Goofus And Gallant — Buzz Dixon

Jul 3

Jul 3 Goofus And Gallant

“He called pa a drunk!”
“Well, that’s what he was.”
-- The Sons Of Katie Elder

I know / knew two writers, one living, one dead, contemporaries of one another, alike in certain ways, different in others, but similar enough for an apples-to-apples comparison.

The dead one we’ll call Gallant;
the one still wasting oxygen
we’ll call Goofus.

Oh, full disclosure:
I do not like Goofus one little bit,
and for ample reasons.

Gallant produced an impressive body of work. It would not be an overstatement to say said body of work remains enormously influential.

Gallant could fairly be described as a mercurial person. A fighter -- and more often than not a fighter for good causes, not just for the sake of fighting. Generous and helpful. Willing to go the extra mile for those he felt needed the help.

Gallant’s writing career proved long enough for some stories that expressed ideas and attitudes perfectly acceptable in the 1950s and 60s to be rendered…well, let’s be generous and say passe’ 70 years later.

To their credit, Gallant grew as a person, and in many cases learned better and did better as the 1960s segued into the 1970s and 80s.

Gallant also made mistakes in praising and defending some people and some organizations who later proved unworthy of such praise and defense. Those cases involve Gallant voicing opinions based on their best knowledge at the time, and later when the truth of said individuals and organizations came out, Gallant either muted or recanted those opinions.

Gallant also mentioned their own bad behavior several times in the public record, bad behavior documented and reported by eyewitnesses and victims. Behavior bad enough on occasion to warrant criminal prosecution of Gallant had police seen the behavior or any victims pressed charges. Behavior bad enough on occasion to cause physical harm.

I can’t speak to Goofus’ abilities as a writer other than to say the few times I read their work, it seemed professional and competent.

I don’t watch or read anything by Goofus because I studiously avoid anything having to do with Goofus.

I know from direct personal experience that Goofus is a liar, a coward, and utterly treacherous. I have seen Goofus betray and attack two organizations that originally welcomed Goofus, organizations devoted to promoting the best interests of creators.

I have seen Goofus maliciously lie about people who did them no harm, simply because Goofus exists in a universe where one is either high above (and thus worthy of ass-smooching) or far below (and worthy only of contempt, even if smooching Goofus’ ass).

There are no equals in Goofus’ universe.

I have had Goofus lie to my face about business related matters, and I have seen Goofus lie about their own behavior in a given situation even though there was ample documentation of what Goofus actually said and did.

I have seen Goofus falsify the work of others to smear their reputations.

So when I refer to Goofus as a sac of human excrement I have earned that right.

Now, here’s the thing:
There are some people who like Goofus and the work Goofus produces.

Fine by me; I bear no one any grudge for what they may or may not like. Most of these people have either never encountered Goofus face-to-face, or if they have, are perceived by Goofus as being so high in ranking as to render them safe from abuse.

So be it.

Some people report to gaining insights from Goofus’ work.

Sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie but I'll never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy motherfuckers.

Some people report Goofus doing good deeds and charitable works.

If Goofus did, fine.

Doesn’t alter my perception of what Goofus did to people I know and care about one iota.

Doesn’t change the harm Goofus inflicted or attempted to inflict on friends of mine.

I’m a half-Italian hillbilly
from Appalachia, folks.

We may forgive.

But we never forget.

And Goofus to date
has done nothing
to indicate they
deserve forgiveness.

As Gallant’s life moved on, Gallant became aware certain boundaries of social acceptance changed.

At first Gallant railed against these moving boundaries -- “Toughen up! It’s a joke! Don’t censor me!”

But gradually, bit by bit, it sank in on Gallant that the times had indeed changed, and that Gallant had not changed with them.

Many of us loved Gallant.

We loved Gallant’s stories.

We loved Gallant’s fearless nature.

We loved the unbridled passion for what Gallant loved and believed in.

But we need to be honest and admit Gallant made mistakes, and on occasion Gallant acted deliberately badly to people who didn’t deserve what Gallant did to them.

There are people not of our coterie who hear us wax nostalgic about Gallant and point out the bad things Gallant did, and legitimately so in many cases where Gallant’s attitudes didn’t move fast enough with the times and people who should not have been subjected to abuse were.

Gallant wasn’t the first or only writer with these sorts of issues.

There are lots of writers like Gallant -- and artists, and musicians, and actors, and politicians, and doctors, and…well, the list goes on and on, doesn’t it?

Crappy behavior is crappy behavior, and we’re too often willing to forgive or overlook it because “Oh, that’s just Ernest being Ernest, that’s just Jack being Jack, that’s just Bill being Bill.”

We’re willing to overlook it because we were not on the receiving end of Gallant’s abuse.

We’re willing to forgive because we feel we gain something from the transaction.

Look at all those cool stories.

Look at all those great times.

We don’t see this the way others see it:
“You are defending and honoring a person who did bad things that made life worse for some people.”

Consider the case of Bill Cosby.

There are people who openly hope he dies soon so his reputation can be rehabilitated and they can openly enjoy his comedy again.

Why?

What will future generations lose by not hearing or seeing him?

All the positive influences he made have already been absorbed by the comedians who came after him.

All his charitable acts have already come to fruition.

How can we look at his work today and not feel disgusted by the rank hypocrisy permeating it?

And granted, Cosby’s actions proved far worse than what was laid on Gallant’s doorstep.

Nonetheless, the difference in either degree or magnitude does not negate the wholly reasonable reactions of a new generation who aren’t going to put up with that kind of bullshit anymore.

Not being honest about beloved creators and friends who did something bad is akin to those white supremacists who wish to eradicate all mention of slavery and jim crow and prejudice from public discourse.

For the white supremacists to acknowledge the evil of slavery and jim crow is to tacitly acknowledge they are wrong in defending those things.

It forces them to recognize at the very least they are enablers insofar as they block attempts to address those issues.

We must find a balance point.

We must acknowledge people are complex
that few are wholly saints or monsters.

We must acknowledge, as painful as it feels, when those who did things we admire also did things that we should condemn.

I have come to terms with Gallant to this degree:

I can admire Gallant as an individual while fully acknowledging their flaws and shortcomings.
I can admire and advocate most of Gallant’s work while acknowledging some pieces contain harmful, outdated attitudes.
I can accept that many will never appreciate Gallant either as an individual or a writer because of Gallant’s well documented multitude of shortcomings and offensive-bordering-on-criminal behavior.

So be it.

It is up to us, Gallant’s friends and admirers, to do better going forward, to take the good ideals we gleamed and present them to the next generations without the baggage of a problematic creator. This doesn’t require canceling Gallant, but it doesn’t require ignoring those affected by Gallant’s bad actions, either.

I personally have come to terms with Goofus to this degree: