• Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    No offense, but just no. If you don’t like the art, but the artist that’s fine, absolutely no problem here, but supporting a person like J. K. Rowling financially by consuming their creation is actually a problem and should be opposed.

    This view is enabling horrible people and not okay.

    • Wolf Link 🐺@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      supporting a person like J. K. Rowling financially

      If I already own the books, I’m not going to toss them away just because the author is an ass. It doesn’t hurt her anyway. And you can buy books, movies etc. secondhand, as secondhand stores, private sellers and the like don’t have to pay royalties to the author. There are plenty of ways to consume their creations without supporting the creator.

      • Swiggles@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s fine. The problem lies in talking about their works which might encourage others to buy the books or merchandise etc. Unfortunately the best result would be if the work and the author would be forgotten, but that’s unlikely to happen. So at least when talking about the works it should never be omitted that the author is a horrible person who abuses her influence to hurt other people.

        Hence I disagree with the take. This way around the work should not be separated from the creator, because popularizing it is enabling even if you won’t consume any more than what you already have, others might.