Finally, after much coverage of the story all around the world, the plight of Eva Gabrielsson, the longtime partner of bestselling Swedish novelist Stieg Larsson, gets some extended play in the English-language press, specifically the Times of London:
The legal battle between Larsson’s girlfriend and his father and brother could have been plucked from the pages of his three crime novels and is stirring just as much passion in Sweden, where at least one in three people has read them.
For months the nation’s attention has been focused on the plight of Eva Gabrielsson, a 54-year-old architectural historian. She lived with Larsson for 30 years until his death in 2004 but has inherited none of the estimated £10m he has earned since because they were not married.
“I think it’s a great injustice,” Gabrielsson said last week. “It would have been beyond Stieg’s worst nightmares to know that someone other than me was handling the rights to his books and to know that the money we planned to invest is gone.”
Gabrielsson is campaigning for a change in Swedish law that would allow common-law partners to inherit in the absence of a will, as was the case with her. Chances are that Gabrielsson herself wouldn't benefit from such a change (if, indeed, it's ever made) but one group's effort to help her out has already netted several thousand dollars' worth of support.
The Youtube clip, by the way, comes from "The Millenium Millions", a Swedish documentary about Larsson's life, work and the inheritance battle between Gabrielsson and Stieg's father Erland and younger brother Joakim. I'm in the midst of watching it and even though my copy has no English subtitles, the gist of the story - and how high the stakes are - is strong enough to merit the repeat broadcasts of the documentary since it first aired a year ago. And now that the film version of THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO has bowed at Cannes and is set for release in many countries, including Canada (though there's no distribution deal in the US as of yet) there's still another layer to what promises to be a long, drawn-out battle.
I'm sorry but I can't follow it -- need the translation. FWIW, no matter what, if it's not in writing, if you didn't get married thus ensuring the equity ...
Posted by: Jeanne Ketterer | May 19, 2009 at 11:02 AM
We cannot speak with very much authority or specificity about Swedish law; however, the squabble serves all of us well as a lesson: personal choices have consequences, and if those choices are not in conformance with the law (notwithstanding our disagreement with the law), then we (or someone else) must face the consequences. The Larsson case is not one of equity or fairness or emotions, it is one of matter of fact legalities, and Gabrielsson needs to face up to the facts. Again, it may not be fair, and it may not be right, but it is the law, and everyone in the business of writing and publishing should see a big wake-up call in the Larsson case.
Posted by: R. T. Davis | May 19, 2009 at 11:11 AM
The question of inheritance of revenues from a late author's literary output comes up more often than you'd think. Case in point: friend Tessa Dick's battle with her late ex-husband's trust:
http://totaldickhead.blogspot.com/2009/04/please-let-this-be-on-judge-judy.html
Posted by: Cantara Christopher | May 19, 2009 at 11:39 AM
If Stieg had written a will leaving all to his father and brother would she still be suing?
The fault lies with Stieg, not his father and brother.
Posted by: Judy Bobalik | May 19, 2009 at 11:43 AM
The story, of course, is more complicated than the Times' writeup and my own short summary, but from what I understand, though there wasn't a will proper, there may be some written documentation that Larsson and Gabrielsson intended to start a company to better handle the finances he expected to have from his novels (since it was already very clear, even before his death, that the books were going to be blockbusters - they were much buzzed about at the 2004 Frankfurt Book Fair, which took place about a month before his death, and I think some foreign rights were locked up at the time). He did make up a will in 1977 that made a leftist organization the beneficiary of his estate, but it appears that was deemed invalid by the Swedish courts.
There's also the question as to why they didn't marry, which appears to be based in Stieg's fear that having tangible connections on record would put Gabrielsson in danger because of his work at Expo, which exposed him to a lot of credible death threats. But that, too, is ultimately speculative. Ultimately it's a bad situation magnified by the millions being made on the books around the world, which has all manner of parties fighting for as much of the pie as they can.
Posted by: Sarah | May 19, 2009 at 12:02 PM
Next the illegitimate children will be coming out of the woodwork.
Greed knows no boundaries.
Posted by: David J. Montgomery | May 19, 2009 at 01:04 PM