#it's mildly related to the gaiman discourse going around right now

[tavina-writes]

so deeply deeply tired of the discourse where if an artist/creative gets revealed to have been a vile and shitty person irl we just start throwing their art out wholesale to the tune of "omg well I KNEW they were a BAD person!!! look at how AWFUL AND BAD and SUCKY their art was!! it was CLEAR it was never ANY good. Anyway I never bought the hype about them because their art was BAD!"

like, I'm not arguing for continuing to hold onto art that you now dislike because the creator was a vile person. you don't need to do that.

but this "oh I can tell if a person is good or bad if their art is good or bad bc bad people make bad art" is just such a reductive and honestly tiring approach? Good people make bad art. Good people make good art. Bad people make bad art. Bad people make good art. there's no correlation, stop trying to say there is.

we must learn to separate the morality and value of art from the morality and value of the creator.