On Separating the Art from the Artist (Spoiler Warning: I Can't)

[wyrmlore]

Another recycled Substrack post, which I started to discuss engaging with my nerdy hobbies in a conscious, mindful manner. A bit dated by now, but I still wanted to post it here.

 

Content warning for #MeToo and SA being mentioned.

 

With the various instances of authors and other celebrities turning out to be pieces of shit, the discussion of separating the art from the artist comes up again and again. Considering this is a new platform for me and yet another controversy has arisen, these are my two cents.

 

I guess it’s really difficult for famous people to not be horrible people.
 

 

What happened this time?

On January 13 2025, Vulture published the article “There is no Safe Word” about the sexual assault allegations to famous fantasy author Neil Gaiman (that first came to light during summer last year) involving multiple women. I should warn you that the events that this article describes are vile and disgusting — all trigger warnings apply, read at your own risk. I would not blame you if you decide not to read it and I’m defintely not going to rehash them here. These are also still allegations, but Gaiman hasn’t denied them. He only claims that these were consensual and that there was no abuse. Considering the differences in power dynamic and age, the vulnerability of these women, as well as the nature of the things that allegedly occurred, that still paints him as a disgusting creep. The NDA’s don’t really help his case, either. That’s not even going into the fact that, in a lot of times, men hardly get convicted in sexual assault cases because they’re so hard to prove. I’m inclined to believe the women. My heart goes out to the victims and I hope they’ll be okay.

 

Gaiman is hardly the first case of a famous person who turns out to be a despicable person and will not be the last. The recurring questions are: what do we do with such a person’s work? Can you separate the art from the artist?

 

The Death of the Author

In a lot of these situations, people say ‘The Death of the Author’, which is used as an argument to separate the art from the artist. ‘The Death of the Author’ was orginally an essay by Roland Barthes about literary criticism, where he critiques the notion of relying on an author’s intent and/or biography to discover a text’s meaning. He argues that this limits a reader’s interpretation of a text, because a text has multiple layers and meaning. Rather, the meaning and interpretation depends on the reader, not the writer. Though Barthes does argue for separating the art from the artist, it’s not in the way a lot of people think.

 

What Barthes is trying to say, is that my own interpretation of a text can differ from an author’s intent. If an author intended two male characters to be just very good friends, I’m free to interpret their relationship as queer because of, say, their character dynamics and their behaviour around one another, and that interpretation would be valid. If we’re in an academic setting, I’d be free to do a queer reading of the text and analyze it in such a way, even if the author did not intend or would even agree with my interpretation.

 

This is an entirely different thing from supporting horrible people without thinking critically.

 

Works do not exist in a vacuum

I have a master degree in English literature and literary studies exist because books — even fiction — say a lot about the society the author used to live in. What was perceived as acceptable? What wasn’t? What were the anxieties during that time? Consciously or subconsciously, authors put their experiences and world views into their books. It can be subtle or hard to tell, it can even be unintentional, but it’s there. This applies to other forms of media as well, but books are by nature a lot more personal than, say, a movie or a video game. It’s why we say older works that have elements that are now considered ‘problematic’ are ‘products of their time’. This still makes them valuable, because we can discuss why they are problematic and learn from them. This is why I’m against censoring older works, but that’s a different topic.

 

Also, I’m not implying that depicting horrible things in media makes the creator a horrible person. These are two different things entirely. I’m saying that separating the art from the artist doesn’t really work, because the work will always be informed, shaped, and influenced by the artist that creates it.

 

There is a second way in which authors do not exist in a vacuum, which especially applies if they are still alive: they profit. With every sale of a book, media, or merch item: they earn money and (in a lot of cases) power and influence. The issue becomes complicated if the money and power we (as fans/consumers) give them are used for things or causes that are actively harmful. In the case of, say, J.K. Rowling who uses her large and influential platforms to spread vile, hateful rhetoric towards the trans community, she even says she feels validated in her views due to the money that she still earns from Harry Potter. Orson Scott Card supports anti-gay legislation. If you want a very concrete example of what harm the money you put into an author’s pocket can cause: manga author of Rurouni Kenshin, Nobuhiro Watsuki, was charged with the possession of a lot of child porn. I doubt this dvd collection was a gift.

 

It’s one thing to be a bit of an unsufferable pretentious asshole on social media, who has flung a badly worded post into the aether. It’s one thing to make a mistake, but to be willing to acknowledge your ignorance and to learn (no matter how unforgivable mob culture online can be). It’s another thing entirely to consciously use your money and power to actively harm others. If the aforementioned allegations are true, Neil Gaiman has used his power and influence to sexually assault and abuse very vulnerable women, and used his money to get away with it. That’s disgusting.

 

And that’s also the primary reason why supporting people like Neil Gaiman differs from, say, buying a book by H.P. Lovecraft, who was a racist. Though the racism is present in his work, H.P. Lovecraft is very much dead. He no longer profits when someone buys a collection of his stories.

 

The answer, obvious and not so obvious

The obvious answer is to ‘just’ not support these horrible people, at least for as long as they are alive. Don’t buy any books, merch, or anything related to their IP’s. If we must consume their content, borrow from a friend or sail the seven seas. Don’t put money (or views through streaming) in their pockets.

 

Of course, I realize this is a bit more complicated. We often already bought copies of their books, sometimes even related merchandise. We loved them, we met people through them, we have memories we hold dear, and our attachment to these work might have gotten us through the tough spots in life. And that’s okay! There’s nothing to be ashamed of, we didn’t know, we were duped. There’s also nothing wrong with reading the books we already have or rewatching our dvd’s or using what we have. But, we know now, so let’s not financially validate their behaviour any further. And if we have an online platform, let us be conscious about what we’re communicating and normalizing if we’re knowingly promoting or recommending works by people that are actively harming others.

 

It’s not cancelling. These people suffer very few consequences from their actions, if they do at all. They will continue to swim in money regardless of what you or I are doing. Nonetheless, I definitely can’t financially or otherwise support people displaying such harmful, disgusting behavior in good conscience. And I think that’s definitely relevant to conscious consumerism and engaging in my hobbies mindfully, when I’m trying to reduce my harm. I’m extending the same treatment of avoiding horrible companies like Amazon, Starbucks, or Shein as much as I can to horrible artists.

 

A bit more personal

In my case, people spouting hateful bigotry or being vile abusers definitely tends to sour my perception of their work. If I look at the works I already own, displayed on my bookshelf, I’m reminded by their behaviour and become disgusted.

 

I was once, a while after hearing about Watsuki’s charges, gifted the entire series of Rurouni Kenshin (the person in question asked if I wanted a samurai manga they had lying around but no longer wanted to own, and it turned out to be this series). I gave it a go because I got it for free, but I kept being reminded that the person who made this was a pedophile while I was reading it, so I gave up after volume 3 and passed the whole series on to someone else. I also can’t look at something related to Harry Potter without being reminded of the hateful bigotry J.K. Rowling spreads. I decluttered my copy of The Mists of Avalon after I found out about Marion Zimmer Bradley’s child abuse situation.

 

I don’t demand authors to be perfect people, no one is perfect. They are humans, therefore flawed and they make mistakes. But there’s a line to be crossed, and after that point, I can no longer separate the art from the artist. For books and manga, especially, the artist has a very close connection to their works, and I’m reminded of their horrible and often disgusting behaviour every time I lay eyes on their work. I used to own several of Gaiman’s works, but I’ll be decluttering them because I can’t help but experience a strong sense of disgust whenever I look at them. Space is a premium and I’d rather use it for works that have a more positive association.

 

In terms of holding on to and consuming works you already bought in the past, I think the line differs with each person and the decision is personal. If you’re willing to hold on to your copy of The Ocean of the End of the Lane, or Good Omens because Terry Pratchett co-wrote that one, that’s entirely up to you.

 

Some concluding food for thought

In the end, I think there is a lot to be said about how we’re placing famous people/artists on a pedestal and how much power and attention we give them, almost to the point of worshipping them, and how much we identify with being a fan of something or someone. This is understandable, because the appreciation of art can be very personal. At the end of the day, however, we never know these people, not really, despite how they appear or present themselves.

 

We should also keep in mind there’s plenty of other great books, movies, games, tv shows, comics, and anime/manga out there, waiting to be discovered. There is more out there that we could ever read, watch, or play. We don’t need to jump through mental hoops and justifications just to cling to the work of a horrible person.