Can you separate an author from his or her work?

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

I didn't bring up lovecraft first that would be Jester Canuck

So it was.

Well as i said I enjoy Battlefield Earth despite his views and the fact that others feel that it's bad writing and the majority of the thread is focusing the book aspect and you are right it's not just books either but that's what the main discussion is focusing on, if you wish to go off on the road about the over all issue then by all means go with it.

No, I think the current focus is fine.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Which just gets us back to the question upthread about using findings obtained via unethical research.

That would be hard to judge. Were the findings replicated? If so, were they replicated using unethical research methods?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

That would be hard to judge. Were the findings replicated? If so, were they replicated using unethical research methods?

While I am definitely not an "ends justifying the means" kind of guy, there is a certain point at which, even if the methodology is unethical, factual findings have their own merit.

If, for instance, the early studies that determined the existence and force of gravity were all done- and replicated- with human

E
X
P
E
R
I
M
E
N
T
S
_________________




...and were never repeated in any other way, researchers who went forward from that point using that data but behaving in a way we would not find reprehensible might be criticized for not replicating the results of the earlier experiments with inanimate objects.

But they could assert the defense that the data gathered- unethical though we deem the earlier methods- was valid, and the only thing gained by repeating the experiments ethically is some vague moral high ground.

 

[Kramodlog]

I'm sure if you* looked at your collection of art, books music and movies- owned or just dearly beloved- you'd eventually stumble upon a few writers, artists, actors, musicians, etc. whose beliefs or actions are antithetical to your own. Possibly even abhorrent.

Anyone a Roman Polanski or Woody Allen fan? Garry Glitter? Jimmy Page?




* as in the nonspecific, Everyman "you"

Why is Woody Allen dragged into this?

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

While I am definitely not an "ends justifying the means" kind of guy, there is a certain point at which, even if the methodology is unethical, factual findings have their own merit.

If, for instance, the early studies that determined the existence and force of gravity were all done- and replicated- with human

E
X
P
E
R
I
M
E
N
T
S
_________________




...and were never repeated in any other way, researchers who went forward from that point using that data but behaving in a way we would not find reprehensible might be criticized for not replicating the results of the earlier experiments with inanimate objects.

But they could assert the defense that the data gathered- unethical though we deem the earlier methods- was valid, and the only thing gained by repeating the experiments ethically is some vague moral high ground.

Excellent. We birth agree that there is a difference between fiction and scientific findings.

 

[Elf Witch]

Why is Woody Allen dragged into this?

I would think because of the allegations from his daughter Dylan that he sexually abused her.

 

[Janx]

While I am definitely not an "ends justifying the means" kind of guy, there is a certain point at which, even if the methodology is unethical, factual findings have their own merit.

If, for instance, the early studies that determined the existence and force of gravity were all done- and replicated- with human

E
X
P
E
R
I
M
E
N
T
S
_________________




...and were never repeated in any other way, researchers who went forward from that point using that data but behaving in a way we would not find reprehensible might be criticized for not replicating the results of the earlier experiments with inanimate objects.

But they could assert the defense that the data gathered- unethical though we deem the earlier methods- was valid, and the only thing gained by repeating the experiments ethically is some vague moral high ground.

Not that my idea that we should burn every copy of Mein Kamf is particularly wise or anything, but the difference between Mein Kamf and Newton's Effects of Gravity on Humans is that we can't take back the knowledge on the latter. Once we all know that stuff falls down, it's kind of a done deal.

We can, however, destroy every copy of the books (well, that's usually pretty hard as some yahoo always hangs on to a copy and starts a cult). Nobody needs to learn from the originator about gravity. In effect, Newton can lose credit for it because he used human subjects pushed from trees.

That's revisionist history of course, but sometimes you have to explore the bad ideas to make it more obvious why the good ideas are a better choice.

 

[KirayaTiDrekan]

Regarding Orson Scott Card...

I will never watch Ender's Game or read any of the man's books, because of his associations. In that regard, I don't differentiate between author and work. I debated this with some friends who read Ender's Game as kids, before they knew about his problematic views. Because of the nostalgic association, they didn't want to look too closely at OSC's politics. I can't do that. Even if I did have a nostalgia-based fondness for something, I would set it aside if I discovered that the authors were problematic in some way.

Lovecraft is a little harder to deal with...

The Cthulhu mythos is everywhere, practically, but especially prevalent in gaming. Material inspired by it is in Pathfinder, D&D, and just about every other RPG out there that has fantasy or horror elements. With that in mind, I have an e-book compilation of Lovecraft's works that I plan to read someday to see the source material, so to speak. As others have noted, authors who are now dead aren't going to profit from the sales of their work any longer, so that makes it slightly easier.

If an author/artist/creator/whatever is still alive makes all the difference it seems. Regardless, I will generally do a little research on a person before consuming their work, a background check, so to speak.

 

[Mallus]

In the case of Orson Scott Card, I don't separate him from his work. He earns money from his work which allows him to continue to spew his hateful beliefs and politics. I did not watch the Ender's Game movie as I do not want to give such a hateful person any of my money.

Serious question: do you subscribe to any media streaming/rental services, ie Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant, Spotify, etc.?

Ender's Game is on Netflix. So are a lot of Roman Polanski films. I don't even want to countenance the sins of musicians. So in some small diffuse way, everyone who subscribes to these services provides financial support to artists who have espoused terrible views and/or committed and been convicted of heinous crimes.

Are you willing to carry your position that far? If not, why?

 

[Kramodlog]

I would think because of the allegations from his daughter Dylan that he sexually abused her.

Exactly, why is he dragged into this? Anyone can make allegations.

HS touched me when I was a kid.