Even more horrific accusations against Neil Gaiman revealed

[Asbo Zaprudder]

If you're a fan of those shows and regularly watch all the episodes anyway, you should be fine watching the episodes he wrote or appeared in without making it appear as though you're supporting him. Besides, as mentioned about his Doctor Who episodes, The Doctor's Wife was heavily rewritten by Moffat and Nightmare in Silver isn't really worth rewatching anyway. I never watched B5, but I wouldn't be shocked if the episode(s?) he wrote there were rewritten by JMS anyway. I also never watched Big Bang Theory, but since you said "cameo" I'm guessing he didn't have that big a role in it? In that case, is the episode otherwise good or worth watching? If so, I see no harm in continuing to watch that.

All that said, I don't blame anyone who feel they can't watch the content he was involved in on these shows either.

The only episode Gaiman wrote for B5 was the fifth season "Day of the Dead". It's ok, but, because of its fantastical elements, it doesn't really fit in the B5 universe. It also features Penn and Teller playing very unfunny comedians rather than magicians. It's easily skipped over. It's only real benefit is to act as a relief from the arc featuring the grindingly annoying Byron and his telepath cult members. DW's "Nightmare in Silver" I think I also found ok, but I've not been anxious to revisit it. "The Doctor's Wife" was very good and I'd probably choose to watch that again given the chance. The Big Bang Theory episode I remember in which Gaiman appeared as himself was season 11's "The Comet Polarization" (2018). The joke seemed to fall flat as I recall - possibly because the audience didn't know who he was.

 

[Set Harth]

Reading up on that episode, I learn that Howard named his son Neil after Neils Armstrong, Diamond, and Gaiman.

oops

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Well, it's not like the name Neil itself has been tarnished.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

As to the Tanith Lee stuff, I'm not sure if Gaiman really took from her in as much as they were both inspired by similar stories. I did find this from Sylvia Moreno Garcia who dismisses any inspiration Gaiman took from Lee as nothing that could be considered plagiarism:

Silvia Moreno-Garcia (@silviamg.bsky.social)

No, Gaiman didn't plagiarize Tanith Lee (I have a bunch of Lee first editions, I interviewed her once, I know her work). There are a bunch of writers who did gods stuff before him (Adams, Leiber) BUT it does show something I've noticed that a lot of writers from the 80s and 70s have been forgotten-

bsky.app

Thank you for sharing this insight. Her own thread on the subject (which goes beyond Lee and Gaiman) is enlightening and helpful.

If you're a fan of those shows and regularly watch all the episodes anyway, you should be fine watching the episodes he wrote or appeared in without making it appear as though you're supporting him. Besides, as mentioned about his Doctor Who episodes, The Doctor's Wife was heavily rewritten by Moffat and Nightmare in Silver isn't really worth rewatching anyway. I never watched B5, but I wouldn't be shocked if the episode(s?) he wrote there were rewritten by JMS anyway. I also never watched Big Bang Theory, but since you said "cameo" I'm guessing he didn't have that big a role in it? In that case, is the episode otherwise good or worth watching? If so, I see no harm in continuing to watch that.

All that said, I don't blame anyone who feel they can't watch the content he was involved in on these shows either.

Actually, JMS has previously wrote how "Day of the Dead" was the one episode he didn't rewrite at all.

As for the Doctor Who epsidoes, I knew Moffat worked on "The Doctor's Wife" but it's only now that I'm seeing he "heavily rewrote" it. I'm not saying it's untrue, just expressing some skepticism on the timing of that claim (I'm happy to stand corrected with cited sources from Moffat himself). I was one of the few defenders of "Nightmare in Silver" so I'll keep that one on the sidelines for when I'm ready for the whole separating the artist from the art discussion.

 

[Steve Roby]

I never watched B5, but I wouldn't be shocked if the episode(s?) he wrote there were rewritten by JMS anyway.

Actually, JMS has previously wrote how "Day of the Dead" was the one episode he didn't rewrite at all.

Until the scriptbook of "Day of the Dead" was published, I took it for granted that of course JMS did a heavy rewrite on it, because it's so awful. Then the script was published, through a company Gaiman had connections with rather than as an official B5 tie-in, which I assume means it's Gaiman's script as he wrote it -- and the awfulness is all there.

(This isn't one of those "I never liked Gaiman anyway" posts. I've got all 75 issues of Sandman in the basement, purchased as they came out monthly.)

 

[Nerys Myk]

Well, it's not like the name Neil itself has been tarnished.

I just realized "Neil Pye" is a pun.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Besides, as mentioned about his Doctor Who episodes, The Doctor's Wife was heavily rewritten by Moffat and Nightmare in Silver isn't really worth rewatching anyway.

I thought Doctor Who fandom was overly kind to "The Doctor's Wife" and overly harsh to "Nightmare." At the time, I said something like, "If 'The Doctor's Wife' had gone out with 'Written by Chris Chibnall' in the credits, fandom would have given it a solid 6/10."

I've been pondering what I would do if he novelized the episodes for BBC Books. (Gaiman has said in the past he'd like to, he just had other contracted work in the way.) Now, BBC Books may be less interested in working with him than they are with Gareth Roberts these days, but for sake of argument, would I buy Gaiman novelizations, were they to appear...

And I honestly don't know.

Just as I don't know if I'd buy Miracleman: The Dark Age when/if Marvel ever publishes that.

The Seven Sisters, the long-gestating sequel to Neverwhere, though. That's a likely pass.

 

[The Wormhole]

I knew Moffat worked on "The Doctor's Wife" but it's only now that I'm seeing he "heavily rewrote" it. I'm not saying it's untrue, just expressing some skepticism on the timing of that claim (I'm happy to stand corrected with cited sources from Moffat himself).

I don't really remember details, but I do remember back in the day Moffat and/or Gaiman himself comparing the original script with what aired and noting all the various differences. Granted, for the most part those rewrites were the by-product of Gaiman writing as though there was an unlimited budget while Moffat's rewrites reflected the fact that there is indeed a budget. IE, I think the "Uncle" was originally mean to be something new, but ended up becoming an Ood because it was cheaper to use an existing alien mask than make something new. So the episode is probably still 95% what Gaiman intended.

I thought Doctor Who fandom was overly kind to "The Doctor's Wife" and overly harsh to "Nightmare." At the time, I said something like, "If 'The Doctor's Wife' had gone out with 'Written by Chris Chibnall' in the credits, fandom would have given it a solid 6/10."

Because of this discussion, I decided to look up the threads for those episodes when they aired, and it looks like I am currently guilty of looking back on The Doctor's Wife with rose tinted glasses, as it appears as though at the time it aired, I did not give it a particularly glowing review. Looks like I wasn't too fond of Nightmare in Silver when it aired either, indeed it seems I felt both episodes were "overhyped" because they were written by Gaiman. Interesting how time can change one's perspective.

 

[JD]

I wouldn't call essays posted on the Internet that don't name names and that lack any means of corroboration "evidence," but you do you.

Again, this is why I hate these kind of situations, I never know what to believe when it's not as obviously true as what's being said about Gaiman.

I remember hearing rumors about this a few decades ago now. I've never seen anything other than rumors. As someone said earlier, at the time being gay automatically made one a possible child molester in the eyes of many people.

ttps://bsky.app/profile/silviamg.bsky.social/post/3lfsr7al2bk2x[/URL]

I didn't think about that.

Actually, JMS has previously wrote how "Day of the Dead" was the one episode he didn't rewrite at all.

As for the Doctor Who epsidoes, I knew Moffat worked on "The Doctor's Wife" but it's only now that I'm seeing he "heavily rewrote" it. I'm not saying it's untrue, just expressing some skepticism on the timing of that claim (I'm happy to stand corrected with cited sources from Moffat himself). I was one of the few defenders of "Nightmare in Silver" so I'll keep that one on the sidelines for when I'm ready for the whole separating the artist from the art discussion.

Isn't it pretty much standard practice for a showrunner to rewrite every script, even if it's from someone like Gaiman?

 

[theenglish]

Thank you for sharing this insight. Her own thread on the subject (which goes beyond Lee and Gaiman) is enlightening and helpful.

I found more of what she wrote after I posted. I've been meaning to read her stuff for awhile. I think her observations of how formerly popular science fiction and fantasy authors have fallen into obscurity is interesting. It is reminiscent of how popular pulp writers in the first 2/3s of the twentieth century have largely been forgotten. Coincidentally Our Lady of Darkness is on my 2025 reading list.

Again, this is why I hate these kind of situations, I never know what to believe when it's not as obviously true as what's being said about Gaiman.

I didn't think about that.

Isn't it pretty much standard practice for a showrunner to rewrite every script, even if it's from someone like Gaiman?

It's been true of scripts that just can't be filmed due to lack of budget or other logistical problems. Remember that Harlan Ellison's original script for Guardian on the Edge of Forever called for a cast of thousands and McCoy to have an addiction problem (I can't recall the details though).

 

[David cgc]

Isn't it pretty much standard practice for a showrunner to rewrite every script, even if it's from someone like Gaiman?

Yes and no. The showrunner will do a final pass for voice and tone ("The Doctor wouldn't say 'It's there,' he'd say 'There it is.'"), but it's not obligatory that there'll be any changes, or any substantial ones (I believe Russell T. Davies mentioned in his book that he didn't or hardly rewrote Moffatt's Doctor Who episodes, for instance). For earlier drafts, it's possible there will be notes sent back for the original writer to implement, though considering the hectic pace of television production, it's common for the showrunner to simply rewrite it themselves.

In this case, an example I remember is that in Gaiman's first draft of "The Doctor's Wife," the Corsair was much more explicitly described as a proto-Doctor, who was the Doctor's childhood hero who he modeled himself on, which Gaiman ran by Moffat before he'd even done his first draft (Moffatt thought having a "Gray Ghost" to the Doctor's Batman wasn't the right choice, and the Corsair became a peer instead of an idol). There's more information about the writing process here on a Q&A Gaiman did on his blog, but since I doubt any of us are going to get the chance to do a Writer's Guild credit arbitration where one of us is sent every draft and correspondence between the two of them to figure out which word came from which person, the idea that the episode will be fine if it's more Moffat's than Gaiman's feels a bit like debating angels dancing on the heads of pins. Does it still count as Moffatt's creation if it was his feedback but Gaiman did the actual writing?

 

[Set Harth]

Spoiler

 

[Allyn Gibson]

an example I remember is that in Gaiman's first draft of "The Doctor's Wife," the Corsair was much more explicitly described as a proto-Doctor, who was the Doctor's childhood hero who he modeled himself on, which Gaiman ran by Moffat before he'd even done his first draft (Moffat thought having a "Gray Ghost" to the Doctor's Batman wasn't the right choice, and the Corsair became a peer instead of an idol).

It was the right choice, imho. Jody Hauser's Corsair story in Titan's 13th Doctor comics put a nice spin on the Doctor and the Corsair's relationship -- what if the Doctor got to have one more adventure with her best friend from college... who also happens to be dead in the Doctor's present. My college best friend died almost twenty years ago now, and I found Hauser's story meaningful and touching for that reason.

I'm not opposed to the idea of the Doctor having a mentor or inspiration, though. But fitting that kind of mythology into the series now, when the Doctor has thousands of years and millions of adventures under their belts... well, the time for that has passed, and it would raise questions (like, where has this mentor/inspiration been all this time?) that would deform the character of the Doctor.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Again, this is why I hate these kind of situations, I never know what to believe when it's not as obviously true as what's being said about Gaiman.

I understand.

My way of coping with it is to accept uncertainty. Most of the things I know or believe generally have at least some level of uncertainty attached to them. Usually, I don't even know enough to assign a numeric probability, as that would be pure guess work. So I have categories like "probable", "unlikely", and so forth, and they have no precise definition.

In the case of Clarke, I can live with assessing the allegations against him as something like "unproven and likelihood uncertain." In a court of law, that would imply reasonable doubt and acquittal. Based on what information there is that's publicly available, the truth can't be any clearer than that. And I personally have no interest to push the various institutions that have affirmed that the allegations against him are groundless, to obtain more information regarding how or why they reached the conclusions they did, assuming that the public even has the right to know such information.

I've no expectation that my position will please everybody, or even anybody.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Until the scriptbook of "Day of the Dead" was published, I took it for granted that of course JMS did a heavy rewrite on it, because it's so awful. Then the script was published, through a company Gaiman had connections with rather than as an official B5 tie-in, which I assume means it's Gaiman's script as he wrote it -- and the awfulness is all there.

(This isn't one of those "I never liked Gaiman anyway" posts. I've got all 75 issues of Sandman in the basement, purchased as they came out monthly.)

It's been years since I've done a Babylon 5 rewatch but I always remembered loving "Day of the Dead"...and that was long before I became a big fan of Gaiman's work as novelist and comic book writer. That's why I'm a little taken aback by Asbo's and yours opinions of the episode (including in regards to how Penn & Teller were used). I'm curious to see how I feel about the episode if and when I revisit it.

The Seven Sisters, the long-gestating sequel to Neverwhere, though. That's a likely pass.

I know I was in the minority before but Neverwhere was always my favorite of his and I had been anxiously awaiting for any details on that long-gestating sequel.

But now?

I also honestly don't know either.

I don't really remember details, but I do remember back in the day Moffat and/or Gaiman himself comparing the original script with what aired and noting all the various differences. Granted, for the most part those rewrites were the by-product of Gaiman writing as though there was an unlimited budget while Moffat's rewrites reflected the fact that there is indeed a budget. IE, I think the "Uncle" was originally mean to be something new, but ended up becoming an Ood because it was cheaper to use an existing alien mask than make something new. So the episode is probably still 95% what Gaiman intended.

I remember that much in the way of differences, which felt relatively minor and understandable (in regards to budget constraints) and that's why I was thrown by people saying "Moffat heavily rewrote" the episode. Feels like a case of people misunderstanding the process while attempting to separate from their previous enjoyment of it.

I found more of what she wrote after I posted. I've been meaning to read her stuff for awhile. I think her observations of how formerly popular science fiction and fantasy authors have fallen into obscurity is interesting. It is reminiscent of how popular pulp writers in the first 2/3s of the twentieth century have largely been forgotten. Coincidentally Our Lady of Darkness is on my 2025 reading list.

I have to say, regardless of any truth of the plagiarism claims, I am now curious about Tanith Lee and I hope to locate copies of her Flat Earth series. I already tried looking them up on the website of my local bookstore and I have to call the store for a price, which probably means they're out of print.

 

[Steve Roby]

It's been years since I've done a Babylon 5 rewatch but I always remembered loving "Day of the Dead"...and that was long before I became a big fan of Gaiman's work as novelist and comic book writer. That's why I'm a little taken aback by Asbo's and yours opinions of the episode (including in regards to how Penn & Teller were used). I'm curious to see how I feel about the episode if and when I revisit it.

I've only watched it once (I'll see it again when KRAD gets to it in his B5 rewatch on reactor.com), but in addition to disliking the whole Rebo and Zooty thing, the way I remember feeling about it is that it was an episode that was allowed to break the rules of the show because it was by a celebrity guest writer doing what he does instead of doing B5.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I understand.

My way of coping with it is to accept uncertainty. Most of the things I know or believe generally have at least some level of uncertainty attached to them. Usually, I don't even know enough to assign a numeric probability, as that would be pure guess work. So I have categories like "probable", "unlikely", and so forth, and they have no precise definition.

In the case of Clarke, I can live with assessing the allegations against him as something like "unproven and likelihood uncertain." In a court of law, that would imply reasonable doubt and acquittal. Based on what information there is that's publicly available, the truth can't be any clearer than that. And I personally have no interest to push the various institutions that have affirmed that the allegations against him are groundless, to obtain more information regarding how or why they reached the conclusions they did, assuming that the public even has the right to know such information.

I've no expectation that my position will please everybody, or even anybody.

Regarding probability, I find Bayes' Theorem very efficacious. Regarding Clarke, I assume that many potential witnesses are still alive and their statements could be obtained. Even though he is dead, discouraging sex tourism is a worthwhile goal. Someone might still benefit financially from allowing its continuation.

 

[Starkers]

I remember that much in the way of differences, which felt relatively minor and understandable (in regards to budget constraints) and that's why I was thrown by people saying "Moffat heavily rewrote" the episode. Feels like a case of people misunderstanding the process while attempting to separate from their previous enjoyment of it.

To be clear, the person who said this is a hugely experienced writer for Big Finish/ BBC books and DWM amongst others. When asked for his source he stated "A old Scottish writer I drink with". Interestingly the original post on Bluesky has now been deleted (though all the responses to it still exist). I'm guessing this means either;

1. He was wrong.
2. He was right but had realised it isn't politic to state this!

 

[The Nth Doctor]

I've only watched it once (I'll see it again when KRAD gets to it in his B5 rewatch on reactor.com), but in addition to disliking the whole Rebo and Zooty thing, the way I remember feeling about it is that it was an episode that was allowed to break the rules of the show because it was by a celebrity guest writer doing what he does instead of doing B5.

I'll take you word for it. Like I said, it's been years since I last watched it. I'll keep what you said in mind whenever I do a rewatch.

 

[marillion]

What's disturbing to me is that Amanda Palmer has been implicated by two of Gaiman's accusers, of being complicit. Palmer and Gaiman separated a couple of years ago and I figured it was because of the accusations. I've been quite a fan of her music, so if true, this really sucks.