"Some judge of authors' names, not works, and then nor praise nor blame the writings, but the men." - Alexander Pope -
I think the 'mob mentality' on social media is a large part of this issue and is something that should be discussed more and something that everyone should consider when they post anything online. It has become a very big problem with YA discussion especially and I think it's important to think about whether the opinion you're giving is your own or one you heard/ saw somewhere else and decided you also believed without really thinking about it.
So the foundation of this post, separating authors and works, falls under the umbrella topic of reading and thinking critically. When researching the cases mentioned above, I came across a Tumblr post where the user stated the book they were 'reviewing' was harmful (The post is not linked. This is to avoid any harassment towards the user.) Personally, I have not read this book and cannot speak on the content it offers. There was little to no information given on the book itself and only a few excerpts were presented, which many others have claimed were taken out of context (Again, I haven't read it, so I don't know if these claims are false or not.) The user encouraged others to boycott the book in the following ways; reviewing the book on Goodreads, telling people that it's racist, posting about it online, and contacting the publishers to show your disapproval. If you know the book to be harmful, then, of course, these are reasonable steps to take and this is something I have no issue with. However, in this post, it is never stated to actually read the book first. These suggestions seem to be asked of anyone who sees the post, not just people who have read the book and can fairly review it or speak on it. In general, reviewing a book when you haven't read it is something that I do have an issue with. This one post alone isn't necessarily concerning. What did concern me was the number of reblogs the post had, and although I can't know for certain, I'm sure not all of the people spreading this post had read the book first. The post did contain a few links to longer, more in-depth reviews, but to make a post with the intention of spreading hate and only linking those reviews instead of mentioning their contents in the post is reckless. How many of the people who saw that post actually bothered to click the links and read the reviews before sharing it?
So how does this tie into separating authors and their works? Whether this book is harmful or not, I don't know, but this example shows how easy it is to spread this kind of hate. If you haven't read a book, you cannot form an accurate opinion on it. It's literally that simple. Because of these kinds of posts bashing books, authors receive a ton of harassment from users, including those who haven't read the authors works. I'm not saying this particular instance was harassment per se, but I have seen these kinds of things lead to harassment towards authors. I will never condone online harassment, I don't care what someone has done or is accused of doing. If an author is harmful, there are better ways to handle the situation than harassing them through social media. However, if the author was not harmful and the boycott controversy is started because of one or a few negative opinions and is spread by people who aren't thinking for themselves, then that is a huge problem and can end up being very damaging to the author.
Mostly, what I want this post to accomplish is to encourage anyone who reads it to think critically and to think for themselves. Something that I consider to be a large part of thinking critically, is separating authors from their works. By this, I mean taking a few things into consideration. (This will specifically concern fiction writing.)
1. Consider whether a book/work and any opinions in it is a reflection of the author and their beliefs or a part of the beliefs of the character.
For this, I'd like to offer Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov as an example. This is a book I have read and can speak on. Long story short, the main character in this book is a pedophile who hardcore creeps on his step-daughter. Every once in a while claims will pop up that Nabokov was a pedophile or condones pedophilia and the only evidence to this is that he wrote Lolita. The main character, Humbert Humbert, is not based on Nabokov and it would be ridiculous to assume that because he wrote a book where the character is a pedophile, he must be one too. The job of a fiction author is to create fictional characters who are their own people and have their own opinions and biases. But because some people are unable to separate the two, both Lolita and Nabokov are burdened with undeserved and negative misconceptions.
2. Consider whether it's the author or the book that you like or dislike.
Keep in mind that liking an author as a person doesn't necessarily mean that their book is good. I've seen plenty of people give glowing reviews to a book solely because of who the author is, and yes, this is sometimes when they haven't even read the book. Also, an author can be a good person and still write something offensive or hurtful. Sometimes fans of authors will defend the author without thinking about whether or not they're actually at fault. Disliking a book does not mean you have to hate the author and liking an author does not mean you have to think their book is flawless or belittle anyone who disagrees. If you judge a piece of literature based on its author, then you are not really judging the literature at all, and in doing so, you do a disservice to anyone who happens across your review of it.
3. If an author is harmful, consider whether their work is beneficial or not.
Sometimes an author could be 'problematic', but their work is helpful or significant in some way. This especially happens with classic writers who often times are sexist, racist, homophobic, or prejudiced in some other way. This is usually a result of the time period and general societal beliefs the writer grew up with (though keep in mind sometimes it's not and the writer is just a shitty person.) An author that comes to mind is H.P Lovecraft. I have read quite a bit of Lovecraft's work and to be completely honest, I love it. His work is fun and weird and hugely influential. Lovecraft in his personal life is known to have been lonely and a bit of a recluse. He has been accused many times of being racist and anti-semitic and as someone who has read his works, these ideas have shown up a few times.
However, Lovecraft as an author is known for creating weird fiction and his own special type of horror, Lovecraftian Horror. Because of this, he is still considered an influential writer and his work is praised for its undeniable literary significance. I'm not saying HE should be praised, just that his work should be separate from him as much as possible and any opinions on his work should be made based on his work alone.
It's also good to keep in mind if an authors work has been beneficial to readers. Recently, sexual misconduct allegations have been made against a few YA male authors. People are calling to boycott these authors by not reading their books because of this, but some of their books have been helpful to readers. These are books that have made people struggling with different issues feel understood and heard. Books that may have been life-changing for readers. Books that are being condemned because of the actions of the person who wrote them, even though the books itself is beneficial rather than harmful. And I think it's a shame that these books are given such a bad reputation because of this refusal to make a distinction between the two.
***Just a general tip - I recommend you fact check anything and everything you hear about another person, situation, etc. You can't know if what someone's telling you is true unless you take a few minutes to look it up for yourself. This is especially important to remember when it comes to sharing articles, pictures, etc. online without reading them or verifying if the picture/headline/whatever is true or taken out of context.
4. Consider whether or not you want to support the author financially.
Whether or not you choose to read an author is up to you and is a personal choice. But take into consideration whether or not the author you're wanting to read will benefit from you. With classic writers, most are not benefitting financially from you buying their books. But for authors that are still living and making money off book sales, there are ways to access their works without your money supporting them.
If you want to read an authors work without supporting them financially and you have access to a library keep in mind that it's an option for doing just that. You might also try borrowing these books from friends who may have them, or buying them from secondhand stores where the money from your sale will go to the business, not the author/publisher.
Similarly, if you do choose to support an author who's had questionable behavior, that's your decision, all I ask is that you be thoughtful when doing so.
✴ Okay, I think that's about as much as I have to say on the subject. If you have any thoughts or opinions on this topic, please comment with them as I really would love to get a discussion on this going and hear any other perspectives regarding this.
No comments:
Post a Comment