That is my take, or when a straight line can be drawn from the reprehensible beliefs or attitudes to a specific set of ideas in a work of art/philosophy.
Example, If Wagner did an opera on The Merchant of Venice that espoused an Anti-Semitic viewpoint, I’d shun it. I wouldn’t use it in my art. I wouldn’t ban it, because I am not into banning.
I think it also matters whether those views are expressed in their work. Lovecraft’s were, extensively. I can’t think of any anti-Semitism in Matilda or the BFG or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (I guess I might have missed something). Orson Scott Card’s best work has very little to say about sexuality, let alone homosexuality. Terry Goodkind actively wrote his books to spread his fucked up ideas.
Edit: got pipped to that one…
Not really. Good point for more debate, because you can interpret your way into seeing it in HPL’s work, but there isn’t a Straight Line per my personal codex. You have to scry into, and allegory your way into seeing it in HPLs work. Hence, it isn’t a platform for advocacy of those beliefs. So I don’t find the works problematic.
Despite the way it’s portray or discussed in media, or even from Lovecraft himself, it’s not always obvious; it’s subtle so expecting straight lines is not reasonable. It also becomes more obvious though if you look at his work outside these favorite stories and then reread and suddenly the connections are there.
We had two people here who tried to refuse to even acknowledge the problem to the point where you don’t ever get to number 2.
Instead, they seem to get angry that number 2 was even discussed in the first place. And let’s face it, sci-fi / fantasy, historically, hasn’t been kind to minorities or women so… it’s a phantom fear to think that political correctness is some sort of evil out to deprive us all of those genres. It’s another slippery slope argument that holds no water and is designed to try and shut down all conversations without the willingness to dive into the merits of a single one.
Well. I would probably concede that Lovecraft wasn’t outright advocating for his beliefs, but I don’t think you need to do much interpretation to see the prejudice in some of the direct quotes upthread.
I don’t disagree, but I think without foreknowledge of his personal belief system, that becomes a very difficult task. Hence, my “Straight Line” test. Which, btw, is my test alone. Anyone can think however they think about whatever, in my book.
And that user was particularly vexing in his personal interactions with the planet.
I know you meant Jesus Christ as an expression, but it could be read as being on the list of things to be banned!!!
Also, the original, jewish Christians (Peter being the leader ) wanted to keep curcimsuon and maintain Christianity only for the Jews. Ergo super racist!
Paul obviously won that particular debate…hence Christianity subverting Judaism in much the romantic empire, precisely because they dropped the racial (circumcision) requirement.
Anyway, the bible should be banned because it is super racist and actively condones genocide, before we bother banning Tarzan etc.
Such a sweet Empire. Cuddly, thoughtful as a partner and a lover…
Our recently departed friend was not the only one doing this.
I missed this Kristi. Let’s be plain; Farewell My Lovely has some straight up racist moments in it. Marlowe’s racism, the Police’s racism. Racism.
But it’s acceptable to me in the art, because it is Marlowe’s POV. So the author isn’t offering a mandate on the world, or advocating certain behaviors. In fact, he is showing his protagonist’s racism and the institutional racism of the LAPD (and the specific racism of two cops) in '39 (the protagonist being less racist than the cops are, but still racist). I’d argue that he is portraying 1939 as 1939.
Autocorrect is our loving friend! 😂😂
So, I’ve learnt Terry Goodkind is kinda not good?
Roald Dahl liked Hitler (I read every Roald Dahl book as a child and even acted in at least one play - the fantastic Mr. Fox, so this is news for me, and saddening.)
Etc etc.
Educational.
I stand by my original.original . thinking that the motivations behind the original article are…suspect.
At best virtue signalling or attempting to stir up controversy.
At worst attempting to rewrite the past and reframe the entire discussion, which is a sneaky horrible tactic.
Personally speaking, sorry guys but I don’t care if HPL was racist or not.
I haven’t read the books but honestly I don’t think I’d care if it turned out Tolkien or CS Lewis were racists either.
CS Lewis is dangerously close to a fundamentalist Christian for me, and it is hard to read a Narnia book after you make the (obvious?) Connection between Aslan and Christ.
If that makes me a bad person so be it.
Bring on the tentacles.
Narnia was explicitly a Christian allegory.
My understanding is that while both Tolkien and CS Lewis were strong Christians, Tolkien disagreed with Lewis about the literary worthiness of allegory. Tolkien wrote with the intent of creating myths informed by Christianity, but not intended to be allegory.
I now await the inevitable corrections for my errors. :)
I think these questions are missing two more, ignoring the article part:
3.) Does an artist’s work directly or indirectly push these questionable views?
4.) Do works derived from an artist’s work continue to push these views?
In this scenario, I think it is a majority opinion that Lovecraft’s works do push these questionable views. And this then leads to question 4 and do derived works also push this view? This is the struggle I personally find. I don’t have a problem with Lovecraft works being available, I do wish any collection would have a prelude to outline his racism, but that isn’t required.
I do have a problem though if others can use his work to derive art that carries forward these views. If we acknowledge some of the metaphors in savages and fish people and tentacled gods and such, and those are carried forward with that same baggage, I think this can cause some significant friction.
If a derived work doesn’t carry any of this imagery forward, I personally think it should still be examined closely because it will inherently carry some baggage from the previous work. Is this baggage not enough of a hindrance for what is being derived? Could the same art be created without any baggage? I think this was part 1 of the article. If the Mythos is being used to derive these works, what in the Mythos is unique enough to be worth this baggage?
Try finding a copy of Song of the South by Walt Disney, even though Zip A Dee Doo Dah won an Academy Award in the 1940s. They never even released any format home video in the US because it seems like such a cultural stereotype.
Similarly, you will never see the original Porgy and Bess produced now, because of it’s extreme period racism, but the music still stands out and is popularly used outside of that context.
You’ll see later my “Straight Line” test. As well, I don’t think it’s a given that HPL’s works propagate his views, without the foreknowledge provided by his personal letters and then using critical reading to establish allegories.
Which doesn’t meet my (personal standard) “Straight Line” test.
It was too good to pass up. :)
In fact, one could make the argument, that Card’s seminal works not only don’t spread his uglier views, they actively subvert and work against them. He’s rather interesting in this respect.
So I dont have a problem with people who choose to read Card, likewise I respect when some chose not to support his work either. People chose not to listen to Pink Floyd because of drug use, but I still love Animals and Wish You Were Here. John Schaffer may be a raging jackwad, and have a bit much southern reverence, but The Glorious Burden is one of the most epic metal songs ever and I rock out to it.
And the reality is that someone who is safe, completely uncontroversial or inoffensive? They’re probably also bland. Full. Pastiche.
There has to be some separation of the art and the artist, otherwise that way lies madness. Set your own personal threshold, and understand it. But also recognize you’re probably a hypocrite about it since whatever artificial line you draw is probably broken by some artist you enjoy.
So more sensibly is to judge the work. Is the work tainted by the artist foibles? Are there elements that can be teased out as still of value? In a case like HPL what can we take from his work and use, while being mindful of the danger spots.
Honestly sometimes the best adaptation of a work may become a commentary on the original. If Lovecraft racism infests the work, as it does, then turn that on it’s head! Use that expectation against the reader, let that become a way to surprise the reader like a good magician uses distraction to hide the sleight of hand.
As always the answer is to be critically mindful of the work you are adapting. Know it beyond the superficial, understand it’s themes.
Spot on here. To use the Chandler Farewell My Lovely example above, a film could make clear that Marlowe, while the Protagonist, is approaching certain situations in a racist way, showing him as flawed, without even having to alter dialogue or characters from the book. The adaptation could be true to its time, and via tone make clear what was unacceptable about that time.
Nuance.
I understand but don’t agree personally with the Straight Line test. I personally see enough allegorical evidence in Lovecraft’s work that shows me he is pushing these views. Regardless, I think it also doesn’t matter. You can stop at answer 3 and say no. So the rest of this discussion is purely rhetorical in that case. If you think 3 is true, then it is important to move onto 4. That’s why I thought these appended to your first questions well, it is a basic flowchart for personal reflection on these matters.
Also, I think that part is key, it is personal reflection. These discussions are important to have, but no one is advocating censorship or making any material unavailable. It is more a personal decision on what parts of the questions bother you and where do you bow out. However, if the majority of consumers say that anything at level 4 is repulsive, maybe a creator should take that into consideration when making a piece to understand the likelihood of backlash or loss of sales.