Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
in my opinion, no. an artist's worldview informs their art, so things like racism/misogyny/ableism etc etc seep into the works they create. consuming media like that uncritically can be harmful by reinforcing biases, conscious or unconscious.
there's also the more direct harm that can be done by financially supporting certain artists. jk rowling, for example, is funnelling any wealth she gets from the harry potter franchise into funding anti-trans organisations.
in my experience, people who want to separate art from the artist just want to continue uncritically consuming everything, without feeling guilt over the harm they could be doing by "voting with their dollar".
I disagree with this part. People are extremely complex and not even internally consistent with themselves. I don't think it's a given that any and all bad qualities they possess are necessarily going to be present in art they create.
I agree that it doesn’t always seep through. That said, I think you need to be extra vigilant when experiencing art produced by someone like Rowling. That bias may appear in unexpected ways and they shouldn’t be given the benefit of the doubt.
This is my stance as well. I don't want to knowingly consume something that was made by someone who held horrible views for their benefit OR my detriment. With almost unlimited media to consume out there, it seems so trivial to find someone with less problematic views who fills a similar niche. Rowling, Cosby, Chris Brown, etc all have contemporaries who have far less problematic views. And if one of those contemporaries are determined to have some similarly horrible views? We examine what biases may have snuck by us, throw them away, and move on. Humanity has no shortage of creative geniuses if you dig even an inch below the surface.