Theater play based on Neil Gaiman's Coraline has been cancelled following the sexual assault scandal
A stage version of Neil Gaiman’s Coraline has been cancelled after allegations of sexual misconduct against the author.In addition, Yahoo/Deadline reports that a UK agency for authors working in showbiz removed Gaiman's profile from their site:
The musical was to have been staged at Leeds Playhouse from 11 April to 11 May before touring to Edinburgh, Birmingham and Manchester.
In a joint statement on Wednesday, the co-production partners Leeds Playhouse, Royal Lyceum Theatre Edinburgh, Birmingham Rep and Home Manchester said: “We have decided our production of Coraline – a Musical will not proceed. After careful consideration, we feel it would be impossible to continue in the context of the allegations against its original author. Ticket holders have been contacted directly via email.”
Neil Gaiman has been removed from UK agent Casarotto Ramsay & Associates’ client list after the Good Omens writer has faced a string of sexual misconduct allegations over the past six months.So a theater play based on a book that, as noted before, was actually in very questionable taste, has seen the curtains drawn before it even started, and now Gaiman's also left without any representation in the entertainment industry. Let's hope the theater houses give attendants a refund. It remains to be seen if DC/Marvel will be withdrawing any comics of his that've remained on sale until now.
Gaiman’s profile was quietly scrubbed from Casarotto Ramsay & Associates’ website, meaning he no longer appears on pages listing its film, TV, and theatre clients.
However, Aussie Theatre says this isn't good for the production staff involved:
The organisers offered apologies for the inconvenience, with an assurance of full refunds for ticket holders. The abruptness of the announcement left many theatre fans reeling. Some had long planned to travel from around the UK to catch the show on its scheduled tour from 11 April to 11 May 2025 at Leeds Playhouse, followed by stops in Manchester (15 May to 7 June), Birmingham (12 to 22 June), and Edinburgh (26 June to 19 July). The cancellation therefore represents a significant blow, not just to local theatre economies that depend on ticket sales and visitor spending, but also to loyal fans who had hoped to see Gaiman’s eerie world unfold on stage.What's so "imaginative" about his worlds? Actually, what's really alienating about his writings is the penchant for crude violence in several of the examples. And in hindsight, it was startling how many allusions to sexual misconduct turned up in the pages of several comics he'd written. Exactly why I hesitate to think of what his novels are like, ditto his short stories. Certainly, it's a shame that quite a few stage performers will be out of a job, but chances at this point are the play will sputter in attendance, and nobody should have to spend money that could go into Gaiman's pockets in residuals. And "cautionary tale"? No doubt even that can be questioned after all this.
Theatre, at its best, provides a space for creativity and community. From large venues like the National Theatre in London to smaller playhouses across the country, new productions keep the art form vibrant and relevant. When a show of this scale—featuring a beloved children’s story—gets pulled, it sends ripples through the wider theatre community.
For one, the financial implications can be severe. A cancelled production means wages lost for performers, creatives, and technical staff. For institutions like Leeds Playhouse, Royal Lyceum Theatre Edinburgh, and Birmingham Rep, an interruption of this magnitude can create long-term scheduling headaches and funding challenges. It is also possible that the controversy will cast a shadow on future adaptations of Neil Gaiman’s work, prompting producers to re-evaluate contracts and rehearsal schedules.
Secondly, theatre-goers who had eagerly bought tickets may now question what happens next with any production tied to an embattled author. In an age where audiences are increasingly aware of ethical and social issues, the cancellation underscores how swiftly public perception can shift. Just as #MeToo prompted major changes in Hollywood, theatre is similarly grappling with heightened scrutiny over who should be allowed a platform. [...]
For now, ticket holders can expect a full refund, and the creative teams will likely refocus on new or existing projects. Theatre fans, meanwhile, are left to wonder whether Coraline’s cautionary tale—of a child who must see through illusions—may hold a deeper lesson for an industry that strives to balance artistic freedom with moral accountability.
As the dust settles, one final thought stands out: theatre is a living art form, constantly evolving in response to its cultural environment. Stories, like people, are not infallible, and ethical considerations must increasingly inform creative decisions. CORALINE – A MUSICAL could have been an unmissable show, introducing a new generation to Neil Gaiman’s imaginative universe. Instead, it becomes a symbol of the complexities facing modern productions.
Now, since we're on the subject, Rachel Johnson, the very same person whose news and podcasting site first brought forth the accusations against Gaiman, has now written in the UK Standard that she didn't want him cancelled like he's being now. And she describes him thus:
Plus, Gaiman was a kind, vocal, public ally of all the most worthy, trendy minorities and causes from refugees to trans kids and what’s more, he even tweeted about consent and believing women.Unfortunately, yes. He now stands as a most prominent example of a leftist ideologue who believes everybody but himself should follow certain rules and conduct. But how appalling if Johnson thinks the woke ideologies he was championing are actually valid. There's a reason why reelected POTUS Donald Trump has signed orders protecting children from transsexual surgeries and stuff like that. And do the refugees spoken of include horrors like these in Europe? She continues:
THAT Neil Gaiman?
The point of me “breaking my silence” now here is to say that the blanket cancellation of Neil Gaiman was not my intention when I first heard Scarlett’s story, then the voices of four more females you hear in Master.Point: that's why the responsible consumer makes sure to grind all further purchases of such a phony's works to a halt. What, are we supposed to put money into his pockets he doesn't deserve? The money should, if anything, go to medical funds for his victims. At least Johnson notes the following:
My point was the compelling public interest in reporting her allegations, and others like hers.
All Scarlett said she wanted was “accountability,” or some recognition that she had been abused.
Our intention with Master was to probe the greyest of grey areas – allegations of sexual abuse within an otherwise consensual relationship.As I noted earlier, what's chilling about Gaiman's conduct is that he lured the women into ostensibly consensual relations, then afterwards he began to cross red lines. Nasty tricks and stunts like those are exactly what give sex a bad name. Johnson is correct that this news should be public record. But Gaiman should face consequences for his behavior too, both legally and in the court of public opinion, and that's just what's happening now.
What the police call IPSV – or intimate partner sexual violence – is the most underreported crime. Women don’t report it (even though marital rape has been on the statue book since 1992) because they don’t think they will be believed; they don’t want to think they’ve been abused and themselves as victims, they don’t want their partner, often the father of their children, to go jail. They very often send their alleged abuser loving messages, afterwards, that can be used as the crux of any defence. It’s…complicated.
Here's also what the Linden Link is saying:
Fans of Gaiman’s work are going back and rereading passages they once thought to be feminist as a monster of an entirely different nature.Nope. And "beautiful works of imagination"? Gimme a break. What's so beautiful about scenes of sexual violence and decaptitations like one seen in the 6th Sandman issue? Even the stuff where it was merely implied there was sexual misconduct going on were alienating and superfluous. It was, as far as I can tell, Gaiman's leftist ideologies that won over the leftist crowds that elevated him to the status he saw for nearly 4 decades. But politics alone do not a masterpiece make, and now, it can only be hoped anybody who didn't consider before will be willing to reevaluate now.
While none of these allegations have been proven, and Gaiman himself wrote “I don’t accept there was any abuse,” it has caused many shows and movies related to his work to take a step back. Fans everywhere are shocked and trying to understand how such beautiful works of imagination came from such an ‘awful human being’ (if the allegations are true that is).
While I don’t know for certain how much Neil Gaiman makes off of every book sold, every episode watched, or every movie streamed, I am assuming he does benefit.
How do we, the consumers, decide where to draw the line? At what point does the art separate from the artist? And at what point do we choose to stop consuming the art of problematic creators?
And now that you know more about the artist behind the art, are you still willing to go watch “Coraline” or “Good Omens”?
The USCD Guardian spoke about the case:
How do we discern monsters in the shadows of homogeneity? This is the question raised in the wake of sexual assault allegations against celebrated British author Neil Gaiman. Through his fictional works and outspoken social media persona, Gaiman platformed himself as a progressive, a champion of women and queer rights, and an altruist for the marginalized. These contradictions highlight a crucial notion regarding these types of figures: Your ally may not be your friend."Idealism and hope"? That's kinda hard to swallow seeing how dark many of his writings were. Note of course the part about desolation and shadows, and that too conflicts with the whole notion of hopefulness. Not to mention it's hard to say kindness and compassion won out when Lyta Hall/Fury was misused in the Sandman, and her son in the end was otherwise no longer hers, his ascension to lord of the Dreaming notwithstanding. Let's also not forget what happened with Hector Hall/Silver Scarab in the 12th issue.
In the realm of fiction and fantasy, the projection of idealism and hope holds a hefty weight. Much of Gaiman’s work has toiled with a metatextual reckoning of storytelling, from “The Sandman” and its use of dreams as vehicles to explore the power and necessity of imagination, to explorations of personal history as an identity tether in “The Ocean at the End of the Lane.” Gaiman envisioned worlds of shadow and desolation, contrasting eons of history with the sprawl of urbanity and making sure that the souls of kindness and compassion won out in the end. Through Death, through Coraline, through Lettie Hempstock, his fictions served as a gateway to trailblazing reality — to reimagine how the world could be.
Gaiman’s real-world actions have shattered those fantasies. He is a manifestation of the worst monsters in his creations, where his actions align with those antagonized in his work. His eloquence afforded him the ability to aggrandize his fictional female characters, while his power and wealth from those aggrandizations allowed him to demean and assault the real members of those marginalized groups. The conceit that storytelling is a vehicle to impart tenets and pieces of oneself to the world is broken when the storytellers themselves betray these tenets, making these beliefs falsely-proclaimed platitudes.
The separation of art from the artist — especially in a literary space — is nearly impossible. In other media such as film and music, artists’ processes are more overtly collaborative, whereas in prose, the artistic voice and personality of an author remain the most prominent feature. The progressive rhetoric and topics in Gaiman’s work will remain worthwhile and evergreen, despite his appropriation of them to accumulate power and wealth; what is now worthless and even dishonest, however, is reading these values from his mouth.Yes, please do lecture us what to believe about the "progressive beliefs" Gaiman was espousing in his writings. They haven't done anybody any favors in the long run. There are beliefs and values that don't count coming from certain would-be moralists and ideologues. But what Gaiman exploited the comics he wrote as a platform for were little more than leftist talking points, and as Donald Trump's reelection makes clear, the public is tired of having it all shoved down our throats, however it's done.
Labels: dc comics, dreadful writers, Europe and Asia, history, marvel comics, misogyny and racism, moonbat writers, msm propaganda, politics, violence, women of dc