. Nearly twenty years later, everything is still the same. My discomfort is nothing compared to any inconvenience that a man may feel. I know this more than I did when I was nine, and at moments when I feel hope? I make the mistake of reading comment sections like this and realize that there are still so many people out there who don’t believe women. 2. People are rallying for details so they can judge for themselves. I hear you. You want to read my correspondence with Sherman Alexie, perhaps to read Sherman’s words, but to attack my own. Whatever I put out there will be torn apart. The three INCREDIBLY brave women who publicly came forward are having their accounts degraded and shamed. Why on EARTH are you doing this? Do you think it’s actually easy to speak up about sexual harassment? Do you want to see what I look like? To think ‘Okay, I see why he hit on her.’ or ‘Seriously? Her? She’d be lucky if anyone looked at her.' What does my appearance have to do with this? Does this mean it is okay if he went after someone who you find unattractive? 3. I value my career. I’ve seen what happens to women that come out publicly. I’ve seen their careers get torn apart. I am not as brave as the women who came out publicly. I am weak in this regard, and I admit this. But guess who else feels weak - all of the other women that Sherman Alexie has done this to, who haven’t come out because they are also worried about what talking about their Sherman Alexie experience will do to their careers, to their lives. I want to shout about this. I want to be loud and furious and PUBLIC but I’m not because I recognize that you still have power. That even though I am so fortunate to be surrounded by supportive friends, and the extremely warm, welcoming, and supportive kidlit community, you are still out there, doubting me. Making me second guess my discomfort and demanding I look at my situation again. Am I sure that a married man was swimming around me like a shark? Am I sure that I didn’t misunderstand? Am I sure he wanted me? Am I sure? I am sure, and I’m making a demand back. Why do you insist upon doubting me? What do I, this nameless, faceless woman, have to gain?Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:47
Brooks Benjamin
To all the women who have spoken up, thank you. I can’t imagine how scary and frustrating it must be to have to recount these experiences, hoping someone will actually hear you. To AILA, thank you for listening. This needed to happen.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:34
Anne Sibley O’Brien
I believe the women. And I support and respect the right of AILA to do whatever its members deem appropriate in the granting and removing of awards.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:26
Philip Nel
Laura Jimenez, Kaye M, and many others have expressed this idea and similar ones far better than I will here, but let me add the following: 1) It's not an isolated incident or a single "spurned lover." This is pattern of abusive behavior in which Alexie used his power to manipulate and harm women. When there's a pattern, you cannot just write it off. It's not a series of isolated incidents. IT. IS. A. PATTERN. 2) An award-granting organization is not a court of law. It's an award-granting organization. I'm surprised that so many commenters cannot tell the difference between the two, though I suppose this confusion does at lest help explain the weakness of their arguments. 3) Rescinding an award is not censorship. It's rescinding an award. The book is still available. If it's an important work for you, please re-read it, buy copies for your friends, etc. 4) It is true that creators of beautiful works of art can also be horrible people. I'm sure each of us could draw up a short list of brilliant artists who also did horrible things. How you decide to respond to that is always a moral question. The AILA's response has been to rescind the award. As readers, librarians, teachers, or whatever our roles may be, we also have a moral decision to make. As a teacher, I might decide that the literary work is too important to remove from my syllabus; if that were my choice, I could then bring in (as context) these accusations, the news coverage, and Alexie's response. The class could debate whether or not Alexie's misconduct (and inability to understand that what he did was wrong, as Alexie's "apology" letter shows) should influence our interpretation of his work, or the value of biographical criticism, etc. Or I might decide to teach a novel by a different author on the grounds that I don't wish to pay the salary of a man who has used his power to demean others. Perhaps I decide to teach Cherie Dimaline's The Marrow Thieves instead of Alexie's Absolutely True Diary. Or I might assign another work by a native writer. There are many books to choose from. And there are many ways to respond to these revelations of Alexie's misconduct. How you decide to respond is a moral decision. The moral decisions made in this comment thread by defenders of Alexie reveal a great deal about the people who posted them -- more than I think some of them realize.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 07:04
Stephanie Willing
I stand with the women and AILA. I applaud them for their bravery, and I mourn their stories and the stories we haven’t heard. It’s painful every time we lose a personal hero or favorite, but it’s a fraction of the pain women experience when they are harassed, threatened, and silenced by those “heroes.” I’m furious for them, and I’m furious for me.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 06:02
Tasslyn Magnusson
Thank you to the women who spoke out - that is brave. Thank you to the AILA for rescinding the honor - that was the right thing to do and it was courageous. You stood for the women and you stood for the readers and you stood for the kids. I will stand with you.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 05:59
Heid E. Erdrich
I stand with the women who have come forward. They did so knowing they would suffer further abuse in social media such as we see here. Those who spoke out know there are many women who cannot speak out. Seeing these comments, why would they? To those women I say I BELIEVE YOU. I believe because, over the years, several women have told me their stories of Alexie's harrassing behavior. Both women and men Native writers have told me of his intimidation power plays. They did so long before #metoo but everyone was afraid for their careers. Writers get this - we are close. Native writers even closer. These were not my stories. I could only support the tellers and encourage them to do what they needed to recover. I heard these stories again and more on top when news broke. It has been very painful for a small literary community. Many in the Native literary community know that public comment it the tip of the iceberg that is the behavior of a complex, famous, and often ill-behaved man. It is the least that professional Native literary associations can do to rescind awards. Such gestures allow a path toward uplifting writers harmed by Alexie's actions.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 05:50
Ronny Khuri
I believe the women, and I won’t forget this. I believe in the AILA’s obvious right to rescind their own award. I am so appalled by how far people are going out of their way to dismiss these women. And for the people giving the old “boys will be boys” argument: shame on you. There’s another way.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 05:50
Megan Blakemore
I found the AILA statement to be quite powerful. They were clear in their reasoning, explaining how their choice was mision-driven. It was a bold, impressive stance to take, and one that shows support for the women of the community they represent and serve. Moreover, I am grateful for the work of AILA and of Debbie Reese for raising awareness of other Native voices.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 05:45
Gaia cornwall
Thank you to the brave women who came forward. We are with you. I’m sorry your voices were silenced for so long. Thank you to the AILA for doing the right thing.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 04:28
Sarah K.
Talent doesn't excuse abuse. Talent doesn't excuse abuse. TALENT DOESN'T EXCUSE ABUSE. In rescinding this award, the AILA shows an integrity many other organisations could stand to model.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 03:39
Melanie Conklin
I am beyond disappointed at the comments here that advocate ignoring Alexie's victims. The AILA statement does a tremendous job of explaining why their decision is not only brave and forward-looking, but necessary. Their choice to rescind Alexie's award is not censorship. It is not unjust or unfair. It is what's right.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 03:05
Kate Messner
I applaud the American Indian Literature Association for this brave decision that sends such a strong message. My support is with you, and with the brave Native women who came forward to speak, and I look forward to seeing more of their work lifted up in all of our literary communities.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 02:30
Laurel R Snyder
In all likelihood, the allegations that have been made public represent a number of other offenses that have not yet come to light. And yet, that shouldn't even matter. These women are victims, who have come forward, despite the additional pain and negative publicity it may bring them. This is a brave act, a generous act. We should be thanking them, not shaming them, or questioning them.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 01:46
Joy McCullough
To the women who so courageously spoke their truth about Alexie, I believe you, I support you, I stand with you. To those abused by Alexie who have not felt safe speaking up (and one glance at these comments should explain why they wouldn't), I believe you and support you and stand with you too. And to other survivors of other abusers who are looking at these comments and feeling the stabbing reaffirmation that your story and voice are not valued, I am so sorry. I am with you too. And thank you to AILA for the stance you have taken.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 01:23
Carole Lindstrom
As an Ojibwe/Metis woman and children’s author, I stand with the American Indian Library Association for their courageous action. I also stand with these courageous women who spoke out . AILA stands for the children first, and I appreciate the important work that they do. Thank you, AILA.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 12:48
Kelly Barnhill
Point one: the AILA is a private organization. They get to honor whoever the heck they want, according to their own knowledge, inclination and say-so. Just because any one of us had a positive experience with a certain book (and I know that I have read many of Alexie's stories over the years that have moved me profoundly, and that experience will not change), that experience has no bearing whatsoever on what the AILA decides to do. Point two: tokenism, in any situation, is a problem. That there are people on this comment thread who have only ever, in their entire reading lives, read only one (or, I'm hazarding to guess, maybe three) Native American author is a HUGE problem. It alters one's perspective on where the harm lies. Point three: the fact that Mr. Alexie has - and this is ignoring the sexual misconduct for a moment - actively silenced other Native authors, or refused to raise up or amplify other Native voices in literature, is not up for debate. We all heard the same interviews. We all heard him demure on the subject of Native writers. How many times have I heard him respond to the question of what other Native authors does he recommend, with his famous quip, "Does a Buick recommend that you should try driving a Ford?" or some variant on that theme? I have heard him say it in different interviews over the years six or seven times. Or there's his other line, "I keep looking in my rear-view mirror, and I don't see anyone on my tail." WHICH IS A WEIRD WAY TO TALK ABOUT THE COMMUNITY OF LETTERS. Also? Sherman? New writers don't come up from behind: they are ahead of us. We slow down and we lift them up, that is what we are supposed to do. Ugh. Point three: It is not lost on me that there is a culture of aversion in this community when it comes to harm that is directed towards women of color. We don't see it; we don't hear it; we don't respond to it; we don't speak up against it. That changes today. I insist that this changes today. Mr. Alexie has admitted to harming women. Women of color have come forward and offered their stories of experienced that damaged them. That silenced them. That have hurt their careers. This cannot happen again. I won't let it - and you shouldn't either. Your experience with his books that, yes may have moved you, and yes may have transported you, and yes may have helped you to see the world differently? I'm sorry. That doesn't matter. One man's book is not as important as the lives of women. We get to choose who we honor. We get to choose why we honor them. We get to choose to have high standards for conduct. We get to remove a distinction from someone's work when it becomes clear to us that we dishonor ourselves when we honor dishonorable men. If someone's book comes to us at the cost of another person's voice, if it stands on the neck of someone else's genius, is it worth it? Is that a cost we are willing to bear? I'm not. I believe the women. And I support the AILA's decision - and I recognize that it actually does not matter if I support it or not, as it is not my decision to make. It's theirs. I support it anyway, and I honor the thought and listening and courage that went into it. Thank you, to everyone involved.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 12:42
Anne Ursu
I would also ask those of you who are choosing to believe the best of one man and the worst of many women, despite all evidence, to step back and ask yourselves why.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 12:38
KE Carson
Good on the AILA for rescinding the award. It's about time we stand behind native women in our community. There's nothing "unjust" about any of this. Victims have spoken up, Alexie has confirmed it (without details), and so it's not a question of if these allegations are true or not, it's a question of how do we respond. And I think this is a good start. We need real world consequences for behaviour that has skittered by in the shadows for years.Posted : Mar 26, 2018 12:05
Caitlin O'Connell
I support the AILA in their decision to rescind Alexie's award in light of his behavior, and I support the women who have been hurt by this man's horrible actions. The ones who have come forward are incredibly courageous, and none of these people deserve to be gaslit and belittled like this.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 11:54
Stephanie
I believe the women. Sherman Alexie abused his position of power, manipulated these women, and silenced their voices and their art until now. I thank all of them for their bravery in coming forward and I thank the publications, Debbie Reese, and Litsa Dremousis who documented what the women had to say. I am disgusted by SLJ for this shallow, un-nuanced squib of a piece.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 11:36
Ariel Bernstein
I hope the AILA's decision brings some measure of acknowledgement to the women who have spoken out. Their word is evidence of what happened and I believe them.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 11:32
Anne Ursu
Kaye and many others have said it amazingly well. I’d be curious how many people suddenly enraged over a decision by the AILA even knew the organization existed last week. The women are so courageous, both the ones who speak and the ones who do not feel they can. It’s so heartbreaking to see the way they are being treated here and the way harassing and abusive behavior is excused. We are a deeply damaged society and my love and respect goes out to those who have risked so much to make it a little less so and to keep other women safe. We are standing behind you.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 11:07
Casey
I support the women who have spoken up about Sherman Alexie. I support the women who have not been able to speak up. People who have not been in a situation like this have no idea the level of fear and intimidation that is involved. The gas-lighting, the threats, the manipulation - it wears victims down until they begin to doubt themselves. The bravery it took for the women who were able to speak to come forward is astounding. Why are we offering a book more protection than we offer these women? Thank you AILA for taking a stand with this strong statement.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 10:58
Kaye M.
I believe the women. I believe that removing the throne from under one privileged man will do nothing but help more Native voices find their position - because this man is not the be all and end all of Native voices, or talented voices in literature. When we insist that we cannot lose this kind of man (whether it is Alexie, or Handler, or Dashner), we erase the worthy who he might have already been silencing, or attempting to silence, through his actions and abuse and positioning. For the fellow teachers who have commented: your position as an educator involves continuing to educate yourself. There are voices out there besides Alexie. Respect the victims and seek out the voices that will touch your hearts in ways that you might not have imagined or expected in this moment in which you realize that you have only upheld and stood by one voice. Listen to Debbie Reese, who has done hours of tireless work for her community, and read her blog and seek out other titles you may introduce your students to. Believe me, this is not as huge a loss as you are believing it to be - nor will it be an entire loss for any of these men, who will still see their royalties, their staunch supporters (as sadly and disgustingly demonstrated throughout this thread) and their hidden accolades that others feel reluctant to remove. (Also, truly, consider what it will represent to our students if you try to erase all of what Alexie has done and been accused by as 'it is only adultery.' Think of what this represents to their own relationships, their expectations of relationships, and if they are young women, what they believe they should deserve from their partners. One more thing: an award is a privilege, not a RIGHT. An award is a cherry on top of the sundae, not an expectation. There is no legal standpoint or governmental due to be argued when an organization has rightfully decided that they do not stand by a man that has acted beneath their moral values, and move on to support others who are far more deserving.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 10:44
Andrea L. Rogers
Kudos to Native Organizations doing what they can in support of the women and community harmed by Alexie and publishing. Non native people Should no nothing more than listen to the women, believe the women, and accept that native organizations are dealing with this in a just way. As an educator and someone who has recommended his work for curriculum and purchase and as a library board member I no longer can support him. I will continue to advocate for all the other ignored native writers and small presses.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 10:31
Jessica
Laura Jeminez made my point for me. To be crass, opinions are like asshole and everybody has one. We don't need to hear everyone's. We need to listen to the people who have been impacted and who are in a position to make these decisions. I support the AILA's right to make this decision themselves (and the decision itself). I support the people speaking out against Alexie.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 10:24
Kendal
I believe and support the women who have come forward, and I'm so grateful for their bravery. Speaking out against a male author with so much power must've been incredibly difficult. I'm glad ALA rescinded the award, and I hope other actions follow. When it comes to issues like these, the silence from publishers is deafening and does not go unnoticed.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 09:53
CL
I believe the women. I also believe the "due process" people in this comment section need to either learn what that actually means or sit in the back of the class while the kids who did their homework talk.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 09:52
Icer
You Team Alexie folks need to ask yourselves why you feel you are owed anything from the AILA. You can celebrate the author with your own award if you want to (just see who cares). It's the AILA's award and they can do what they want with it, if you're paying them the $20 membership dues and don't like their decision to NOT celebrate a serial sexual harasser and adulterer you can always comment with your wallet and opt not to renew. It's what many of us did when SCBWI's enabling of serial harassers/abusers came to light.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 09:36
Katie L. Carroll
I want to voice my support of the women who have spoken out against Sherman Alexie and my support of the AILA in rescinding his award. We should believe these women as we have done for other women speaking out in the #metoo movement.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 09:12
Jennifer Austin
I too read TATDoaPTI years ago and was transported. It was an amazing and unflinching look at PART of reservation life. It also has it's problems, as many Native reviewers have pointed out and I as a white person am not qualified to comment on. It is an important book for youth and adults alike, despite some problems, and I am glad that I read it and that it has been there for kids whom may have needed it. But. But. But. But. NONE OF THIS EXCUSES THE FACT THAT ALEXIE HAS BEEN ACCUSED BY MULTIPLE WOMEN OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT! Court of law you say? Proof you ask for? Witch hunt you claim? Where all the women crying #METOO? Where are the loud proclamations of #TIMESUP? Where are all the BELIEVE WOMEN supporters? I'll tell you where they are. They were all used up on white women, because apparently we don't want to believe Native Women. Step away from your hero-worship for a second. It is hard for a woman--ANY woman--to come forward with accusations of sexual harassment. They won't be believed. They will be ridiculed. They will be dragged through the mud and verbally or physically abused. Now just imagine that is a woman of color, especially a Native woman. Native woman are raped, murdered, and abused across this nation and Canada and very few people speak out in their defense. They know this. They live this every day. And now you want to question if they are telling the truth?! They have so many truthes they could tell, but this is the one they have strength for and now you want to criticize it? And yes, this means I lose a beloved book. I lose novels on my kindle I haven't read yet. And I won't. I lose a man I once thought well of because I could admire him from afar and not see what he cost other women in a professional setting. Not all women. Of course he didn't harass ALL women, but that is no proof that he didn't harass SOME women. But is what I lose by believing worse than what these women have lost by being harassed? I believe women. I believe NATIVE women, because they have so much more to fear by coming forward. I stand with all of you.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 09:01
Julie Artz
I believe the women who have come forward and applaud the AILA for taking action. Hopefully more award committees will follow suit and send a strong message that this type of abuse and harassment will not be tolerated in the industry.Posted : Mar 25, 2018 08:58
Lindsay Eagar
If only you were as protective of the women who were abused, manipulated, gaslighted, and used by Sherman Alexie as you are protective of this book! It’s everyone’s personal choice to continue to consume media that was created by a$$holes. Someone mentioned Roald Dahl’s famous antisemitism—yes, if you care about Jewish children and families, you probably will at least read his books while remembering that Matilda and James and the Grand High Witch came from the same mind that hated Jewish people and thought women were subpar. In fact, his antisemitism probably informed his writing and that is such an uncomfortable truth, but you cannot separate the art from the artist. If you are so capable of doing so, congrats! Remember that not everyone is as privileged as you in that department. Not everyone is able to put aside a serial sexual harasser and enjoy their work. And as a consumer, you have to be ready to answer for what you’re consuming. It doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy things by problematic people (because then there would be no books or movies or music or paintings); it DOES mean you are a callous, selfish person if you want victims of those problematic creators and others who are sensitive to such things celebrate the media on the same level as you. And if your idea of defending your book choices is trying to erase the very clear, documented behavior of Alexie over the last decade, then you’re also being kind of an a$$hole, changing the narrative just so you can feel good about reading a book. AILA has every right to rescind and grant awards and it is not censorship or punishment. And the fact that so many people will defend this book over the myriad of Native women who were targeted by Alexie.... it does make me want to point out that Asher and Dashner’s victims were white women. So what’s the difference? Believe women. Believe Alexie himself—he apologized because he did this and worse. The whisper network about Alexie has been alive and strong for years in the publishing industry—can you reconcile the fact that your favorite books come from icky, cruel minds sometimes? And stop prioritizing this book over human Native women!Posted : Mar 25, 2018 07:04
Anonymous Observer
I've reread and thought about all 90+ comments. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Believe Women did not die on Emma Sulkowicz's mattress, and that "believe women" is a better standard for truth-finding than "listen carefully and verify completely." Let's assume that the worst allegations and reports about Alexie are true. Hell, let's assume that the truth is far worse than these allegations. This still does not provide justification for the rescinding of an award granted to a book he wrote, not to him as a human being.Posted : Mar 24, 2018 08:56
Henry Carman
how many more women have to come forward before people here believe them? native women in particular. how many? has anyone read this yet? https://psmag.com/social-justice/amid-metoo-journalists-shouldnt-commodify-womens-painPosted : Mar 24, 2018 02:30
TJG
AILA has every right to make decisions for their organization based on the objectives they hope to meet through their recognition. It’s also possible they have additional information that influenced their decision to rescind Sherman Alexie’s 2008 Book of the Year Award. As for the rest of us--we lack enough clear information to draw many reasonable conclusions from this mess. Sadly, Litsa Dremousis, who was not forthcoming from the beginning about her consensual sexual relationship with Alexie (a married man) has only hurt the credibility of the women choosing to speak out against him. 1.) The SLJ comments about Alexie were all anonymous and could have been posted by one bitter former lover. 2.) NPR is the only primary source with three accounts from named women. Supposedly there are seven or so additional off-the-record undetailed accounts, but it doesn't seem that Alexie’s decidedly obnoxious behavior was criminal. https://www.npr.org/2018/03/05/589909379/it-just-felt-very-wrong-sherman-alexies-accusers-go-on-the-record 3.) From what the women said on NPR, we don’t know that Alexie’s statement is false and defamatory--especially regarding Dremousis. 4.) Whatever the motivation, Dremousis chose to insert herself into this narrative and we have little indication what she alleged has been proven. She claimed to have verified dozens upon dozens of harassment stories as “100% credible,” while receiving emails from women she was (for some bizarre reason) funneling to NPR. 5.) In case Dremousis hasn’t promoted herself enough, here is a link: https://litsadremousis.com/altitude-sickness-reviews/ to her author site and a bonus link to one of her articles What the Tumor Left Behind: http://www.theweeklings.com/ldremousis/2016/08/04/what-the-tumor-left-behind/ (Apparently her ex-fiance, like Alexie, had surgery to remove a benign brain tumor.) If Dremousis and a handful of other women had the intention of rallying grievances of every kind against Alexie--they succeeded. Among them, criticism of his writing, his speaking topics to adult audiences, his perceived arrogance, and his supposed obligation to promote other Native writers. That said, some blatant problems have been addressed, including Native American tokenism and the dependency of Alexie as a gatekeeper in the publishing world. Also obvious--the need for dependable reporting options for all women writers, but especially Native American women who statistically run a higher risk (2.5 times other racial groups) of sexual harassment and assault. So, based on their own accounts, none of the women that spoke on NPR were sexually assaulted by Alexie. But were they sexually harassed by him? Bullied or threatened? Based on the information we’ve been given...possibly? Jeanine Walker seemed surprised that Alexie was interested in her beyond her poetry and basketball skills, yet she also admitted her only real interest in him was to advance her publishing ambitions. He asked to kiss her, didn’t when she said no, and later apologized. Doesn’t seem to fit the definition of harassment. Erika Wurth traveled to one of Alexie’s readings, walked back to a hotel with him and agreed to go to his room after he kissed her in the lobby. In his room things ended when he picked up on her non-verbal objection to his advances. Yet, several years later she had another sexual encounter with him that ended badly? She chose to put herself in that position with him again? A series of consensual choices hardly sounds like harassment, but maybe he was bullying and threatening in the angry email exchanges afterword...we don’t really know. Of the accounts given on NPR, Elissa Washuta’s is the most problematic. Alexie’s vulgar comment to her at the restaurant could absolutely be perceived as threatening. Hopefully he said it loud enough that someone else at the table witnessed his reprehensible behavior. Worse, Alexie and Washuta later worked together as colleagues at IAIA. On NPR she said he tried to lure her to his hotel room at a conference they both attended. Jacqueline Keeler later wrote an article in which Washuta described Alexie’s pathetic attempt at seduction--sending a picture of the bed in his hotel room with a box of condoms on the nightstand. Fortunately, that’s easily verifiable. Unfortunately, NPR didn’t seem to verify it. As ground-breaking and necessary as the #MeToo movement is, I worry that some people are giving in to blind belief based on hearsay that is easily distorted, manipulated and magnified in our digital age.Posted : Mar 24, 2018 12:03
Library Associate
I believe the women. I recognize their courage in a terrible situation. I'm not sure how I feel about the possible precedent being set by rescinding the award. Awards are given to recognize someone's excellence or contribution. It's the AILA's choice to decide who deserves recognition. With all the talk about due process, I'm surprised no one has mentioned the other legal side of this. I am not a lawyer, and I may have this wrong. But here's how I understand it. The laws in place to protect people in the public sphere are libel and slander laws. Alexie has certainly lost future employment due to the testimonies of these women and the articles. But the key to libel and slander is that the accusations must be false. Why would Alexie not use these laws to defend himself if he is innocent?Posted : Mar 23, 2018 11:43
Sarah H
Do people here arguing for “due process” also believe that Harvey Weinstein should be reinstated at his company until he’s convicted in a court of law? Or does such “due process” only apply when the majority of women speaking out about violations of their bodies and autonomy are Native. Are people out there arguing that Harvard shouldn’t have rescinded Weinstein’s 2014 Du Bois Medal without “due process”? Or do such arguments only apply to a Native organization making autonomous decisions about its own award. Are they reading Native women’s own autonomous words about their experiences of assault? Or are people content to speak over and about those women, and violently mischaracterize their experiences as “abrupt endings to consensual affairs.” Are they speaking about the loss of work from Native writers Alexie harassed? Or are they too busy lamenting any possible loss of the single story his work represented. When people say “due process” do they mean the workings of the US criminal system, or those of sovereign Native nations? These people’s arguments are not about “due process” or “separating art and artist” and never have been. They are dismissals of the value, integrity, and autonomy of Native women’s bodies, work, and lives. At least be honest about that. People Alexie hurt are reading these words. Those who spoke out are seeing them. Those who have not felt able to speak out are seeing them. To them, I extend all of my warmth and support. To commenters here who are engaging in victim blaming: you are complicit in ongoing hurt and abuse.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 07:33
Anonymous
Due process is *not* just associated with criminal court cases. It has to do with fundamental fairness in all forums. Those forums may be judicial like the federal and state criminal and civil courts, administrative proceedings by the government like for immigration, proceedings by administrative institutions like schools and unions, and even the disciplinary proceedings of non-for-profit organizations. Here is how that kind of due process would apply here: Were there provisions existing at AILA in 2008, at the time that Alexie accepted his award, that the award could be stripped from him for alleged misdeeds of moral turpitude? Did Alexie accept then with advance notice he would need to be morally upstanding for the rest of his life in the sole definition of the shifting leadership of the organization? If Alexie had no such prior notice, stripping his 2008 award is a violation of the fundamental fairness that due process protects. A person doesn't need to be of any particular race to assert that fact. She, he, or they just has to have fairness as a core value.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 06:41
Native Writer
Interesting words, all around. I am a Native American male who writes for fun. Growing up, I read mostly Tony Hillerman, Maxine Hong Kingston, and Leslie Marmon Silko. Silko's Storyteller inspired me to start writing. In college, I discovered Susan Power's Grassdancer. I was fortunate enough to meet Susan Power at a powwow. Quite interestingly, I also met Sherman Alexie in 1996 or 1997. He was doing a book reading at another college two hours away, and a bunch of us Natives piled into a van to see him. He seemed like a gentle man, very eloquent and soft spoken. I don't recall if I asked him any questions, and overall, it was a positive experience. What stands out in my memory is how proud he was to be married to a Native American lady. He told us that all other Native American writers are married to non-Natives, and he made it a point to marry a Native American. His words disappointed one of my Native friends because at the time, my friend was married to a white lady. After recently hearing about Sherman Alexie on NPR, I started researching the sexual harassment allegations and found my way to this website. I don't know the guy, and I've never read his books. What bothers me most is how the young man I met 20 years ago could have it in his heart to hurt his home, his wife and children. It makes me wonder about what he said about his wife. Growing up, my female elders played a huge part in shaping my outlook. I farmed and herded sheep with my Grandma, and she taught me the importance of women. She taught me that I am my mother, my grandmother, and all my female ancestors all the way back because we are all one blood, one clan. She also taught me that in the darkest time in our history, our originator, the Changing Woman, ushered in a change upon the earth and created goodness/happiness. We are that goodness/happiness. These teachings culminated in respect: respect for self; respect for relatives; respect for all. As to how a man who once proudly spoke about his marriage can crumple up his home and throw it away is truly puzzling to me. He sounds like he lost his way. My condolences to Sherman, to the women he mistreated, to those who were angered by his actions, and to his family. PS: I'm not published, so I'm not trying to sell or advertise anything. Most of what I write is for self-edification.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 05:33
Mike Jung
AILA is not a judicial body, and rescinding an award is not a criminal sentencing. Due process according to the law does not apply in this situation - AILA has every right, and in my opinion, every responsibility to consider how their awards reflect their organizational values and the communities they serve. But even if we were discussing events in a court of law, we know Alexie would still be at an advantage, because our criminal justice system has proven over and over that it will prioritize the future prospects of men over the past, present, and future well-being of women.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 03:44
Ishta Mercurio
I believe the women who have come forward. It is immeasurably difficult and stressful to speak out about one's harasser, to relive the trauma of the harassment by rehashing it and revisiting it in one's mind every time a reporter calls or an article appears or an acquaintance asks how you are doing... What these women did by coming forward was courageous and I stand by them 100%. And therefore, I stand by the AILA's decision to rescind this award. If the AILA feels that Alexie does not represent their values as an organization, they have the right to make this decision, and I stand by them and applaud them for doing so. To those of you decrying the absence of "Due Process": this is not a court of law. Alexie is under no threat of imprisonment, or fines, or public service. The women who were harassed by him have a right to speak about their experiences with him, and every single one of us has a right to choose how we respond to his books when we hear what these women have to say. "Due Process" has nothing to do with the decisions of private individuals or organizations.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 03:28
Allie Jane Bruce
If you want a microcosm of what whiteness piling onto Native people looks like, look no further than the comments section herein. FFS. AILA made an informed decision. Let them do their thing. I trust Native people to understand justice and healing a hell of a lot more than I trust my fellow white people, and this is why.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 02:31
Rebecca
I'm so very disappointed to read this. I do not condone any of Alexie's behaviors and I stand with all victims of any kind of abuse. That doesn't negate the quality of this beautiful book. which deserved to be recognized.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 01:14
Andrea Jones
Of course Alexie is a flawed individual but as other Native writers such as Terese Mailhot have mentioned he has also done a lot of good. Alexie is a great writer as evidenced by the depth and breadth of his writing and although he has worked with the Native community he doesn't own anyone anything--not even his community. It's disturbing to read the pile-on of people maliciously questioning his worth as a writer. He is a philanderer not a rapist and the author saying she was in fear for her career is now a university professor at a very young age with many awards. I feel most sorry for his wife and sons and I do question Litsa Dremousis, the white writer leading the charge, because by having an affair with Alexie fully knowing he was married and she was also in a relationship---well she lost any credibility to a superior morality. She should have let one of the Native American writers handle the situation. I fully expect her to write a book on her relationship with Alexie.Posted : Mar 23, 2018 12:46
Anonymous Observer
The decision to rescind the award is a mistake. The book stands on its own. Rescinding awards because of personal conduct by an award-winner is a terrible precedent. Please agitate to pull back Rev. Martin Luther King's Nobel Peace Prize. As for the Alexie situation itself, can we first agree that we know nothing about Alexie's marriage and its boundaries? There is concern over the harm done to his wife, and harm may indeed have been done, but there are plenty of couples out there that are monogam-ish, as anyone who follows the work of Dan Savage understands. Plus, are we really speaking for his wife, who has a mouth of her own and the ability to use it? Where are we, 16th century Spain? Furthermore, we tell kids all the time not to judge others on the basis of their own morality, yet the judgment on Alexie on the basis of morality has been worthy of Cotton Mather. Meanwhile, the Alexie facts themselves underwhelm. The chief fact-gatherer evidently had a long-standing non-marital affair with the writer, but failed to disclose it as she was gathering the facts. We learned it from Alexie. There was a claim that Alexie had threatened people's careers, and engaged in assaultive behavior, but he did neither. Nor did he abuse his power with work subordinates or students. Instead, there is a vague sense that he misused power relationships because he was famed and those with whom he had sex were not. Life is about power imbalance -- young and old, rich and poor, educated and not. The only way to have sex in a relationship that does not include a power imbalance is to do it by yourself. Alexie might well have used his fame to get something he wanted, under false pretenses. Others use beauty, wealth, political power. The truth is, this is extremely common behavior, across genders and sexual identities. It's not pretty, but it's reality. NPR chided Alexie for flirtation that turned sexual. What was flirting supposed to turn to, architecture? Bread-baking? It's flirting! Alexie was called to task for ending non-marital consensual sexual relationships suddenly. How are they supposed to end? With agonizing slowness? He made unwanted sexual advances. If there are sexual advances, some of them will be unwanted. Merely asking for consent is a sexual advance. Alexie is no choir boy, but he's no Weinstein or Lauer. His book is a masterpiece, whether he was a choir boy or not.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 11:38
Laura Jimenez
I was unable to react to this article online this morning. Instead I tweeted out my reactions (easier to do on a phone) but I am now in my office, reading through this trash heap of comments and my reactions still seem appropriate. AILA stands for AMERICAN INDIAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION. Notice the first 2 words ? Native American. Then there are the last bit , the LA ... as in LIBRARIANS. That means that a bunch of Native American and allied librarians who read, write and think about the representation of Native Americans in books are running the show. They decided to rescind the award. As non-Native and Indigenous folks we (White people, Black people, Latinx people, Asians ... all of us) need to listen because they are telling us what matters to them and I am going to guess that was NOT an easy or light decision - as a matter of fact, they tell us that in the announcement ! It is our job to listen the experts (AILA) and to learn from them because Alexie isn’t unique in our field. Instead, we need to recognize that the AILA is out front on this issue and showing us how to deal with authors who's choices are implicated in @anneursu ‘s #metoo piece and elsewhere. And, it is this part that smacks of misogyny ... Alexie made choices about how to talk and act towards these women - multiple women. He is responsible for those actions - no one else is responsible for the way he treated women. No matter who he wants to blame, or who you decide to blame, his actions were conscious, focused, and purposeful. And, for the folks in the back, ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES, even for authors you like, admire, and honor. Having this award rescinded, not erased, is a consequence.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 10:27
Kazia
Thanks to those who have spoken up in defense of the women who have come forward (and, of course, thank you to the women who have come forward), and thank you to AILA for making such a clear and thoughtful statement. Your contributions are true and valuable and necessary and brave.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 07:13
Sarah H.
Reading through these comments, the combined racism and misogyny are breathtaking. This anger at the American Indian Library Association for making an independent decision about its own award is directly related to anger from non-Natives at Native sovereignty more generally — which is in turn directly tied to violence against Native women. My full support is with the Native women who have come forward to speak about the harm Alexie has done, and with those who have felt unable to come forward. I appreciate the AILA’s decision, and respect the AILA’s knowledge about how best to serve Native communities and readers. I hope too that School Library Journal will look at the editorial decisions they have made with the publication of this piece (including its authorship, and whose voices it includes and centers.) As evident in the above comments, the framing of articles such as this affect the ensuing conversation. And, shame on anyone using this as an opportunity to spew invective at the American Indian Library Association or at Native women, or to cast doubt on Native women who have spoken out about their experiences of sexual assault and harassment.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 06:36
Elisa Gall
I'm reading through so many of these comments. My heart hurts for the victims (many of whom are Native women) and those at AILA who had this decision to make. I believe the victims and trust the AILA made the decision necessary to live by their core values. I stand by them and thank them for their courage and leadership. Harvey Weinstein no longer has his 2001 honorary degree from Buffalo. Charlie Rose no longer has his Allen Foundation Award from Kansas University, or the Walter Cronkite award from Arizona State. Roger Ailes no longer has a newsroom named after him at OU, etc. etc. Every institution has policies about rescinding such awards, or they are coming to terms with them or creating them now. I think it is worth noting that when an ALA book award (committee is usually only 15 people) is announced, people aren't digging into the names and qualifications of each of those members to prove that they are only a representative sample of a larger group. That's a privilege White people on majority-White committees get. I am noticing a pattern where so many of us White people ignore the sovereignty of Native Nations until it is convenient to use the diversity of Indigenous communities for the argument we are trying to make, and we will openly start naming (USING) our other contacts and colleagues to point to dissent in a community (when this dissent supports our opinion, of course). As a presenter in a SLJ webinar on cultural competence just last week reminded librarians, not everyone can be a victim of oppression - but anyone can be an agent. I am also thinking about courts and the law, since so many of you bring it up. When has looking at what "the law" says ever been a dependable compass for truth or equity?Posted : Mar 22, 2018 05:48
Jan Chapman
If the award was to honor the author, I support this decision. If it was to honor the book, I do not. Let books stand or fall on their own merit. Condemn the actions of the author, yes. Do you know how many books would be banned if we based our decision on the behavior of the author?Posted : Mar 22, 2018 05:35
Dan Hotchkins
I think that it's particularly important to note the first paragraph from the NPR story: "Writer Sherman Alexie last week issued a statement admitting he "has harmed" others, after rumors and allegations began to circulate about sexual harassment. Without providing details, Alexie said "there are women telling the truth," and he apologized to the people he has hurt. Now, some of those women have come forward to speak to NPR about their experiences with him." Alexie said "there are women telling the truth". Which women, and which truth? And again, why so vague? Coded language to some, but obfuscation to many of the rest of us. The devil is in the details, as we know, and he's been absolutely on the details. Unless there's a judge compelling his silence, which seems doubtful, as no court cases have been referenced by any of the parties involved, Mr. Alexie is choosing to obfuscate what happened, while giving the appearance of being apologetic to people whom he has hurt. Or, something.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 04:24
Debbie Reese
What happened to "BELIEVE WOMEN"? Why are so many non-Native people casting doubt on Native women? Why are so many non-Native people standing in judgement of Native people and our decisions?Posted : Mar 22, 2018 03:10
Debbie Reese
FFS! What happened to "Believe Women"? Why are so many of you questioning Native people and thoughtfully rendered decisions we make? Why are so many of you questioning Native women?! Why are so many of you selectively using experiences of Native women to DISCREDIT them?!Posted : Mar 22, 2018 02:33
Don Reynolds
I am appalled by the AILA award rescission and terribly disturbed by the insensitivity of some of the comments which approve of it. First, let us agree that harassment (sexual or otherwise) is reprehensible, sometimes illegal, and should be prosecuted if it reaches the level of physical assault. Its accusation, however, should never be anonymous but able to be substantiated for appropriate resolution for all involved. However, are literary awards about the quality of the writing or the lifestyle of the author? Nowhere in the extensively detailed criteria for this award http://ailanet.org/docs/AIYLA_Criteria_5_09.pdf is there any mention that selection is based on the author living an exemplary virtuous life and/or being in favor of particularly politically correct ideas. "The American Indian Youth Literature Award (AIYLA) was created as a way to identify and honor the very best writing and illustrations by and about American Indians. Books selected to receive the award will present American Indians in the fullness of their humanity in either past or present contexts. Nominations may be fiction or non-fiction. There may be up to three awards given every two years - Best Picture Book, Best Middle School Book, and Best Young Adult Book." If we start eliminating people with character flaws, which could easily slip into other litmus tests, there will be no one left. When Alexie’s book was chosen 10 years ago (!), did its publication predate the offensive behavior for which AILA is now punishing him? How are y’all punishing the women who chose to have an affair with a married man with children? Frankly, AILA is demeaning itself by being victim to cultural correctness along with raising that despised ole specter of “Indian giver” in the eyes of the general public. Of all groups who should be sensitive to misinterpretation, the AILA Executive Board should reassess its intellectual honestly and support of intellectual freedom. For those applauding the AILA decision, you should reconsider not only your commitment to human decency but your ability to support intellectual freedom. Amid allegations of sexual misconduct, author Sherman Alexie has declined the American Library Association’s 2018 Andrew Carnegie Medal for Excellence in Nonfiction. Alexie was announced as the winner of the literary award on February 11, at the 2018 ALA Midwinter Meeting in Denver, for his book You Don't Have to Say You Love Me: A Memoir https://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/libraries/article/76301-alexie-declines-literary-award-paperback-release-postponed.html Will the Catholic Library Association be rescinding their 1983 and 1996 Regina Medals from authors whose lifestyle is not approved by the Catholic Church? If not, does this make Catholics less virtuous than Indians? Are Caldecott and Newbery Awards going to be reassessed and removed based on contemporary points of view and/or discovered bad behaviors by their authors/illustrators? As a woman friend of mine told me, she agrees with “de-selection.” “I do not patronize abusers. or their products. I don't feel you can separate the quality of the work from the lifestyle of the author!” Now that’s all well and good, but then that is a personal choice based on one’s personal beliefs. It has nothing to do with objective literary quality or content. Each of us can choose not to read a book, even an award winner. As Martin Luther King, Jr., said “Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will.” In the School Library Journal article https://www.slj.com/2018/03/industry-news/aila-rescinds-sherman-alexies-2008-ya-book-year-award/ comments section, Tara has a superb perspective of the “victims’” intent, and Julie Corsaro notes we should not deny our own history. To the AILA Executive Board and the AILA Youth Lit Committee (whose names and contact information are difficult to find), in the name of intellectual honesty and kind treatment of others, reverse your decision. If you want to select future books based on an author’s private lifestyle, rewrite your selection criteria.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 12:25
Tara
To be honest, I am a woman and I feel very uncomfortable with this all. This story was started by a woman Alexie had an affair with. She was not forthcoming about this but made it sound like he was a serial rapist. The NPR story details one lewd comment he made to a woman and 2 times he made passes at women. Since he is married I don't condone that, but the only major wrong was done to his wife. I notice both women expressed disappointment their relationship with him didn't lead to career advance for them. Those who have piled on make it clear their animosity with him is because one of the following: 1) he doesn't always portray Natives in a positive light 2) they met him and he was kind of rude 3) he doesn't do enough to promote other Native writers 4) they wish Native women writers got more attention 5)they are envious of the enormous amount of attention and praise he gets. I will keep reading his books. It is clear the outrage is mostly due to vindictiveness and envy. I don't see the women he made passes at as victims. They were adults and had the option of declining to be involved with him. This is 99% pettiness. My sympathy for Alexie's wife. Those who had an affair with him (and I realize not all of the women coming forward did, but the woman who started this all had) don't have much to complain about since they knowing got involved with a married man with kids.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 05:42
Julie Corsaro
This strikes me as a a slippery slope. While I can understand the American Indian Library Association denouncing Sherman Alexie, who has admitted vaguely to abusive behavior, it seems the association is denying its own history. Having given the award to Part-Time Indian, I assume the association found the book to have considerable literary and other merits ten years ago. On a related note: ALA/ALSC is considering changing the name of the Laura Ingalls Wilder Award; I believe on the basis of statements about and attitudes towards American Indians in the Little House books. Will stripping the Little House books of their Newbery Honors come next? What about David Diaz who has also been accused of sexual abuse/harassment? Should he lose his Caldecott Medal for Smokey Night? The Newbery and Caldecott Awards have been around for a long time. As a result, I think its fair to assume that there's something in many of these books that people could find offensive today. Should these books lose their medals, too?Posted : Mar 22, 2018 03:59
Patty Carleton
Whether or not Alexie did what he was accused of, his book is still a significant piece of literature--life-changing and affirming for many Native American youth, and impactful for many youth of color. Do not recommend the book because the author may or may not have done some offensive things does not see right to me. The award is meant to honor the book, not condone the possible behavior of the author. I worry that we are denying access to quality literature. I can't help but think, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."Posted : Mar 22, 2018 02:04
Beverly Slapin
I applaud the American Indian Library Association for their courageous action. Above all, AILA stands for the children first, and I appreciate the important work that they do. REPRESENT!Posted : Mar 22, 2018 01:03
Mike Jung
Alexie has not been convicted in a court of law, and in that context, AILA is being 100% appropriate by not fining him, giving him community service, or sentencing him to prison time. Not that they could, of course. Like Nina, I thoroughly appreciate the important work being done by AILA. They aren't just declaring their ideals; they're doing everything they can to live by them.Posted : Mar 22, 2018 12:21
Litsa Dremousis
Hi, Kara-- I'm extremely disappointed by your reporting of this story. 1) You never mention that allegations against Alexie first began in your publication's own comment section. 2) You never mention nor link to the NPR, KUOW, and Yes! Magazine stories in which multiple women go on and off the record about Alexie's sexual harassment, threats, and bullying. 3) You don't mention he released his false and defamatory statement before these stories came out. 4) You drag me into your story in the worst possible way, ignoring that everything I've alleged has been proven and then some. And, as you know, I've been vetted by NPR both legally and editorially, as have all the women who spoke to NPR. 5) Then, in an egregious act of misogyny, you link to my twitter account instead of my author site. B/c apparently, my entire career can now be eradicated b/c I was the first person to confront Alexie. Jesus. Litsa Dremousis Litsa Dremousis is the author of "Altitude Sickness" (Future Tense Books). Seattle Metropolitan Magazine named it one of the all-time "20 Books Every Seattleite Must Read". Her essay "After the Fire" was selected as one of the "Most Notable Essays 2011” by Best American Essays, she’s a Contributing Editor at The Weeklings, and The Seattle Weekly named her one of "50 Women Who Rock Seattle". She is an essayist with The Washington Post and her work appears in The Believer, BlackBook, Esquire, Jezebel, McSweeney's, Monkeybicycle, MSN, New York Magazine, Nerve, Nylon, The Onion's A.V. Club, Paste, Poets & Writers, The Rumpus, Salon, The Weeklings, on NPR, KUOW, and additional venues. She has interviewed Sherman Alexie, The Black Keys, Betty Davis (the legendary, reclusive soul singer), Death Cab for Cutie, Estelle, Jenifer Lewis, Janelle Monae, Alanis Morissette, Kelly Rowland, Wanda Sykes, Rufus Wainwright, Ann Wilson and several dozen others. @LitsaDremousis, litsadremousis.com.Posted : Mar 21, 2018 11:20
Sarah Z.
How are you vetting all other authors? I'm very concerned about banning books and there has been a lot of talk about eliminating Alexie from school classrooms. Haven't we learned how to teach? How do we weigh the value of his books to the reader against the punishment of the author? Yes, there are other outstanding books that can be added to the syllabus (and the existing tokenism issue is an industry issue...Alexie didn't invent it). But, this doesn't take away from the importance of this book.Posted : Mar 21, 2018 10:27
Nina Lindsay
The American Indian Library Association (AILA) is a valued organization within the national library community that addresses the library-related needs of American Indians and Alaska Natives. I trust and deeply appreciate their work to ensure that their youth literature awards "represented the very best" for their communities.Posted : Mar 21, 2018 10:08
FMLyons
Is a good book or not? Is the work worthy of the award? No one is perfect in all. Give credit where credit is due and punish he who had misbehave. or broken laws.Posted : Mar 21, 2018 09:32
Stacey S
Personally I applaud AILA for standing with victims.Posted : Mar 21, 2018 09:13
Stephanie R
Has he been convicted in a court of law? The Constitution ensures the right if the accused to have a fair, impartial jury as well as to face their accusers in court. While if he is guilty of the charges this would be acceptable, he has not "confessed" to the specific allegations and has specifically denied some of them. Wouldn't the ALA be more justified in following the law than allowing what has not been proven to govern their actions? Having had friends sexually assaulted (and seen the aftermath), I do not take things like this lightly. However, I do believe the court of law should be the final say, not unproven allegations and the court of public opinion.Posted : Mar 21, 2018 06:06