Skip Navigation
107 comments

  • I do my best to avoid art from controversal figures, but more importantly I avoid financially supporting them. Sometimes that's difficult, because they have been involved in so many things and that involvement isn't always obvious, but I try.

    One of the recent, easier examples is J.K. Rowling, whose stance as a self-proclaimed "TERF" has caused me to avoid her Harry Potter franchise except for the books and movies I already own (although I have still not had interest in those lately as a consequence of her stance). This is an easy case to avoid because it's (usually) obvious what she benefits from and what she doesn't, there is no guesswork or Googling. If it says "Harry Potter" in the title it is probably financially benefitting her

  • I'm not consistent about anything I do, including this.

    I do acknowledge that some of the creators I appreciate are awful people. I don't know if I would have picked up the art in the first place if I'd known then.

  • I don't pay that much attention to the latest gossip or trending scandals. And when I hear that there is a scandal, I refuse to jump on the bandwagon unless I take the time to get a clear understanding of the situation and the context, which takes time I may not have. Sometimes torches and pitchforks are clearly justified, sometimes they aren't or it's impossible to know.

    If something is a big enough issue that I hear about it, and it turns out that the artist is a confirmed shit head, I'll avoid giving them money. But generally speaking, it only taints their work if it reveals things you didn’t see there before. Sometimes that thing which can't be unseen is significant enough to ruin the experience.

    Then again, I also have no problem with consuming media that has objectionable elements to it, as long as I know about it going in. I've read Lovecraft knowing he was a racist and more, and yeah, it definitely shows (sources of terror: madness, the cold indifference of a harsh universe, immigrants, the working class, and race mixing). But while I'm not a huge fan and don't actively promote his work, I'm glad I read what I did, and would advise anyone interested in Lovecraft to go ahead and read it, as long as they know what they are getting into.

    So, while I can separate art and artist, I don't know how often I really need to. I can think for myself, I don't need to have my content sanitized, and I certainly don't need to purge my library based on nothing more than an association with someone who did something bad at some point.

    Gene Roddenberry was often a shitty person, but that doesn't change the positive impact that Star Trek has had on myself and others. We could throw the whole franchise out, but it would be a terrible loss if we did.

    • Shitty people can make good things. If the things they make aren't connected to what makes them shitty people, and they aren't using their position as a thing maker to spread shittyness, I don't see anything wrong with supporting them. If their things are disconnected from what makes them shitty people but they DO use their position as a creator to spread shittyness, I might still consume their creations but I won't support them. If their stuff IS connected to what makes them shitty people, I probably wouldn't want to consume it in the first place.

      For example, if a bigot makes good instrumental electronic music and isn't using their somewhat wellknown face to preach bigotry, I have no problem buying their music and recommending it to others. If they were actively being shitty with the face of their music, I'd pirate it and not spread the word instead. If their music was bigoted, I wouldn't want to listen to it to begin with.

  • Strict if the artist is alive. Much less so if they're dead. Much, much less so if they're dead, and so is everyone attached to them.

    I try not to separate the art from its context, I feel I get a more shallow experience by doing so. But, how much context, how I seek it out, etc are all up in the air. So when talking about a piece I'll mention something of the context, the writer being living garbage is easy context to contrast/support against their work.

    Ender's game being written by a bigot is interesting because of the contrast. H.P Lovecraft being a bigot is interesting because it is so obvious in the work.

  • Yes and no. The Art can be beautiful and the artist very gifted, i can recognize that part. It can also be related to their story, mood, society, environnement or not.

    However, if they are shit toward human being, i boycott them just as any brand.

  • It's tough when something that's been a huge part of your life turns out to be made by an unlikeable person. Two big ones for me off the top of my head are Megadeth and Orson Scott Card. Music and novels that were big parts of my formative years. While I still have fond memories of their works in my life, I don't go back and revisit them much from what I've learned about the people since then.

    In an age where anyone can get their content out there, there are too many people doing equal quality creations without the baggage, so I'd rather just move on to new creators I can spread the word about than trying to defend someone who's already seen success and tarnished it for themselves. It's not enjoyable to have to defend someone questionable to anyone else, or to myself.

  • Yep, was scolded on reddit for "making a post about an antisemite" when I mentioned Mel Gibson in a list of some 10 odd other actors I liked (I even mentioned in the post that I was only refering to his acting, not his personal character). Guess by the internets rules, Mad Max is no longer a good movie?

  • Depends on the crime. If it's bad enough their music is just ruined for me. Listened to a couple artist before only to find out the groomed or touched kids, just can't listen anymore without thinking about that.

  • If they're dead and didn't kill people I think I'm fine separating art fron artist when needed

    More specifically, if they were a not great person, nobody directly associated should be making money from the art I consume

107 comments