#lest c/ncel c/ulture find it

[beardedhandstoadshark]

Question: Can i enjoy something that has a problematic creator? (WITHOUT supporting the creator's actions) I say this cause i like a lot of stuff but its creators are bad so i just don't know if it is okay to separate the art from the artist. I'm pissed that everything that i like turns out to have a shitty creator. These things make me happy and i simply can't stop liking them lol

Oh. Thats. A complicated issue I cannot give you a definite answer to and most likely doesn’t have a "right" one to begin with.

If they’re dead or their career‘s irreversibly in shambles or whatever, they can’t profit or gain any reach from it in any way, I‘d say separating art and artist works well here, since the art is here but the artist is, well, not.

But if they’re not… I guess it… depends on how much the art can be separated from the artist?

(Though this is, of course, not universal at all and you gotta look for yourself if you still wanna openly support it depending on the level of shittiness.)

If the creator isn’t actually using their creation or the platform they gained from it to fuel whatever shitty thing they did/do in any way, the main point left becomes giving this creator money to sponsor their craft. In that way, if you pirate their movie or take the book from a library or whatever, that sponsorship/perceived support falls away. In this case, talking about the craft itself doesn’t seem to be actually doing any damage because it’s reach has no connection to what the creator is doing, and is therefore separate. And ig bonus points if you make it clear the creator‘s actions aren’t/shouldn’t be supported?

If they are weaponizing that money or reach…you could try becoming a dead-end? Pirate/secondhand their stuff, but don’t talk about it in any way either. As nice as it is to talk about something you like, the main issue here is the spreading of the craft itself. As long as the craft is relevant within any general audience, it‘ll give the creator the funds and platform to spread their crap. Not paying for anything‘s obvious, but by engaging with others about the craft, that keeps it, and thus it’s creator, circling around. But if you only engage with it silently for yourself, it’s essentially in lockdown, and won’t be passed further (because you’re not acknowledging it’s existence to others they can’t know about it being a thing, thus not giving it any platform to stand on). Therefore, both the money and platform support fall away, since any reach that could be there gets cut off by you. Hence, a dead-end.

(I guess in a weird way talking about it can be compared to…reblogging? Even if you’re not giving the op any money, by reblogging their post more people will see it, and help op gain reach. But a post that was screenshot instead of reblogged won’t spread, and op won’t gain anything from it, no matter how much you like said screenshot. And we already know this really makes a major difference because of all the likes < reblog posts. The same logic applies here, just using it this time instead of fighting it like with the reblog’s).

Then again, this is probably still a case-by-case issue you gotta look at it yourself and decide if you’re chill with it, and other people (both on tumblr and different platforms) are gonna tell you anything from "engaging with their creation makes you just as bad as the creator“ to "separating the art from the artist always works“. There’s just no concrete answer to this without pissing off at least some people, as with anything that’s even slightly discussing problematic stuff.