One thing that was jarring to me when I met my literary heroes was how disappointed I often was. Some writers really are as wonderful as the books they create, others...not so much.
The problem is, of course, that writers are people. And people are different from other people. They have different beliefs, vote for different candidates and have different levels of tolerance for those who, in turn, are different from them.
The other day, a writer was posting telling everyone NOT to buy Orson Scott Card's books. It appears this writer, a man, likes putting his genitals into other men. OSC is a member of a religion where that kind of thing is frowned upon. Ergo, in his works "If you're gay and buying Orson Scott Card's books, you're supporting repression."
Now this is not an issue of avoiding a book because of subject matter. No one likes to be preached at. I tend to avoid books with a heavy-handed dialectic even if I happen to agree with the author (which isn't often). No, this is someone calling for the shunning of a writer because of their religious beliefs.
The opposite happens as well. Openly gay or Republican or whatever writers will be shunned, not for their books but for who they are.
My question is, should we separate art from the artist? Richard Wagner was, to most people, a loathsome human being but man he wrote some good music. Modern day, there are lots of musicians I'll listen two that I wouldn't trust with my sister or my house or my bathroom for that matter.
You can make a case that the character of an artist is relevant for non-fiction or memoir. But should we take the artist into consideration for fiction as well? If someone snorts cocaine or cheats on their spouse or worships Shub Niggurath, the Black Goat of the Forest with a Thousand Young does that matter if they're writing about made up worlds and made up people?
The problem is, of course, that writers are people. And people are different from other people. They have different beliefs, vote for different candidates and have different levels of tolerance for those who, in turn, are different from them.
The other day, a writer was posting telling everyone NOT to buy Orson Scott Card's books. It appears this writer, a man, likes putting his genitals into other men. OSC is a member of a religion where that kind of thing is frowned upon. Ergo, in his works "If you're gay and buying Orson Scott Card's books, you're supporting repression."
Now this is not an issue of avoiding a book because of subject matter. No one likes to be preached at. I tend to avoid books with a heavy-handed dialectic even if I happen to agree with the author (which isn't often). No, this is someone calling for the shunning of a writer because of their religious beliefs.
The opposite happens as well. Openly gay or Republican or whatever writers will be shunned, not for their books but for who they are.
My question is, should we separate art from the artist? Richard Wagner was, to most people, a loathsome human being but man he wrote some good music. Modern day, there are lots of musicians I'll listen two that I wouldn't trust with my sister or my house or my bathroom for that matter.
You can make a case that the character of an artist is relevant for non-fiction or memoir. But should we take the artist into consideration for fiction as well? If someone snorts cocaine or cheats on their spouse or worships Shub Niggurath, the Black Goat of the Forest with a Thousand Young does that matter if they're writing about made up worlds and made up people?
There are a lot of factors that go into deciding where we should give our money and our minds when we're picking which books to read. Subject matter and genre are certainly valid discriminators. How far should we discriminate, though?
David Farland aka Dave Wolverton has said on several occasions that your writing should appeal to as wide an audience as possible. Other authors at the PNWA conference said it as 'don't piss off your readers'. Some go so far as to say you shouldn't, as a writer, discuss your politics, religion or sexual beliefs if you think they might alienate agents, editors and publishers.
It's a free country, mostly, and we certainly shouldn't be forcing anyone to buy anything they don't want to. Though, if you're in school, yes you will be 'forced' to read authors you might not otherwise prefer. But once you're out in the big, bad world, you're going to be exposed to all different types of beliefs.
It's a free country, mostly, and we certainly shouldn't be forcing anyone to buy anything they don't want to. Though, if you're in school, yes you will be 'forced' to read authors you might not otherwise prefer. But once you're out in the big, bad world, you're going to be exposed to all different types of beliefs.
Do we need to be fair? Do we need to separate the art from the artist?
RSS Feed