Reading books by bigots.

[Mouthwash]

So, this came up a while back on the book thread; I didn't want to read any of Iain M. Banks' books because of his refusal to let them be sold in Israel. Now, I don't want this discussion to spiral off in that direction, so I'll make this a general question: Do you read or enjoy works by people who are bigoted or that you just can't stand? Obviously a lot of gays don't read Orson Scott Card, but yet a lot of them still presumably do.

What about anti-Semites? Tabletmag is making a whole collection of articles called "My Favorite Anti-Semite" about antisemitic artists or writers that they still are inspired by. But to me that seems actually easier than consuming works by BDSers because anti-Semitism is taken so little seriously today. Jew haters seem incredibly primitive; I don't take offense from reading ancient viewpoints that would be considered horrendously bigoted or out-of-touch in the modern world. Who gets flustered by Heliocentrism or fascism anymore?

So at what point do you draw the line? Is there a line? Or is art something immutable and unrelatable to the artist and his beliefs? Now, I personally think that the link I posted above is ridiculous and self-aggrandizing- the right to have a federal marriage license isn't even comparable to the right to freedom from slavery. And I am aware that there are plenty of people- reasonable people- who think my view on Banks is idiotic, even if they don't agree with his politics.

 

[Kyriakos]

While being a "bigot" can downgrade your actual thoughts to even significant degrees (assuming one deserves that term, of course) in art it is rarely an issue deciding the value of the artist. Wagner is a decent example, since many of his compositions are very notable. You could argue that they are in music so they cannot present the views he may have had, but there were notable writers who were against some races or in favor of nazis and so on (Celine, Hamsun, to a degree Lovecraft etc).

Of the above Hamsun is (in my view) one of the main authors of the 20th century, and is likely to remain as part of the literary pantheon forever.

So views on races do not really play much of a role in regards to one being a decent artist or not. I suppose that they rarely even are presented in those people's art anyway.

 

[JollyRoger]

I spend enough time reading judicial opinions by bigots - no need to expand any further.

 

[Tahuti]

Even if I disagree with most of his opinions, I find Julius Evola very enjoyable to read and occassionally he present opinions that are echoed by mainstream philosophers in a very good way. You'd almost would believe that his general outlook of radical traditionalism is right!

Except that he is an Aryan supremacist.

 

[PhroX]

I won't avoid a book purely because it was written by someone who's views I dislike. If said views start appearing too strongly in the book though, I might well stop reading it though.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I stopped reading Orson Scott Card's science fiction ever since he was a jerk to me at NonCon 6 in the early '80s. Many years later I tried his non-SF... and it's just really poorly-written crap.

A couple of years ago I got into an argument with Stephen Goldin, who decided to post his opinions of Marion Zimmer Bradley, while advertising reprints of his own novels. He had a lot of personal issues with MZB's husband, and felt she didn't do enough to support him (Goldin, not her husband). And horrors - MZB actually had the gall to write several excellent SF novels with gay protagonists!

I take things in context, and decide how much/little the author's own opinions matter to me. There are many things Heinlein thought that I find disturbing or even disgusting, but I still enjoy most of his books. The ones that have too much of his own agenda in them simply don't find their way onto my bookshelves.

 

[Mouthwash]

I stopped reading Orson Scott Card's science fiction ever since he was a jerk to me at NonCon 6 in the early '80s. Many years later I tried his non-SF... and it's just really poorly-written crap.

I've heard that his Alvin Maker series was pretty bad... although I'd be interested to hear what he did to you. (I also don't know what "NonCon" is; Google doesn't turn up anything.)

I take things in context, and decide how much/little the author's own opinions matter to me. There are many things Heinlein thought that I find disturbing or even disgusting, but I still enjoy most of his books. The ones that have too much of his own agenda in them simply don't find their way onto my bookshelves.

I normally don't mind an author's politics- but what if an author had declared that he would be "boycotting" people of your beliefs/political affiliation/nationality and not selling his books to you? Would you read him, even then?

 

[El_Machinae]

No, I wouldn't care too much about their boycotts, but I'd feel free to counter-boycott them. It's both groups expressing their rights. If I really cared, I might try to figure out why they were boycotting.

But, I don't like reading books by bigots if I don't already agree with their bigotry (my bigotry is obviously eminently reasonable). I don't like being poisoned intellectually.

 

[Kyriakos]

Regarding Iain Banks, although i haven't read any full story by him, i did try to read the Wasp Factory.

It was a famous book in the past, particularly in the 90s.

I did not like how it went. Later on i read a synopsis and i would not say the overall idea was that good (if the synopsis was accurate, anyway).

That said, one of the most boring and badly written books i read (most of) was that one attributed to Anne Frank. The book is not good at all and it is a farce that politics made it some sort of 'classic'.

 

[warpus]

That you think Banks was a hateful person or even bigot is hilarious. As for your question, I take it on a case by case basis. So far nobody's banned per se, but Orson Scott Card would be up there, if I actually wanted to read any more of his books. Last one I read was "Empire" and it really stunk, so I've moved on. I would read another one of his books if I thought it were good enough, but nothing's coming up on my radar. His status as a jerk makes me want to read his books less, but if there were one that was good enough, I'd override the "ban".

 

[Tahuti]

I don't like being poisoned intellectually.

It is a bit of an uncanny valley here: If you are familiar with a relatively limited range of opinions, you are very prone to be poisoned intellectually, but if you are knowledgable - perhaps even formerly a follower - of about every intellectual movement, you are more capable of thinking more broadly without fear of getting intellectual poisoned.

Throughout my relatively young life, I probably tried out almost every ideology, from anarcho-capitalism to communism, from brights-ism to radical traditionalism. I would dare to say I'm pretty immune now to any ill-regarded intellectual tradition, unless it delves into issues that haven't been explored by any stream of thought I know of.

 

[Kyriakos]

Fiction which is political tends to be bad anyway. In my view even a slight focus on specific (as in polarising for example) politics can make art be worse than it would have been without it.

Iirc the only text which was centered on a political premise (the rise of nazism) and had some degree of interest for me, was Ionesco's "The Rhinoceros". But i only read it once, when i was 17. It is a massive play anyway, and i recall that one reviewer of it in Paris in the 60s had commented that "During the impossibly long three hours that the play took to finally end, mr Ionesco unfortunately convinced us that he is able to think"

 

[Mouthwash]

That you think Banks was a hateful person or even bigot is hilarious.

Boycotting an entire people is bigoted. Nice thread derail.

As for your question, I take it on a case by case basis. So far nobody's banned per se, but Orson Scott Card would be up there, if I actually wanted to read any more of his books. Last one I read was "Empire" and it really stunk, so I've moved on. I would read another one of his books if I thought it were good enough, but nothing's coming up on my radar. His status as a jerk makes me want to read his books less, but if there were one that was good enough, I'd override the "ban".

Pathfinder was good, although it has plenty of flaws. Ruins was even better.

 

[Ajidica]

Boycotting an entire people is bigoted

If I remember correctly, Banks is boycotting the sale of his works to the state of Israel. If, as you say that makes him a bigot, it is nice to know my entire college campus was bigoted when we refused to purchase school clothing (or anything else, really) made in South Africa in opposition to the Apartheid policies.

 

[NovaKart]

Normally I separate someone's work from his/her person which is why I have no problem watching anything by roman Polanski or woody Allen. I suppose if someone is saying he actually doesn't want certain people like those who live in Israel to buy his books it might be different.

I stopped reading Orson Scott Card's science fiction ever since he was a jerk to me at NonCon 6 in the early '80s. Many years later I tried his non-SF... and it's just really poorly-written crap.

A couple of years ago I got into an argument with Stephen Goldin, who decided to post his opinions of Marion Zimmer Bradley, while advertising reprints of his own novels. He had a lot of personal issues with MZB's husband, and felt she didn't do enough to support him (Goldin, not her husband). And horrors - MZB actually had the gall to write several excellent SF novels with gay protagonists!

I take things in context, and decide how much/little the author's own opinions matter to me. There are many things Heinlein thought that I find disturbing or even disgusting, but I still enjoy most of his books. The ones that have too much of his own agenda in them simply don't find their way onto my bookshelves.

Are you ever going to tell us what orson Scott card did to you? I'm dying of curiosity.

 

[El_Machinae]

It is a bit of an uncanny valley here

That was a great turn of phrase to make your point!

 

[bathsheba666]

Boycotting an entire people is bigoted. Nice thread derail.

Mistaking an entire people for one state where some of those people live, may be unfortunate, but at least displays your poor analysis in stark clarity.

I kind of find my desire to read any other Card books somewhat poisoned by what I've heard of him, I guess it depends how loudly they shout.

 

[Mouthwash]

If I remember correctly, Banks is boycotting the sale of his works to the state of Israel. If, as you say that makes him a bigot, it is nice to know my entire college campus was bigoted when we refused to purchase school clothing (or anything else, really) made in South Africa in opposition to the Apartheid policies.

I responded to this and will not further derail the thread.

 

[bhsup]

If the book is good, I really don't see why the author's political views should matter. I enjoyed Battlefield Earth, for example, but I kinda think the US govt should forcibly dismantle Scientology.

It's much like actors and actresses. If I refused to watch them because of their idiocy, then I would have missed out on great shows like The West Wing with Martin Sheen. Wonderful, outstanding actor. Not going to deprive myself him his works because of his politics.

 

[El_Machinae]

In general, I'm a fan of boycotting. If you disagree with the practices of a company, boycott. Tell me you boycott. Tell me why. Boycotting is a type of "putting your money where your mouth is", well, the inverse thereof. I respect it.