|
|
The
Christchurch Civic Creche Case |
|
|
|
|
March 21 2005 If you flicked through
the papers at the weekend, you probably read about the spat between author
Lynley Hood and Creative New Zealand. According to the Sunday Star Times, The government arts
agency is destroying hundreds of CD-Roms about New Zealand writers - and
asking those who have already received them to destroy their copies after
Dunedin author Lynley Hood threatened legal action. She was upset her
profile said her Otago University doctorate was honorary, when in fact it was
an examined degree. Hood has been
criticised by other writers on Creative NZ’s The new word CD-Rom, who accuse her of
vanity and paranoia. Reissuing the CD will cost up to $5000. But according to
today’s NZPA report in the NZ
Herald … she rejected claims
that she had threatened to take legal action against Creative New Zealand,
which is responsible for the error. Hood is best known as
the author of A City Possessed - The Christchurch Civic Crèche Case, which
hit the bestseller list in 2001. A quick recce of Hood’s own website throws this up: In 2003 I was awarded a
Doctorate of Literature (earned, not honorary) by the University of Otago for
‘published contributions of special excellence in literary, social and
historical knowledge’. A sidebar on her site
says ‘last updated 2 Dec 2002’ - and a quick check of Google’s cache shows
that the ‘earned, not honorary’ bit has been there a while. Now, what’s really
going on here? We have a feeling that there’s more to this storm in a LittD
cup than meets the eye …
I have had a deal of
trouble connecting to this website over this matter so i can see why Lynley
is saying paranoia (a condition of which she isnt afflicted by.) I am bothered by the
screeches from Wellington people over this; CNZ has made a mistake, should
acknowledge this, destroy the CDs, and that will be that. I am annoyed that I
have never received a copy of the CD (so I’ve never had a chance to proofread
it.0
Lynley Hood earned the
doctorate she received for all the books she has written. Her examiners reportedly
said that the book “A City Possessed”
would have been enough by itself to have earned the degree. She is not just a
“novelist” but a meticulous researcher who has produced one of New Zealand’s
most important books ever. A City Possessed has had dozens of favourable
reviews, but there are a number of people who do not like the conclusions -
and who have resorted to personal attacks against Lynley Hood, instead of
debating the substance of the book. Anybody who has earned
a doctorate deserves to be protective of that honour, and Lynley Hood has
done no more than I would have in the same circumstances. The fact that she
has had to endure personal attacks (even today by a person using “a nom de
plume” in the Otago Daily Times)
makes her actions even more understandable. It has been reported
that Lynley Hood provided the correct information to Creative New Zealand,
twice. How the mistake ever happened in the first place is extremely odd. How
it happened is something that Creative New Zealand should explain. Fixing up the problem
is not too difficult - After all burning more CDs may be inconvenient, but is
certainly not the cost that some manufacturers have when they have a product
recall due to their own mistakes. And to the credit of Creative New Zealand,
they have obviously agreed quickly to do as Lynley Hood asked, and make
replacement CDs. So the next question to
ask, is where the story came from? Given that Creative New Zealand was
already replacing the disks makes me smell a rat. It’s interesting that both
the Editor of the Sunday Star Times, and one of the people publicly
criticising Lynley Hood in the SST just happened to have a very close
association with the Creche. The focus of the debate
should turn away from the qualifications of Lynley, and focus on the
substance of her scholarship that enabled her qualification. Her critics
should refrain from personal attacks and actually come out in the open and
point out anything they have found wrong in the book. The book exposes a
scandal - Not just about the injustice done to Peter Ellis himself, but about
the sexual abuse hysteria of the time that led to injustices for so many
other people. It exposes problems with the law and justice system, and the
appeal court system that allowed the mistake to occur and the mistake unable
to be rectified. It exposes problems in police investigations and the
interviewing of children. But all these problems
ARE recognised - at least by a couple of hundred prominent New Zealanders -
retired judges, lawyers, lots of MPS, etc, who signed the petition of Lynley
Hood and Don Brash to have a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Creche
case. The only people who
seem not be listening are the the present government, and in particular Phil
Goff as the Minister of Justice
The comment by Brian
mentioned: "It’s interesting that both the Editor of the Sunday Star Times, and one of the
people publicly criticising Lynley Hood in the SST just happened to have a very
close association with the Creche." Well, Sunday Star Times Editor is Cate
Brett. Brett wrote about the Ellis/Civic Creche case a few years ago in “North & South”. She didn’t let the
readers know that she had been a creche client parent during Peter Ellis’s
creche employment era. A commentator in that
Sunday Star Times story was Kate de Goldi. de Goldi was also a creche client
parent during Peter Ellis’s creche employment era. The story never mentioned
that. People, such as these
two, have tried and failed in their attacks on “A City Possessed” because they can’t fault the scholarship - so
all they can do is attack the author
Less than Fifty cents a
Cd Less than a dollar
postage for a few dozen of the 1000 or so CDs I’m sure those on the
‘artists dole’ wouldn’t see the funds anyway - as it would have gone to
Dobbyn/Finn bros/hip-hop-tours and others that have ‘put in’ the so-called
hard yards. Hood is not being precious,
previous poster ‘Brian’ raises the sharp questions. Except - honorary
degrees are not always a ‘joke’ as attributed to Hood in The Press. Many are well earned and well respected.
John Lorimer made the
comment that honorary degrees are not always a ‘joke’ …”Many are well earned
and well respected” I do not think that
Lynley Hood would disagree with that either. Honorary degrees come with a
huge amount of respect, but they do not convey the status of scholarship for
a particular topic that an earned degree would have. If Lynley Hood were to
use an honorary degree to appear to enhance the status of her research on the
Creche case it would have been a joke - just as much as a person with a PhD
in Physics putting “Dr” in front of their name when speaking on medical
matters. Make no mistake -
Lynley Hood’s Creche book has made as many ripples in the Child Protection/
Psychology / Justice world as Rutherford once did in the world of physics.
And of course when anybody does come out with a bombshell and a significant
presentation of “new” thought, there is always a reaction fom the old guard -
the “Flat earthers” survived for a century or two.
I have no no argument
with Dr Hood’s request and her work stands as an example of highest
scholarship. The honorary vs earned
debate is a little removed. Perhaps the term ‘earned” is misleading, as it
can most honorary degrees are also earned - but in a different forum. The
term ‘enroled for’ might be a better one than ‘earned’. Consider this; in the
case of most degrees it is the receiver who petitions the University; in the
case of honorary the university petitions the recipient |
