I performed just that Google. Then I read the page as I would if I were looking for a bibliography.
Under her Wikipedia entry, I saw this (note that James's post wouldn't have shown up before yesterday):
"Marion Zimmer Bradley: It's Worse Than I Knew". Darkover series - The Mists of Avalon - Walter H. Breen - List of Darkover books
Now, I'm an MZB reader looking for books. Walter H. Breen means nothing to me. If I click through to References, as the Google result page suggests, I get nothing explaining who Walter Breen is or why he's relevant. If I scroll up to the "list of books" page -- remember, I'm a casual reader looking for a bibliography -- it says nothing about child abuse.
That is the only reference to "Breen" on the page. Furthermore, there's nothing on the results page that might, based solely on the Google results and summary, lead me to suspect something's wrong. ("The Strange Case of Marion Zimmer Bradley" is explicitly about a copyright dispute.)
Now, I personally own having missed the abuse of Ms. Greyland, because I read the Goldin pages. It's the global statement that "it seems really odd to me..." that I dispute. (Side note: MZB has an active set of fans defending her Wiki page, just as Anne McCaffrey's "tent peg" interview has disappeared from the Net. I suspect the reference to James's page will disappear soon as being not adequately substantiated.) The point I am defending is that researching the author, as opposed to the books, is not a universal behavior, nor should it be expected to be.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
james_davis_nicoll) wrote2014-06-10 09:02 pm
no subject
Under her Wikipedia entry, I saw this (note that James's post wouldn't have shown up before yesterday):
"Marion Zimmer Bradley: It's Worse Than I Knew".
Darkover series - The Mists of Avalon - Walter H. Breen - List of Darkover books
Now, I'm an MZB reader looking for books. Walter H. Breen means nothing to me. If I click through to References, as the Google result page suggests, I get nothing explaining who Walter Breen is or why he's relevant. If I scroll up to the "list of books" page -- remember, I'm a casual reader looking for a bibliography -- it says nothing about child abuse.
That is the only reference to "Breen" on the page. Furthermore, there's nothing on the results page that might, based solely on the Google results and summary, lead me to suspect something's wrong. ("The Strange Case of Marion Zimmer Bradley" is explicitly about a copyright dispute.)
Now, I personally own having missed the abuse of Ms. Greyland, because I read the Goldin pages. It's the global statement that "it seems really odd to me..." that I dispute. (Side note: MZB has an active set of fans defending her Wiki page, just as Anne McCaffrey's "tent peg" interview has disappeared from the Net. I suspect the reference to James's page will disappear soon as being not adequately substantiated.) The point I am defending is that researching the author, as opposed to the books, is not a universal behavior, nor should it be expected to be.
no subject
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mike_V#Marion_Zimmer_Bradley_-_Child_abuse_claims