Current Events > When it comes to the Harry Potter, can you separate the art from the artist?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I feel like this is the biggest example of trying to "Separate the Art from the Artist" since Cosby.

So what say you?

Man, anything with JK Rowling really opens up a can of worms huh?

Prestoff posted...

Man, anything with JK Rowling really opens up a can of worms huh?

I like the discussion of separating the artist from their art discussion, and I just felt it was the most relevant/current example.

We've seen to move on from Cosby, Louie CK, and Kevin Spacey. JK seems like the most relevant example now.

I absolutely adore Harry Potter my whole family does.

Yes. For context I'm gay and have several trans coworkers and acquaintances. But here's my thing - if you look deep enough into any business you're going to find money coming from or going to somebody you don't like, so just enjoy what you enjoy. All these people thinking they're sticking it to her by burning her books or boycotting the Hogwarts Legacy game and whatever are really just punishing themselves. Now, I'm not saying I'd sit down and have dinner with the woman, but objectively she is creative and brilliant and I enjoy spending time in the fictional universe she has created.

Yes. But I'm still pretty indifferent to HP anyway.

PsychicHippo posted...

she is creative and brilliant

Lmao

PsychicHippo posted...

Yes. For context I'm gay and have several trans coworkers and acquaintances. But here's my thing - if you look deep enough into any business you're going to find money coming from or going to somebody you don't like, so just enjoy what you enjoy. All these people thinking they're sticking it to her by burning her books or boycotting the Hogwarts Legacy game and whatever are really just punishing themselves. Now, I'm not saying I'd sit down and have dinner with the woman, but objectively she is creative and brilliant and I enjoy spending time in the fictional universe she has created.

There's a mistake you are making. The people making a big stink over Harry Potter, don't like Harry Potter and are just looking for any reason to shame people for liking something they don't.

It has never been about trans rights. It has always been about feeling superior over others.

Tmaster148 posted...

There's a mistake you are making. The people making a big stink over Harry Potter, don't like Harry Potter and are just looking for any reason to shame people for liking something they don't.

It has never been about trans rights. It has always been about feeling superior over others.

Stop stalking me.

This sums it up pretty much for me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a--Cc3Kd_kE

AnsestralRecall posted...

Stop stalking me.

I wasn't even responding to you. Not to mention I'm free to post in any topic on the board.

I'm mostly pissed at her more copying a lot of the Worst Witch books and giving zero credit than I am at some stupid washed up 'author' trying to stay relevant by jumping on the 'kids listen to me' propaganda wagon

Art is not art without context. Otherwise it is just a pretty picture.

This is just a statement that people use to defend their poor impulse control issues and their desire to indulge without guilt. Nobody ever says to "separate the art from the artist" in the sense that theyre going to abstain from the art and not give the artist money.

I don't think you should separate the art from the artist.

Jokes on you, Ive never voluntarily consumed anything Harry Potter in my life so this is a non issue for me.

i like hermione yes

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Wut? But that's the whole point of boycotting people

I voted for the third option.

Regardless of anything else, you can't deny that Rowling's work has had an enormous impact on an entire generation. Most of us have a lot of happy memories thanks to Harry Potter. I'm not about to tell anyone they have to discard those memories just because the one who provided them turned out to be a ghoul. So I don't hold anything against those who still derive joy from the Wizarding World. All I ask is that people acknowledge and denounce the ugly beliefs Rowling has revealed herself to hold.

But on a personal level, now that I know what she thinks of people like me, I just can't see her work the same way. Her views have retroactively tainted the Wizarding World for me. There was a time not that long ago when I would rewatch the Harry Potter movies almost weekly. Now, I can't imagine myself ever feeling comfortable watching them again at all. Because for me, those happy memories are lost, destroyed by the very person who created them.

As a lot of people have said before, all she had to do was keep her horrid prejudices to herself and she would've gone down in history as the author of one of the most beloved series of all time. Instead, she'll be remembered as a controversial and, eventually, reviled figure. When you've allowed her work to be such a substantial part of your life, it's hard not to have difficult feelings about the kind of person she turned out to be.

Easily. When I read a story, I'm far too busy enjoying the actual story to care about who wrote it. Same goes for enjoying pretty much any media.

I can, but the thing is I'm not going to give that artist my money anymore. If I ever find myself interested in their new work, which isn't likely because Hogwarts Legacy is bland, I'm just going to pirate it.

bigblu89 posted...

I like the discussion of separating the artist from their art discussion, and I just felt it was the most relevant/current example.

We've seen to move on from Cosby, Louie CK, and Kevin Spacey. JK seems like the most relevant example now.

Fair enough, I guess this is a good segway to make a discussion regarding this.

IMO, I share the same opinion as my Wife's friends. As long as the art itself is not reflective on the terrible things that the "artist" believes in, it shouldn't take away your enjoyment of it. If you start to see their work being reflective on the terrible shit they say, thats when I would take a step back and go "no thanks chief".

Voted third option. I'm fine with the original story as its complete and I've already read it and enjoy it. I won't buy anything from her in the future though.

Easily.

Nope. She's a terrible person and she keeps reaffirming it. I was never really a huge Harry Potter fan to begin with, so I have no problem distancing myself from that franchise.

I've had the lucky position of thinking Harry Potter looked like the lamest shit even growing up so I guess knowing the creator is also lame means I don't even need to.

A_Good_Boy posted...

Nobody ever says to "separate the art from the artist" in the sense that theyre going to abstain from the art and not give the artist money.

Right, because it flat-out doesn't mean that. It means, in this context, "enjoy the art for what it is, without letting the artist's life, personal beliefs, crimes, etc. tarnish your view of what they created." It's just a way of thinking... art can be enjoyed without thinking about how bad a person is or was when they created it.

For example: Kanye went off the deep end, but he still has great music.

I can separate them, but the series has enough problems on its own that I don't really like it the way I used to.

I don't need to but yeah