Separating an author from their work? - YouLookFab Forum

Category

Off Topic

Welcome! Read about what to wear and how to wear it on the YLF Blog. Join the YLF Forum to ask specific questions or just chat about fashion and personal style. Or check out the curated list of things we love in YLF Finds.

Outfits Ensembles Trends Advice

Separating an author from their work?

Echo

Veteran

Is it possible to separate an author from their work? The reference to antiracist books in the book thread got me to thinking about HP Lovecraft.

I adore much of the writing of HP Lovecraft and the mythos it has spawned as far as gaming (RPG as well as video games) goes. Cthulhu became a bigger force than he ever could have imagined. But I have also read Collected Essays of HP Lovecraft: Philosophy, Autobiography and Miscellany, and I am well aware that he was, overall, a despicable human being. He was deeply racist, anti semitic and misogynistic. He was NOT simply "a product of his times" as his beliefs went far beyond that. There's really no way around it: Lovecraft was a white supremacist.

I have been pondering the ethics of compartmentalizing his work from his character, and whether that is really possible. But there is no way around the fact that popular gaming culture (even the horror genre in general - games, books and movies) would not be what it is today without Lovecraft; his work cannot be extricated from the work that came after it, and games like Bloodborne wouldn't exist without him. Heck, his influence on even the DC world is clear when villains are sent to Arkham Asylum. And everyone has heard of the Necronomicon. It would take an essay to describe his influences over the Marvel world. So how do we square the fact that Lovecraft was a truly awful person with the fact that his influence is applauded in almost all aspects of entertainment? Does condemning his beliefs also involve condemning his work as well as anything that was based off his work or influenced by it?

Revelations about contemporary authors' beliefs generally taints their work, as well. This actually extends beyond literature to all sorts of businesses and franchises, involving everything from the world of Harry Potter to whether one shops at Hobby Lobby. At least for me, it is impossible to ever think of these individuals in the same way again. Yet the "classics" were often written by deeply flawed people, but are still widely assigned to high school students. The O Henry Award is still given for short stories, despite the blatant racism in his writing.

So clearly my thinking on this is all over the board, but I am interested in the thoughts of people like you - from different countries, cultural backgrounds and experiences. How do you condemn the beliefs of people while still appreciating their work? Is it possible? Should classic literature written by racists of the last century still be required reading? Should awards still be given in the name of racist writers? Even so, those would be relatively simple changes; how do we separate a man like HP Lovecraft from the stories, books, movies, games, and the countless other things that reference his work?

Off Topic

37 replies

Latest reply was from Janet

rachylou

Veteran

It’s a dilemma. And a bitter pill. To be crassly blunt: Have to admit I won’t pay money to see a Woody Allen or Tom Cruise movie, but honestly think one of the best scenes ever in a movie was Kevin Spacey telling his mother (or was it mother in law?) to crawl up her cross and nail herself to it. I think that was called The Ref. I suppose it’s easier if people are dead and your money isn’t funding anything untoward unbeknownst to you.

I do think the classics should be taught regardless, so people can see how we got here and also to find out about their context, so they’re not read blindly. I could get more broadly into ethics here - you can’t do an evil to achieve a good, but you are permitted the benefits an evil has brought about…

rachylou

Veteran

Oh and also… read others’ canons… read what the English think of the French, the Chinese of the Middle East, etc.

Sal

Veteran

So interesting a topic Echo, and one I have considered when they play Michael Jackson at the gym or when I reflect on my past love of "Gone with the Wind" which is problematic on a few levels. And I don't have an answer.

One argument I read is that you can think about the others involved in the work - the actors, camera-operators, the other creatives and those that take one person's idea and translate this to the next level. Their work deserves to be honoured and enjoyed too.

But maybe that is a cop-out.

For me there are shades of grey, and I don't personally cancel out all things created by people who made a mistake, or who were ignorant and from a different era. But there are some people whose work I can no longer enjoy or appreciate.

Stagiaire Fash

Veteran

My issue isn’t with reading the canon; it’s with the way it’s read. Connections to dominant structures that are unjust in whatever way should be focused on, not brushed under the table. As Rachylou wisely says, we need to know how we got to where we are today. And we should absolutely read and watch things from other times, places, and cultures. We might learn something, it might be fun, or maybe both!

I don’t know a whole lot about gaming culture, but I do have a impression that the game my son plays, TF2, deliberately plays with the tropes of an entrenched culture of sexism and racism across most games (and of Cold War archetypes). If Gamergate changed that broad culture at all, my impression is that the white guys dug in deeper with their sexism and homophobia, reinforced by racism. But it sounds like you are closer to that culture than I am. What do you see? Would things have developed differently if Lovecraft hadn’t been so influential?

Sal, when I hear Michael Jackson, especially the early songs, my heart breaks for the little boy singing in strip clubs. Sit down girl, I think I love you. No, get up girl—show me what you can do! Shake it shake it baby….. He was 12 when that song came out, which means he was even younger when they started putting it together. No wonder he grew up twisted. Saying the cycle has to be broken is not metaphorical.

RobinF

Veteran

This is such a good question! Like Sal, I immediately thought of "Gone with the Wind", an old favorite of mine that I read a long time ago. I also read and loved many books that I re-read as an adult and realized had issues that never occurred to me as a teen or young adult. I still enjoy them but read with a bit more skepticism than I did originally. I do think part is the time period but it is hard to excuse something like racism from any time.

Janet

(website)

Veteran

Oh, not just writers but musicians, artists, actors, etc. For instance, I admire the work of Chuck Close, and got to see him speak some years back, but was reminded at his recent passing that he’s been accused of some awful behavior against women. My feelings are conflicted. Even if I were financially able to do so, I don’t think I could stomach buying a piece of his now, because of all it represents.

Anonymous

I have lots to say on this matter, having worked in publishing for many years, and being an avid reader too. But, I'm not feeling very articulate or capable of writing all that I think about this subject, so I'll just say this: it's a challenge, knowing now what we do about so many artists, political leaders from past centuries, writers, filmmakers, musicians etc . I do find it hard to separate one from the other . Deeper issues aside, many of the famous writers I met over the course of my career just aren't nice or interesting or enjoyable people to be around. Pompous , arrogant - ugh. There is one in particular who sticks in my mind who was so unlikeable and gross as to turn me off his writing forever. I could never separate that face from his writing after having met him .

slim cat

Veteran

Jack London comes to my mind - one of my favorite in childhood and teenage years. I see his work differently now and not sure how to feel about him as a person.
Some actors made me feel very turn off - some I cannot watch anymore.
Not sure I can explain all the feelings in a short clear manner - glad I'm not the only one.

Stagiaire Fash

Veteran

This is an interesting issue, one that has interested many, many people in multiple academic disciplines for decades (at least). I would not want to end discussion by saying “Google it if you don’t know”. Besides that being rude, I always think it’s a pity to chop things off like that; I’d much rather hear other people’s thinking and shape our opinions together. But if you want to discuss and are having a hard time concretizing or verbalizing your thoughts, googling might help prime the pump. Just a gentle suggestion, looking forward to good discussion.

rachylou

Veteran

I thought about that Fash before I mentioned the general principle in ethics about ‘permitted evil’… because I enjoy a little ‘light’ reading in ethics… because it’s also not light at all.

Also: Douglas Adams was one of the rudest authors I have ever met. His books were so clever and he was such a jerk… *sigh*

Stagiaire Fash

Veteran

Rachylou, I generally try not to judge people at all, but when it comes to how they treat “the help”—I’m judgey as can be! I don’t see a chasm between behavior in “small” things and thinking on “Important Issues”. Treating people differently according to status, or wealth, or gender, or race, or whatever shows that there is a divide in your thinking, no matter how much you try to cover it up with grand ideas, even—or particularly—if your grand ideas are about how to “help” those poor little unfortunates. The “help” that is often needed is getting knees off their necks.

Runcarla

Veteran

We want our favourites to be ‘good’, but is it a requirement to appreciate their work? And, the more elevated or famous they become, the more saintly we expect them to be!

Stagiaire Fash

Veteran

Runcarla, I think as poorly of this receptionist as I would of the biggest wig around, if they were to do the same thing. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5380095
What is your response to your own question? I gave mine above. The problem isn’t a “character issue” or something in the person’s personality—there is just one person, so it carries over. Aka the personal is political.

Runcarla

Veteran

I try not to knowingly support something if I have knowledge beforehand that doing so contributes to the furtherance of something I abhor, however I can appreciate charisma, skill, artistry, what-have-you regardless of the source. Censorship is a tricky thing and I worry about who is doing the censoring and when it is the difference between what is harmful and what is inconvenient.

Stagiaire Fash

Veteran

Absolutely we can appreciate skill and artistry of satan! But that needn’t lead us to agree with his ideas.

Can you explain to me how you see censorship as related/why you’re bringing it in? It sounds like you agree with what’s been articulated so far about reading widely to see people’s philosophies for what they are. Where does censorship enter in?

chewyspaghetti

Veteran

I had to think about this with J.K.Rowlings recent comments. I have loved her books, and the movies based on them. They were a large part of my chikdrens childhood and we visited the amusement park area dedicated to the world she created. Our love for that fantasy land and the stories she based on it will always be there, but Icanno longer financially support her ventures. Honestly, the knowledge that Inow have makes me not interested in delving into anything related to her anymore. I loved it, and now I let itgo.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

This is such a rich and important conversation. Your comments and concerns are thoughtful and astute, Echo, and I have been nodding along with so many responses here.

As someone in the arts, I often come across famous others in the field who consistently fail to live up to my ideals for decent human behaviour. (Ahem). So I know exactly what LisaP and Janet mean. It's disappointing to come upon an admired artist and learn that they are rude, arrogant, or worse. On the other hand, Carla has a point. Why should we expect our artists to be any less human than the rest of us? Also—this is a bit off track, but related—people sometimes hold completely unrealistic expectations of artists and want things from them they would never ask from anyone in any other profession. For example, people often ask us to work for free, to read their 400 page manuscripts and comment for free, etc. etc. OK, so we should never respond rudely -- but honestly, there are times when anybody would crack.

I think this is about personality, though, and that is sometimes separate from the work. Although our work very often, perhaps always, reveals who we are, we are also, often, our better selves in our work -- and some real jerks have managed to create amazing works of art that reveal truths they seem incapable of seeing in regular life, or reinforce egalitarian values they seem incapable of living by. Art is full of contradictions. That's part of its power, in fact. Ambiguity makes us uncomfortable, but it can also be a catalyst for personal and social change.

And then there are the Lovecrafts, etc. who are deliberate racists, misogynists, etc. etc. Who, as Echo says, are not just reflecting their times but actively promoting oppression and harm to others.

I really like what Rachy and S.Fash say about reading the canon but reading it to find out how we got here. Reading it critically, reflectively. And reading contemporary works the same way. (In fact, my recent book includes some re-readings of canonical works that meant a lot to me in light of personal and wider social changes. Note -- it's not academic at all, but literary.)

My kid (Asian, trans) like Chewy's, grew up with JK Rowling, so of course we've had those conversations around our dinner table. My kid takes a complex view, similar to Chewy's -- still loves the stories and the characters, but can't support the financial ventures. And you know...I still read Alice in Wonderland to my kid, too -- even though I knew about Dodgson's penchant for little girls. So...it's complicated! Like Rachy, I'm not paying to see Woody Allen any more, but yes, can still appreciate the hilarity of Annie Hall even as I gag at the gorgeous Manhattan.

rachylou

Veteran

I have to mention something… I have my own personal troll on Twitter. I commented that I had to love them anyways because they were funny, and a third party told me that… they did not admire my moral nihilism. So this may be a character flaw of mine, that I can be amused by that which I do not approve of… and I realise it can come as a nasty surprise to some that I do not always approve of that which may amuse me.

Just sayin’…

Suz

(website)

Veteran

Brilliant as always, Rachy.

Sloper

Veteran

I don't know "the" answer to this dilemma.

As a 60-something Jewish American woman, I've read many things over the years and have heard about the experiences of my parents. Am I inured to these things? Am I fatalistic about them ("yep just another white guy what can you expect")?

I've found this column recently in The Tablet. I'll be reading through the articles with interest!
https://www.tabletmag.com/tags.....nti-semite

rachylou

Veteran

Omg, Sloper. Slam.

UmmLila (Lisa)

Veteran

Lately, I’ve had many discussions with people about literature, art and history that center around what value we can take from the past, knowing that much of it was written by self-centered, self-indulgent, violent, white men. Some of their work can stay in the midden. And others have created enough beauty to warrant ongoing looks.

An artist friend and I are intending to visit this exhibition, in that spirit. https://www.gardnermuseum.org/.....myth-power

CarolS

Veteran

Sloper - the essays in the Tablet are amazing. OK, I've only read one so far, on Edith Wharton -- and IT was amazing. Thank you so much for sharing. The main point being, of course, that like most things in life "it's complicated".

Sloper

Veteran

Rachy and Carol - yep!

My husband and I were just watching an old musical on TCM - they had the Chinese stereotype, the Black stereotype, and the Jewish stereotype raising his hands and exclaiming "Oy!"

Jaime

(website)

Veteran

This is such a complicated topic - I am very interested in reading everyone's comments. Glad Suz weighed in as a working artist.

(Sloper - I remember the first time I thrifted something by John Galliano and I asked DH what he thought of me wearing someone known (especially at that time) for his anti-Jewish rant. He said no one in Israel would bat an eye - they assume everyone is an anti-Semite.)

Anyway, I do not think it is possible or wise to dismiss all works of art made by problematic people. Some are representative of their time and we can learn from them. Some are representative of the complexities of the human personality and we can learn from them too. Not quite sure about supporting their continued works though.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

Sloper - Mr. Suz says that if I have ever have a headstone it will read "It's complicated." And he's not wrong. Of course, "it's complicated" whether I will ever have a headstone. Because, you know, death is as complicated as life, it seems!

Sal

Veteran

Suz - that made me laugh (is that rude?)

I encourage my sons not to put sports stars on a pedestal - because we can find out that whilst they are fabulous basketball players or rugby players or golfers or tennis players - they may not be admirable people. I can seperate the sports genius of without admiring their personality or politics or views on the world. Likewise with Politicians - or Monarchs.

But it is harder to do that with creators (writers, artists) because their work seems to be them....

There is no perfect answer. Sometimes I say that "Good people can do bad things, and bad people can do good things." It is pretty simplistic but one way to look at the world.

Stagiaire Fash

Veteran

Lila, there’s a reason archeologists study middens.

But besides needing to learn from the past, another problem with just tossing out everything that’s racist is that we’d be left with nothing. Racism (anti-Semitic and otherwise), homophobia, religious animosity, sexism, and the like run throughout our society and legal codes. If we did toss it all, how could we write it new without looking at how it’s been done before?

Sloper, what an awesome idea for a regular feature! I’m not a fan of the publication it’s in, but isn’t that one of the points being made in this thread?

Suz, with reference to your claim about things “they would never ask from anyone in any other profession. For example, people often ask us to work for free, to read their 400 page manuscripts and comment for free”—that’s literally what the entire system of academic publishing is based on. Every single book and article is sent out for peer review by several individuals, without pay. Some people are trying to get that changed, but it is still far and away the expected model. I get really tired of claims from people, wherever they are in whatever hierarchy you’re looking at, that “I’m not a racist, I was just frustrated & that came out”. Obviously, person who just blurted out something they regret, you have that in you; how else would it be able to come out?

Sal, for seeing that athletes are fully humans just like the rest of us. The Players Tribune is a great source. It often deals with racism and dehumanization by fans. But your comment points to an important split in approaches to the parts of culture that Echo referred to. One is to say that culture is a thing—books, music, sports, fashion, language—that somebody else makes and we are users of. Another is to recognize our role in creating culture, that the end results are built through collective actions. So rather than simply consuming culture, we create it by our interactions with it, whether rolling up the pant leg or changing the pronouns or whatever. There is no avoiding anti-semitism or other racism, sexism, homophobia, etc possible, but by watching how they operate, we can be part of cultures to mitigate their effects.

Suz

(website)

Veteran

Sal, of course not rude! I'm glad I gave you a chuckle!

StagFash, I hear you, but with respect, the situations aren't really comparable. Academics (except adjuncts, a whole other category of unfairness we won't get into here) get paid a decent salary and can expect regular reviews/ raises/ funds to support research etc. Yes, they have to apply for those funds. (More work). And yes, publishers are asking them to do "extra" over and above what they would otherwise do (which is already way too much). But there's an argument to be made that this is part of the job. Much like supervising extra-curriculars is part of a secondary teacher's job. It means extra hours for no compensation, so it is unfair, but it's widely understood by those within the profession to be part of the profession.

Artists are (mostly) self-employed and in most countries, earn far less than a living wage in a typical year. They also work very hard for many years to learn their craft. So when people who haven't "put in the time" presume on them and what's more, ask them to work for free -- it feels all kinds of wrong.

Also, if you thought I was excusing racism, misogyny etc, then I must not have expressed myself clearly. As far as I'm concerned, there's no excuse for that. .I was simply offering a bit of context for what might come across sometimes as garden-variety rudeness or arrogance (and which, admittedly, sometimes *is* arrogance, as I also said.) The "that just popped out" comments don't satisfy me, either.

I agree with your comment that we'd essentially be left with nothing if we ruled out every "problematic" text. That makes it all the more important for us to teach children (and ourselves) to read reflectively and critically.

12