It's Tuesday again, the day I'm on campus from 8:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. UGH.
I'm prepping for my Comp I and my editing class. The editing class is the hardest, because all I can find to say is "go edit, okay?" It's kind of like riding a bicycle; there's not that much theory. Though I plan today to talk about the instructive case of the editor that bought a story by a literal Nazi and then had to figure out what to do when their reading public objected.
Is it okay to buy fiction written by a Nazi? What about a TERF? Do the political leanings of the writer matter? Back when I was working as an acquisitions editor, I did indeed google everyone, just to make sure they weren't fascists before I bought their stories, but that was because we had fascists trying to punk us, a premier fascist himself, Vox Day, having brought their attention to our little zine.
I've seen people argue that you have to separate the artist from the art, which under that reading, what does it matter that your author is a Nazi/TERF/fascist? Except, of course, it does matter, since writers write what they know/believe, and so a Nazi's art, or a TERFs, is going to be informed by that writer's worldview. If you publish that work, you are, in a very real way, endorsing that worldview.
Also, usually what people mean when they say "separate the artist from the art" is "you shouldn't gore my ox, but it's perfectly okay if you gore oxen belonging to those people."
Hence, for instance, Rod Dreher, who is perfectly fine with trans people and black people and atheists having their work canceled, but screeched with outrage whenever anyone dared to note that Christo-fascist bigots maybe shouldn't be allowed to set the rules for the rest of us.
ANYWAY. I also have a night class, Fiction Workshop, with four texts on the worksheet for tonight. I've already read and written feedback for each of them, but our cursed printer is refusing to print, which means I'll have to take my laptop to class and work from that. UGH.
One piece of good news -- the high today will only be in the low 90s. A brief respite before triple digit highs resume.
2 comments:
On separating artists from their work, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I don't want to support bigots, especially if they're using that money to do evil. On the other hand, I do like to support the good things that people do. If they manage to write good books that don't have bigotry in them, I can see buying those.
Also, people are complex, so one could probably find reasons to boycott almost anyone.
Mostly the point is moot for me--I'm not a very good consumer, and when I do buy things, they are often second-hand (which doesn't directly support the creator, but does support someone who supported the creator, thus encouraging them to continue). As far as what other people choose to do, I have no problems with my friends going either way.
Separating art from the artist is a frame to apply as a reader (or viewer or other verber) - let the work stand or fail on its own merits and not on the reputation of the author. If memory serves, it emerged as a counter to Auteur Theory that was all about the canon of a given person's work and how its fine if one piece isnt very good because something something authorial vision.
Neither of these are particular good commandments for an entire worldview, to be honest.
Death of the Author falls totally flat the second you go outside one specific reading experience and enter reality. Acquiring someone's story means paying them (probably) and giving them a platform (definitely) so there is more to it than setting up a reading experience. Those actions of support have consequences in the real world.
Trying to apply a moral purity test and only read "good" works by "good" authors is impossible because we don't live in a D&D game where everyone fits into an alignment chart, but that doesnt mean its ok to shrug and give money to people who will use that money to make the world worse.
TLDR life is too complicated and pointing to one philosophy as an excuse to do a thing is bad.
Post a Comment