Thursday, December 14, 2006

The Small Penis Rule

I do love a good literary slapfight. And this one's a doozy, if only because it involves petty references to penis size, one of the better magazines in the country, and a man who has sold more books than anybody but Jesus.

Columnist Accuses Crichton of 'Literary Hit and Run'

Choice excerpt:

Mick Crowley is described as a “wealthy, spoiled Yale graduate” with a small penis that nonetheless “caused significant tears to the toddler’s rectum.”

Mr. Crowley writes that Mr. Crichton’s Mick Crowley not only has a similar name but is also a graduate of Yale and a Washington political journalist. Mr. Crowley contends that Mr. Crichton has tried to escape public censure for his literary attack by hiding behind what has become known as “the small penis rule.”

The rule, Mr. Crowley writes, is described in a 1998 article in The New York Times in which the libel lawyer Leon Friedman said it is a trick used by authors who have defamed someone to discourage lawsuits. “No male is going to come forward and say, ‘That character with a very small penis — that’s me!’ ” Mr. Friedman explained.


This world would be so much more boring without the passive aggressiveness of writers. It's funny, 'cause an essay I just read for my Book Editing seminar talked about how a publisher pretty much has to rely on the dependability of an author to prevent legal issues like libel and plagiarism. Legal reads can only catch so much--and who's going to question Michael Crichton? Of course, I'm assuming this isn't provable libel, given that nobody really thinks Michael Crowley is a child molester, but it hews pretty close. I'm sure Mr. Crowley's penis would agree.

2 comments:

Jacob said...

This is hilariously awful. Does it even qualify as passive-aggressive when you use the same last name? Is that not regular aggressive (or the author's equivalent)? How bitter must one be to take such lame potshots in one's work?

I also can't believe someone unleashed the phrase, "small penis rule," and that it's stuck around in print for eight years now.

Kate said...

I guess it seemed passive 'cause the usual author M.O. is to write bitchy response letters to the publication in question. (The Times Sunday Book Review usually has one every few weeks.) The anger had to fester through months of publication process here, until a million copies were irretrievably printed. That's dedication to being a sneaky bastard.

So the small penis rule isn't a real legal tactic taught in law school? :)