In literary gossip, what's the deal with this Elizabeth Bear/Alexandra Rowland stuff? I saw Consuela post something on Twitter believing Rowland, which is good to know since I trust Consuela's judgment; otherwise I'm just curious about what this particular blowup is all about.

And were there other issues this week, too? I keep seeing subtweets in book Twitter but I've been oblivious due to work.

Right here, Amy: [link]

I missed all that (not really on twitter) but now I have googled - that seems like a giant mess.

I like Rowland's books better than Bear's (have not read or honestly ever heard of Lynch before) so that colors my opinion.

I think "giant mess" is correct.

I have learned a bit more about the controversy: it appears that Scott Lynch may have been playing both women against each other. There are still significant issues with power differentials and Bear has in the past used her popularity & success against people, but it sounds like she may well be the victim of Lynch's manipulations nearly as much as Rowland is.

Or as someone on another forum put it: poly drama with an overlay of power & manipulation. I believe Rowland experienced what she claims, but I'm not convinced Bear is the only party here who should carry blame.

And it is interesting how much public attention is on Bear instead of Lynch...

It does seem that Bear is the one trying to smear other writers professionally by involving outside parties, so I think she deserves any pushback she's getting over it.

That is pretty much where my googling got me, Consuela. Lynch seems to be the one who has explicitly acted badly in everyone's accounts even without getting into who was manipulated

I know plenty of people who've been hurt by Bear, but there also seem to be stories about people who've been hurt by Rowland too. I don't know anything about Lynch.

Yeah, giant mess seems to be on the nose.

Thanks for that, Dana, I'll bear that in mind.