[ SECRET POST #3547 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3547 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 32 secrets from Secret Submission Post #507.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

The only extend to which recognizing "problematic" artists really matters is if you don't want your money supporting them. With HPL, obviously that's less of an issue. For someone who's still alive, obviously it's a conflicting situation. Though there are plenty of ways (especially in the case of authors) you can legally obtain their work without feeling morally questionable (buy second-hand, give an equal or greater amount than the cost of what you're purchasing to a relevant charity).

NO ONE should be policing your thoughts and feelings about an author, ESPECIALLY because those feelings objectively just don't matter to the outside world.

Learning or knowing about an artist's "problematic" aspects can and should be something for each person to place their own value on. Some people just don't care; they're in it for the art. Some will place absolute value on an artist's merit as derived from how "problematic" or not they are. Most people fall in the middle. Some will just like having that more in-depth awareness of the author as a person. (And how/if that colors an author's work is a debate I'll save for another time)

Everyone's moral compass is different, and it's absolutely a worthwhile (but complicated) effort to judge where yours lies, but for me, the most important thing morally is to do no harm. That can mean abstaining from certain things (I don't buy Chik-fil-a's food) or recognizing the importance of offsetting supporting someone like OSC's work (which is great, and absolutely has value independent of its creator) by supporting charities who seek to help LGBT+ individuals. But 'do no harm' includes harm to yourself. Do not let the love and respect you have for HPL's work be diminished because someone tells you he's "problematic," and you should feel "x" way about problematic authors. If that's the conclusion you come to on your own, one that you feel and know is right, great. But it sounds more like you're worried you're not doing the "correct" thing, and that's bullshit.

The discussion of authors as people is one that each person places their own values on. Please don't listen to anyone saying otherwise. Including me, if you happen to disagree. ;P