This whole thing reminds me of the thing with Orson Scott Card, who wrote a very important sci-fi book but who's also a raging homophobe. And the book, Ender's Game, has important things to say about war and violence and so on. And the homophobia is what it is.
This is what I mean about nuanced views. In this hyper-informed era you're going to have a bad time unless you accept that people can be very wise and very stupid and that you can love them and hate them at the same time.
It does. It's in the video explaining everything she has said and breaking down each point of her giantass essay on transpeople and tweets.
I think that claiming an author's works should no longer be read or appreciated because of unrelated statements is a bit silly.
If someone's a serial killer (and this is a veeery extreme comparison, she's no murderer) then that serial killer should be in jail, but if that serial killer writes a ten part epic about a magic goose. you have every right to enjoy that ten part epic (and you might get some social/cultural understandings reading it, knowing that the writer's a killer, since that's probably reflected in their writing, or surprisingly unnoticable)
As for the Death of the Author thing, I think it's fair to say Rowling was actively preaching tolerance. Heck, even the biggest self centered morons will still try to preach good values, because they rarely realise they're breaking those morals themselves. If anything, it's interesting to read a work from an author whilst trying to understand how their world view is slanted. People with bad ideas get those ideas from somewhere after all.
People still enjoy Lovecraft's works, and he is very openly racist and idiotic in those, but it's interesting to see how this sad reclusive man from the days of old would look at the world and see fear in every corner.
So regardless of what you think of Rowling herself, there can still be value in reading what she wrote (unless you're bored by what she writes, or just too uncomfortable to enjoy it)
I've seen Rowling say some dumb things, but nobody should have their writing license revoked for being ignorant or bad at arguing.
I mean, just to be clear, her writing license has clearly not been revoked since she literally just released a new, pretty explicitly transphobic (especially in conjunction with her very recent tweets and rants) book under her awfully chosen pen name with terrible history of its own (and has many people have said, with her thing for meaningful names the chances of her not having looked it up are slim). So, she's not cancelled in any way, shape or form.
I would agree with you, but was it said somewhere previously in the thread that a recent book of hers, and some of the harry potter books, had problematic coding for trans people, jewish people, etc. It would be great if JK Rowling's problematic beliefs were completely separate from her fiction, but they aren't. And it's really hard for authors in general to not unconsciously weave their prejudices into their art, regardless of how open minded they are.
Well, we definitely can't look at them in the same old light. We can't just think of them as harmless kid's stories if the author has started using her fame to promote an agenda of hate. We can't continue to buy her books, not if it gives her validation and possibly money to spend on disagreeable causes. We can't send the message to publishers that this behavior of hers is okay and doesn't affect their bottom lines at all.
I'm not saying she is cancelled, but rather arguing why I don't think it would be better if she were.
I hadn't caught the thing where she wrote an openly transphobic book. I don't think it's right to say she doesn't have the right to make or sell it, but it's definitely more complicated than that and sellers have every right to refuse selling such a book.
And that's where my wording was rather terrible. The first statement and the second one don't go together very well.
But I do stand by it that there is value in the writings of the fool. It's important to try and understand the world from the point of view of someone who doesn't understand you. Because the more we understand how people consider reality, the better we can be at catching when people are wandering in the wrong direction and at helping them understand our own views.
Ah, that's a complicated issue.
As in the previous comment, I do think there's value in the writings of the fool, but when it comes to children, we do need extra caution.
I wouldn't throw Oodolf Hootler's book Moin Kompf on a fire for its historical/psychological value, but I wouldn't want the kids to be reading it, since it preaches all the wrong things. (and that's perhaps a rather extreme comparison again)
I don't think JK Rowling shouldn't be allowed to write or publish, or that people are wrong for continuing to read her work, but I do agree that we need to take care with these things since just letting people do whatever can get out of hand real fast.
Huurgh. I don't like not having a clear answer. Your earlier comment is pretty spot on, when you mentioned Orson Scott Card.
Sure, but I disagree with other parts of that statement too.
It's so disingenuous to preach tolerance while simultaneously being intolerant. It muddles the message, and brings into question who that person really thinks is worthy of tolerant behavior. I'm not going to listen to a bigot about tolerance, not especially if they put that message into their literature. Not because I can't separate the art from the artist, but because on top of being bigoted, I realize the person in question is willfully ignorant or a liar. And in this case, she's all three. Ah, allegedly. . .
They did answer your question, with a video. There is also google, if you're actually feeling particularly curious. Or, the radfem tweets from the source. Either way, there are resources.
At the end of the day, JK Rowling had to say nothing. She could have just sat back on her billion dollar wizard empire, she could have shut up forever, but she didn't. She actively chose her role as a vocal TERF, and I think we all need to remember that.
But there's the thing. If that person preaches tolerance, it must be because they believe that tolerance is good. If they are themselves intolerant, it must be because they don't understand they are being intolerant. There is value in trying to understand why they think the way they think.
You don't need to learn tolerance from her books. If anything, the value of reading it comes from trying to understand how or why she misses the mark.
People aren't bigots just because, and the most effective way to reduce bigotry is to try and understand the people we think are wrong, rather than brushing them off as not worth trying to comprehend. If we can't do that, then we have no hope of improving things or getting people to understand.
Of course, that doesn't mean you should read the books, just that it isn't inherently wrong to do so.
Just a quick interjection here: It's often a waste of time to truly try to convert the utterly bigoted to your side. While some will change their minds, it takes years and years of dedicated effort. Much likes cults, deradicalising someone from an extremely bigoted belief takes the person realising for themselves that the rabbit hole has taken them to a place they don't want to be. The issue that comes is that a lot of people in these rabbit holes believe that they are right and it's everyone else that is wrong. The way that bigoted groups work as well is to lovebomb people and then isolate them to keep them locked off from rational people who oppose the group.
So understanding how people fall into these holes is super interesting and helpful as a method of prevention and healing once they come out. But actually getting people out? That often takes a lot of work by a skilled therapist who specialises in deradicalisation work.
I think another thing to consider in these discussions is whether or not the original author is still alive and profiting off further support. For example, H.P. Lovecraft was a horrible racist (even considered racist during the racist early 20th century) but consuming his products now no longer profit him and potentially support a harmful ideology(to my knowledge, at least). However, if you found out that an author you like, who is still alive, used their profits to support a movement you are vehemently against, I'd say there's a lot more to consider in that case. I don't know if Rowling is actively funding anti-trans organizations or anything, but to some people their standards for offering their support are lower than simply funding harmful ideologies. Some people might get around this by only consuming their products through illegal means, thus not giving them financial benefit, but that's another conversation.
I'm not saying the above is necessarily my view, in fact, I'm still not fully clear on where I stand on this issue. I know if I found out a creator I've given money to was using their profits to fund, say, a white supremacist organization, I'd have no issues not consuming their product anymore. But what if there's no evidence they financially support these organizations? Or there's plausible deniability that they just say really off-color stuff every now and then but might not necessarily be a white supremacist? Or maybe we find out everyone is donating to these white supremacists and my money's going to them no matter what? Those are the types of scenarios where I might think "It's too much effort to try to be a good person, I'll just go back to blissful ignorance."
People are not perfect and we should still read Harry Potter despite what J.K. Rowling said. Yes, you can disagree with what she did, but there is no need to take your anger all the way out and start burning her magic books. What she did was a mistake, and she like everyone else is not free of sin. humans are like this sometimes. Humans are complex.
Every cent that goes to her potentially goes to more transphobic, harmful things getting pushed ahead by her influence and funds; her ""justifications""" for her beliefs already have been used by other people. There's no justification to buying the new game, most of all "we need to support the devs" (devs rarely get sales bonuses, they've already been paid), much less any new books/movies where she has full control - and old ones give her more influence and engagement. It's also directly giving eyes to the new book where it's ENTIRELY about transphobic beliefs, so hey how about just find a nice wizarding school book on Tapas and giving money to that author instead
I'd just like to point out, it was not a mistake. The first half dozen or so times, sure maybe you can believe it was a mistake. But a full essay? You don't write an essay and than a transphobic book by accident. Mistake is not the right word. Mistake implies she didn't mean it.
oops I fell on my keyboard and made several rants and essays for years about how trans women can take away women's rights. My bad, lol. Only human
Really it not on me or you to forgive her, @WhiskeyClone it on the people she insulted.
I can understand giving someone the benefit of the doubt, but Rowling is being bigoted and willfully ignorant. This isn't a mistake, its a pattern of behavior. Should people send her death threats or degrade the people who enjoy and purchase her work, no. But down playing what's she done said and how it affects others, is not helping the situation. Chalking up her behavior to a 'mistake' is pretty irresponsible.
I feel like you're talking about two different types of people. Let's face it: people throw around -phobes and -ists way WAY too easily. Many times, the person on the receiving end would never consider themselves to be whatever the label thrown at them is. IIRC, Rowling does not consider herself to be transphobic or a TERF so when she gets approached in that way, it really doesn't do much to help. Those types of people I do believe you can talk with and at least come to an understanding. If she says something factually wrong, the best thing you can do is use your voice and own platform to spread the correct information. But screaming out -phobe or -ist, people are just going to shut you out and ignore you (general "you" here, don't mean anyone specifically).
Then there are the people who are actually part of brainwashing groups who are really just looking for a place to belong or let out their rage at the world or whatever. Those people need help in a completely different way. No matter what you say to them, it doesn't matter. I watch a lot of flat Earth "debates" and I can tell you, a lot of them repeat the same things over and over. This is because flat Earth is basically like a cult and they spread around videos and have discords/FB groups where they repeat the same thing. No matter how much evidence is presented to them, they absolutely refuse to see it. Presenting arguments doesn't help and many of them need real, professional help and someone close to actually get them out of the group.
Onto the issue of the thread, I'll just say that I agree that cancel culture is complete BS. It doesn't do anything, it oftentimes backfires and it only riles up people and pisses them off and divides us more. If you don't like what someone has to say, use your own platform to say what you think is right. At the end of the day, we will never agree with each other. We will never completely understand each other. Oftentimes, the intentions of the person saying or doing the thing is misunderstood, especially on Twitter with its character limit really, really doesn't help.
The only time cancel culture works is when someone has gone out and committed an egregious crime. Like I think most people can agree that Shueisha continuing their contract with the Rurouni Kenshin author is wrong, though thankfully they did cancel their contract with the writer for Act-Age who had gone out and attacked two middle school girls.
Adding a JK Rowling's worth of legitimacy to the anti-trans people seems pretty egregious.
And the people protesting aren't really trying to change her mind or those if her followers. They're trying to warn everyone else and maybe send a message to the corporations. You don't want any part of this controversy.
It's here today and it'll be gone tomorrow, that's my honest opinion on it.
Like I think if you try to make change through shame it just never works. It just makes people more cemented in their ways.
And when it comes to people losing their minds on twitter about this...I think it's partly covid? Being quarantined forever? the worst year ever just happening outside our windows?
And...honestly the book funds thousands of artists and writers. She ain't even writing the series anymore. The only people you're banning is the artists trying to get a foothold in this industry. If you want to ban her works ban her new works she's making now not the old stuff.
And one last thing--as a millennial who is old enough to have been Harry's age when the 3rd book came out. We don't care. We've known about JK for a good long time and we were there for the series, not for JK Rowling. (I blocked her like 5 years ago, y'all are late!) The more she has added to the series the more the HP fandom was like "stawwwwp your work is so bad!" And the stuff that was made without her input so much was actually pretty good.
So I don't really see it as fully her creation anymore! In the same way I don't see other book inspired movies as owned by their respective writers. These things start as books by one author--and then after a while...it's just owned by everyone else. She'll slowly lose more and more control and then...Harry Potter will be free to do whatever it wants.
I've never read harry potter, so I have zero attachment to JK and her work (closest I've come to consuming harry potter at all is enjoying the theme park at universal and having watched one of the fantastic beasts movies) so as an outsider I'll say: I might've given her post-HP works a chance since she was such a massive figure in the writing world, but her recent behavior has solidified my drive to never touch a single thing she has or ever will produce. Honestly don't care how masterfully it's written, if the writer has harmful beliefs, it'll bleed into the product in one form or another. That new mystery novel about the gender nonconforming murderer is soaked with it.
And I don't see it as cancel culture personally- JK is a massively successful person with probably enough money to last 5 more lifetimes. She is still getting book deals. She has a video game releasing centered around her creation. She has a theme park. She has people bending over backwards to defend and rationalize her words. She's still succeeding. I'm just making the personal choice to avoid someone who thinks people like me are confused and need fixing, and distancing myself from others who tolerate that belief.
There's precedent for writers and other artists using their fame and influence to get into politics, start harmful social movements, or both. It's never too early to abort these things, is what I mean.
You can like the Harry Potter series and NOT like JK Rowling. series =/= author imo.
Throwing away precious childhood memories because some add-on DLC that happened years later shouldn't change the past.
It's like enjoying Last of Us but not liking Last Of Us 2 XD or playing Pokemon Red but not Pokemon Sword.
We just need to set our own line for when the journey ends.
I think its pretty stupid, honestly. Like there's more hot button issues at hand than a wealthy writer whose swimming in money at least a decade and half past her golden years when she was still relevant. Reminds me of all the times the internet tried canceling notch and it didn't do jackshit. Just don't give them money or publicity if you want them to fade into obscurity. All this is doing is making more people buy her work for the outrage.
Soft power is simply being in good odor with a lot of people. To counter it, you have to make a stink.
People have done a lot of damage with a lot less than what Rowling has. Constant vigilance!
congratulations, you're giving her what she wants lol more money and publicity. You know she's trying to rile people up right? It's exactly what notch was doing and other rich people on twitter once they got bored with their money.
I’m here to clarify on my post. I did not defend anyone. I was just trying to point out that we saw the worst of human nature, and that this is how some humans are. I knew about the transphobic thing, I just never knew that it was this bad, that she published a whole fricking essay on it. I was ignorant about this topic. Rowling might never change, and this is what we have to accept, that she will never say she’s sorry. We don’t have to forgive her. While I never liked her books, I’m disappointed. People should still read Harry Potter if they feel like it and enjoy the movies but enjoy them with the consciousness that what she did was horrible. We shouldn’t to give her attention. I will say no more. Agree, or disagree but I will not add on because this debate has already gone up in flames. I suck at debates anyway.
I always fallowed the "separate content, artist and fandom" rule, so yeah, harassing someone just because they enjoy something that was created by a problematic person just sounds stupid, especially because they might just not know who they're supporting.
If you want to cancel someone, do not go after their fans with pitchforks and such, just inform them, and if they still want to consume the content, show them how to get it without supporting whoever you're canceling.
But if they still support the problematic creator after that... Then still don't go after them! You'll just give them a martyr complex and they'll assume a "us vs them" mentality, and then they'll just get worse than members of a creepy cult, trust me.
There seems to be the implication that there's no way to push back against the rich and powerful once they reach a certain level. That after a certain point there's no such thing as bad publicity. And to an extent this may be true . . . but I refuse to buy into the idea that there's nothing we can do, that we have no control over how the cultural conversation goes. Culture belongs to everybody because it comes from everybody. Learned helplessness is not the way forward and we ought to distrust anyone trying to push it on us.
Someone has to say that something is wrong when it is wrong. Someone has to call out the ridiculous. Someone has to say that the emperor has no clothes.
There’s a really easy answer actually- you stop talking about them
Cancel culture is shit cause it only hurts the little guy; all that happens to the big guy is that rumors start happening and WOM starts happening- and that ONLY helps the people your upset with- there’s plenty of people who had no idea that JK had a crime series and NOW people know and some people are even like “well the magic system was shit in HP but the mystery was good so maybe crime books are better?” And they don’t give two shits about the controversy cause - as I’ve already stated - humans only have so much brain power each day to be responsible consumers especially where we’re talking about consuming entertainment.
This only helped her.
You wanna make a statement and reduce her income? Stop talking about her.
But first we all have to agree to shun her, and that means a certain amount of conversation and maybe a sign for the latecomers.
And if someone hears that something is hate speech and then goes out if their way to buy it, that's not the fault of the people calling it hate speech. If I advocate being a responsible and ethical consumer, that doesn't make me an accessory to someone's irresponsible and unethical purchases.
Yes! Also, Karl Popper's paradox of tolerance:
"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."
Basically, if you allow sheep and wolves, you're only going to end up with wolves in the end. Tolerating transphobes endangers lives. We cannot tolerate JK's intolerance.
Remember when JK Rowling was awkwardly trying to pander to SJW with bizarre random trivia?.......those were wild memetic/cringy times.....Maybe those are the consequences of trying to appeal to a group she doesn't understand and now it's reaching its logical conclusion......
Now, to wonder if she is transphobic.........Can someone sumarize what did she say/do that was transphobic and who would be kind to share links to the tweets or whatever?
Saw the links to long winded videos about the issue, but i wonder if i am asking too much when asking people to:
