 |
| No, I don't know who the guy on the top right is... |
So the whole J.K. Rowling controversy (my thoughts on THAT can of worms can be found here which includes links to her now-infamous essay and a response from the Trans charity Mermaids on why she is wrong. I do not need to go any further into why she is not only wrong but is, intentionally or otherwise, causing active harm to the transgender community) has naturally got me re-evaluating my love for Harry Potter.
Now I should point out that has been going on for a while, even before the controversy. Rowling's new additions to the Wizarding World including her tweets, Pottermore, The Cursed Child and the Fantastic Beasts series have been mixed at best and terrible at worst. It's fair to say that the Wizarding World was not the juggernaut it used to be and is now running on fumes and stoked by a creator who refuses to let it be. But then again, Star Wars faced a similar problem after the original trilogy with George Lucas producing mostly bad prequels and making unnecessary changes to the original trilogy and Disney producing a very mixed bag of a sequel trilogy but I still love it.
So why has my love for Harry Potter waned? After all, none of her transphobias is in the text and I have excused other problematic works like How I Met Your Mother or Hamilton because of how entertaining and well-done they are. Maybe it's because I haven't read the books in a while or maybe it's because she's a huge part of the story. I know of some people who have denounced Rowling as the author and are enjoying it as a work of the fans and that's fine but I personally cannot separate her from Harry Potter. This got me thinking about other works with problematic creators.
Now I can't speak as heavily for books because I'm not much of a reader (I know, that should be rectified) but what about films? Respected directors like Quentin Tarantino, Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock and Joss Whedon have been outed for mistreating their actors and some like Bryan Singer and Roman Polanski have been outed as sexual predators. And yet Tarantino, Kubrick and Hitchcock are still respected filmmakers and I have watched and enjoyed at least one of their works.
What about films starring problematic actors? I sure as hell don't feel comfortable watching films starring Kevin Spacey but I'll happily watch Red Dwarf starring Craig Charles who has been accused of similar things. I suppose the real question is: Can I separate the artist from the art?
Well like many things, it's a case by case scenario. With Spacey, for instance, I can't separate his characters from the real-life monster he is because he often plays creepy or villainous characters and thus, I'm more easily reminded of how similar he is to his characters. But with other problematic actors like say Ben Affleck or Amber Heard (#JusticeforJohnnyDepp), it's easier to separate them from their characters because they play somebody different, usually heroic, and fully immerse themselves in their roles.
It's the same with directors. Hitchcock, Kubrick and Tarantino have all produced great films and whilst I cannot condone their behaviour, it's hard to deny that they know their stuff and I can appreciate the works of art they have created. In the case of Polanski however, I never want to watch his films, no matter how good they are because of the severity of his actions. And in the case of Whedon and Singer, their works aren't exactly masterpieces (Firefly and The Avengers aside) so it's easier to miss out on their work.
But I think at the end of the day, it all depends on how involved they are in the works of art. For instance, if George Lucas says or does anything wrong, I would still feel comfortable continuing my fandom for Star Wars as is because he no longer owns it. If any cast or crew member from Doctor Who did anything problematic, that wouldn't put a dent for my love of the show because the cast and crew are not only massive, they change all the time. Even the Harry Potter films don't suffer from this problem as much as the books because Rowling had little creative input and the cast have even posted their support of the trans community, some (like Daniel Radcliffe) in open defiance of her words. And my support of Red Dwarf, despite Craig Charles' alleged misgivings is due to the rest of the cast and crew not nearly being as bad as he is.
And what if they're dead? H.P. Lovecraft, for instance, is notoriously racist, even for his time, but I might still buy some of his published works because I won't be financially supporting him as you can't financially support the dead. It's the same with Hitchcock and Kubrick. I won't feel uncomfortable watching their films because I won't be financially supporting them so I can enjoy their works mostly guilt-free.
So yeah, it's very tricky and separating the artist from the art is easier said than done. Sometimes it's as simple as one author or as complicated as one bad egg in a sea of good eggs. Sometimes it depends on the severity of their actions or just how good the art is that it's easy to forget how bad the artist is. It even depends on if they're still alive.
It gets more complicated when the opposite happens i.e. when an actor, author or director have been so lovely that I appreciate their work even more. Keanu Reeves is not the best actor but he is now so famous for how kind and easy to work with that I love his films regardless. Adam Sandler's filmography has been very hit and miss but is also said to be one of the nicest and most sincere guys in Hollywood. Rick Riordon, the author of Percy Jackson, whilst not perfect has been very kind and supportive to the LGBT+ community, especially in light of the Rowling controversy that I love the Percy Jackson series more than ever. And some directors like Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorcese, the Coen Brothers, Zack Snyder and Wes Anderson have all been allegedly very lovely to work with.
So with that in mind, I don't think separating the artist from the art is the best idea because sometimes, it can help you appreciate a work of art even more. So yes, it's perfectly okay to distance yourself from Harry Potter because of Rowling's words just as it's okay to continue your support of the series regardless of what she said. I'm probably in the former for Harry Potter but I have been guilty of the latter in other stuff such as The Nostalgia Critic (though I'm sure as not going to recommend him to anyone). Art is subjective at the end of the day and anyone can choose to consume it however they see fit. You don't have to separate the artist from the art but you don't have to let the artist affect your enjoyment of it either. So enjoy (or condemn) whatever the hell you want. I don't care.
Until next time, fare thee well good people of the internet.
