• 155 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Posted by Hunter5024 (5538 posts) 8 months, 18 days ago

Poll: Would you boycott art because you dislike the creator? (391 votes)

Yes, if the creator's an asshole, I don't want them to have my money. 29%
Yes, but only if they use their money to fund things I'm morally opposed to. 18%
I'm not sure. 9%
No, I don't believe my opinions about the artist should affect my enjoyment of their art. 30%
No. If Hitler made a badass album, I'd totally buy it. 13%

So my brother wrote this long post on Facebook about how we should all boycott the Ender's Game movie because Orson Scott Card is "a bigot and a Mormon." I feel like this is kind of an interesting attitude considering that before he knew Card's opinions, he was actually pretty fond of that series. There have been a lot of things that people have backed out of supporting due to the controversy surrounding them, things like Pax and Penny-Arcade, Chick Fil A, Roman Polanski, and even FEZ. I'm curious what you guys think about all of this.

Personally I feel like if there's something worth buying, then I wouldn't let the creator get in the way of my purchase. If they go and spend their money on something awful, I don't really care, because they earned that money fair and square by creating something I enjoy. Am I a homophobe because I love chicken sandwiches?

#1 Posted by Imst (61 posts) -

No...If you like his/her art..doesn't necessarily mean you like the creator... LOL

#2 Posted by Yadilie (380 posts) -

I wouldn't but not everyone is the same. I only wish people would shut the fuck up and stop using places like Facebook as their soapbox.

#3 Posted by Vinny_Says (5685 posts) -

I think there's a limit...and that limit is probably me giving money to Hitler so he can build more extermination camps because I think his rap beats are phat.

#4 Edited by SharkEthic (1004 posts) -

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

#5 Posted by BeachThunder (11689 posts) -

Hitler made some nice paintings, just throwing that out there:

#6 Posted by KoolAid (836 posts) -

What's interesting about this cases is (as I understand it) the rights to ender's game were bought long ago and Card does not stand to make money from ticket sales. So this is all a moo point.

I could be wrong though.

#7 Posted by Imst (61 posts) -

Hitler made some nice paintings, just throwing that out there:

That's a nice painting :D

#8 Posted by Hunter5024 (5538 posts) -

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

@koolaid: I sure hope you're right, cause then I can tell my brother how dumb he is.

#9 Posted by TruthTellah (8525 posts) -

@hunter5024 Honestly, it depends. As a principle, I would say that it is perfectly understandable for myself or anyone else to not want to financially support someone or something they are opposed to. So, if someone feels the artist or the people who benefit from you purchasing something is not someone they wish to support, then they have all the right to have that be a deciding factor for them.

Having said that, I personally don't do that often. At least not to a major extent. There are objectionable people benefiting from most things in the world, and if the thing itself isn't objectionable, I usually don't mind paying for something that may benefit someone who may use that money for something I don't necessarily agree with. I can understand objecting to purchasing or financially supporting some art though, as art often reflects part of the individual that made it, and even if we can justify it to ourselves, we are still somewhat complicit in supporting what they do.

So, it's a bit like buying diamonds that might come from a war-torn region where what amount to slaves are used to get them. I would prefer to not buy such diamonds, and fortunately, efforts have been under way to reform that. Or we might consider a lot of modern technology or clothing. Quite a bit of it is currently made through the efforts of some countries allowing people to be treated poorly, and our lives are enriched on the backs of abusive practices. Because of this reality, I can completely understand some people deciding to stay away from things which directly or indirectly support what they don't believe in. Personally, I am more likely to choose to continue to support something while encouraging that there be reforms. I have serious issues with the government, but I'm not just saying to hell with it. I would prefer to get change to occur rather than simply stand against it outright.

If something isn't very necessary though, why not boycott it? Just choose something else. I see no issue with that. I prefer food prepared in certain ways and vegetables grown locally. That isn't a big boycott; that's just a personal preference to try to not support things I don't want to support. The same can certainly occur with art or anything else. So, even if I don't always feel like protesting outside of a food market, movie theater, or art gallery, I'm still going to express my preferences as a consumer.

#10 Posted by TruthTellah (8525 posts) -

@hunter5024: Also, yes, Orson Scott Card is getting no money directly from the movie. He has no rights attached to it, and he stands to make no money from it or its merchandising.

Though, he does stand to gain from increased sales of his book based on the publicity of the movie, and he has said he will be making more Ender's Game-related books to capitalize on this greater attention.

So, your brother won't be giving any money to him directly. It can simply be argued that the movie's success ultimately adds to his own success. Whether that is a tenuous connection or not is for you and your brother to decide.

#11 Posted by SharkEthic (1004 posts) -

@sharkethic said:

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

I thought you phrased the question just fine. My answer is exactly the same, and in my world, it's most definitely a matter of common sense. Would I give my money to someone or something that find morally repugnant? No, I would not.

#12 Posted by Hunter5024 (5538 posts) -

@truthtellah I agree with you, it's certainly okay for someone to take this stance. The only point where I feel it crosses a line is when they shame other people for not taking the same stance as them (as a certain brother whose about to look very stupid is currently doing).

@hunter5024 said:

@sharkethic said:

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

I thought you phrased the question just fine. My answer is exactly the same, and in my world, it's most definitely a matter of common sense. Would I give my money to someone or something that find morally repugnant? No, I would not.

Let's not say it's morally repugnant then, we'll put it in less extreme terms. If you found out Jeff donated money to a political candidate you didn't like, would you cancel your membership and stop supporting GB? If it's common sense not to give your money to things you disagree with, then surely you would?

#13 Posted by JoeyRavn (4948 posts) -

As long as they are not actively using the profit they make from their art to support something I'm totally against, I'm fine with giving them my money. I know Orson Scott Card is a piece of shit, but AFAIK his ideology doesn't really creep into Ender's Game, right? That being said, there's a difference between "disagreeing" with something and finding something morally reprehensible. Not liking Kanye West because of his huge ego is one thing, supporting homophobia is another.

#14 Posted by TruthTellah (8525 posts) -

@hunter5024: In such cases, I think it's reasonable to perhaps attempt to convince people to reconsider their support of something. I just don't think shame is always the best way to go about it.

#15 Edited by TheManWithNoPlan (5220 posts) -

First let me say, I completely understand why people might boycott certain pieces of consumable media/art simply because they dislike or disagree with someone behind it and don't think they're out of line to do so, but I personally don't care. The reality is at least some of my money will inevitably go toward a cause or be given to somebody I don't care for or agree with. If I want to enjoy something, I'm certainly not going to let a tangential thread to said thing keep me from it.

#16 Posted by SharkEthic (1004 posts) -
@sharkethic said:

@hunter5024 said:

@sharkethic said:

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

I thought you phrased the question just fine. My answer is exactly the same, and in my world, it's most definitely a matter of common sense. Would I give my money to someone or something that find morally repugnant? No, I would not.

Let's not say it's morally repugnant then, we'll put it in less extreme terms. If you found out Jeff donated money to a political candidate you didn't like, would you cancel your membership and stop supporting GB? If it's common sense not to give your money to things you disagree with, then surely you would?

Since I believe in both freedom of speech and the democratic process, I don't give a fat shit who Jeff supports politically, and it wouldn't have an impact on me giving money to GB (which is not synonymous with Jeff Gerstman btw). I see what you're saying, though, but I think we just wen't from one extreme to another. If I lived my life under the assumption that every dollar I spend would only be divided among morally like minded people, I would be delusional.

#17 Edited by JohnTunoku (108 posts) -

I wouldn't boycott per say, but I would be a lot less likely to actually get said product.

With Orson Scott Card I always kind of sensed he may have been a bit of a weirdo with the way Ender's Game was written, so knowing these things about him doesn't change my opinion of him much. Wasn't terribly interested in the movie anyway.

#18 Posted by Hunter5024 (5538 posts) -

@hunter5024 said:
@sharkethic said:

@hunter5024 said:

@sharkethic said:

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

I thought you phrased the question just fine. My answer is exactly the same, and in my world, it's most definitely a matter of common sense. Would I give my money to someone or something that find morally repugnant? No, I would not.

Let's not say it's morally repugnant then, we'll put it in less extreme terms. If you found out Jeff donated money to a political candidate you didn't like, would you cancel your membership and stop supporting GB? If it's common sense not to give your money to things you disagree with, then surely you would?

Since I believe in both freedom of speech and the democratic process, I don't give a fat shit who Jeff supports politically, and it wouldn't have an impact on me giving money to GB (which is not synonymous with Jeff Gerstman btw). I see what you're saying, though, but I think we just wen't from one extreme to another. If I lived my life under the assumption that every dollar I spend would only be divided among morally like minded people, I would be delusional.

Yeah, I suppose it really is just a matter of degrees. Personally I wouldn't support Hitler's rap career, but I don't have any problem going to Chick Fil A, despite thinking "pray the gay away camps" are super gross.

#19 Posted by TobbRobb (4579 posts) -

When IS Hitler's new album coming out?

#20 Edited by Hunter5024 (5538 posts) -

@tobbrobb said:

When IS Hitler's new album coming out?

4/20

#21 Edited by SharkEthic (1004 posts) -

@hunter5024 said:

@sharkethic said:
@hunter5024 said:
@sharkethic said:

@hunter5024 said:

@sharkethic said:

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

I thought you phrased the question just fine. My answer is exactly the same, and in my world, it's most definitely a matter of common sense. Would I give my money to someone or something that find morally repugnant? No, I would not.

Let's not say it's morally repugnant then, we'll put it in less extreme terms. If you found out Jeff donated money to a political candidate you didn't like, would you cancel your membership and stop supporting GB? If it's common sense not to give your money to things you disagree with, then surely you would?

Since I believe in both freedom of speech and the democratic process, I don't give a fat shit who Jeff supports politically, and it wouldn't have an impact on me giving money to GB (which is not synonymous with Jeff Gerstman btw). I see what you're saying, though, but I think we just wen't from one extreme to another. If I lived my life under the assumption that every dollar I spend would only be divided among morally like minded people, I would be delusional.

Yeah, I suppose it really is just a matter of degrees. Personally I wouldn't support Hitler's rap career, but I don't have any problem going to Chick Fil A, despite thinking "pray the gay away camps" are super gross.

In cases like Chick Fil A, I'm gonna stick with the "If you're not a part of the solution, you're part of the problem" school of thought, and I'd pretty much rather go hungry than support a company founded and run by bigots.

But I also recognize that we all have different values and priorities for various reasons. So yeah, to each his own! I'm not trying to come off all preachy - though I realize I'm not doing a great job:)

#22 Edited by audioBusting (1477 posts) -

I feel like not paying someone for their work because of personal reasons is pretty close to wanting them dead, so I don't usually think that way. Unless it's directly funding a terrible, harmful cause, then maybe I won't buy it. Publicly boycotting something feels like giving it too much credit, so I don't announce it either way.

#24 Posted by Sinusoidal (1285 posts) -

I wonder if the aliens will still be called "buggers" in the movie.

#25 Edited by Nictel (2380 posts) -

I find this really difficult, it depends on the situation: Is the artist 'just' arrogant, mean or has some other negative characteristic? Then probably not. But what if the artist directly supports something I am truly against? Things get harder. The most difficult thing is that you often don't know, what do you do if you like something and then find out you're totally against the artist as a person? Like @vinny_says said, there is a limit and I don't think I can place that line very hard. It really depends on the situation.

#26 Edited by Ksaw (341 posts) -

I'll definitely avoid someones work if I dislike them. It's not always necessarily a conscious thing for me, but when you know someone is for sure an asshole, it's difficult to view their work objectively.

Online
#28 Posted by mjk0104 (187 posts) -

I would've gone for the fourth option, but I think Hitlers music would be fascinating, like the Nazi propaganda films...

#30 Posted by SpaceInsomniac (3555 posts) -

So my brother wrote this long post on Facebook about how we should all boycott the Ender's Game movie because Orson Scott Card is "a bigot and a Mormon."

So, your brother is bothered by intolerance, and yet he is openly intolerant of an entire religion?

#31 Posted by Jimbo (9772 posts) -

"...because Orson Scott Card is a bigot and a Mormon."

That's pretty funny.

#32 Posted by Flacracker (1595 posts) -

A religious person is against gay marriage? Who would have thought? Also your brother pretty much said he is boycotting the Ender's Game movie because Card is a Mormon too? Your brother sounds like a bigot.

#33 Posted by Abendlaender (2757 posts) -

Depends on how big of an asshole we are talking about. I don't care enough about what Phil Fish says to boycott Fez. I would never ever buy anything Orson Scott Card related.

#34 Posted by Gamer_152 (14051 posts) -

I think not consuming a piece of entertainment because you don't like the creator and boycotting it because you think the creator has damaging views or does damaging work are two different things. As TruthTellah said Scott Card isn't profiting directly from the movie though, so I don't think anybody is a monster if they want to go see Ender's Game. At the same time however, I do think there's a strong argument for not seeing it on the grounds that it has a knock-on effect to support an anti-gay activist. I think not caring what horrible things people might do with the money you've given them as long as they've earned it fairly is morally reprehensible. I just don't see the logical argument that because someone earned the money to carry out their horrible actions, that it's okay to fund those horrible actions, you're still helping someone do something morally wrong.

Moderator
#35 Posted by GunstarRed (5022 posts) -

Not really a fan of Hitler's earlier work.

#36 Edited by avantegardener (1108 posts) -

@sharkethic said:
@hunter5024 said:
@sharkethic said:

@hunter5024 said:

@sharkethic said:

Most art is a product you can buy just like any other consumer product on the market. Just like I don't support companies that act or do things I don't condone of or find morally ambiguous, I'm not gonna support an artist that acts in such a manner neither. I would think that was just common sense, but I guess not..

I couldn't think of a different way to phrase the question, but I'm not attempting to make a distinction between consumer products and art. I suppose what I meant by the question is "Would you spend money on something you liked, even if you knew that money was going towards someone/something you don't like." I don't really think it's a matter of common sense.

I thought you phrased the question just fine. My answer is exactly the same, and in my world, it's most definitely a matter of common sense. Would I give my money to someone or something that find morally repugnant? No, I would not.

Let's not say it's morally repugnant then, we'll put it in less extreme terms. If you found out Jeff donated money to a political candidate you didn't like, would you cancel your membership and stop supporting GB? If it's common sense not to give your money to things you disagree with, then surely you would?

Since I believe in both freedom of speech and the democratic process, I don't give a fat shit who Jeff supports politically, and it wouldn't have an impact on me giving money to GB (which is not synonymous with Jeff Gerstman btw). I see what you're saying, though, but I think we just wen't from one extreme to another. If I lived my life under the assumption that every dollar I spend would only be divided among morally like minded people, I would be delusional.

That is an excellent point, but I would expect no less from an ethical shark :) I think it's really a case of 'proximity to abhorrent behaviour' that drives these decisions, is buying a Orson Scott Card product worse than visiting IGN or watching a movie produced by 21st century both owned by same company that whose News wing is openly right wing?

#37 Edited by Baal_Sagoth (1234 posts) -

Rationally speaking, the creators of art and their views and habits shouldn't get confused with their work. Those are two entirely different spheres. "Art" as a concept wouldn't really mean anything if it was so pointless to me that I reduced it to its mere monetary value. Which I'd kind of do should I try to "punish" people by not giving them money. There is also the incredibly naive and flawed assumption that one would even be capable of keeping track of all the views and affiliations of all the people involved in creating things one might find interesting and enjoyable.

But I have certainly skipped certain works, acting emotionally and in the moment, because the creators pissed me off in some way. The issue here is, as usual, limited time and money. I can't check out nearly everything I want to, so the process of choosing what actually ends up getting my time and money involves some more petty factors. I was really unsure if I should buy Gone Home at some point, for example, but quickly opted to ignore it when I read the developers tirade against PAX and their pathetic pseudo-martyrdom. Whining that you throw away all that marketing for your principles and then abusing the situation to stir up a shitstorm for free marketing just pissed me off enough in that case.

Boycott, in the sense that you become active to convince other people to join your cause, is out of the question in cases like these. It smells like attention-whoring and knee-jerk bullshit. If you feel that strongly about something you should quietly ignore the associated work and be an activist targeting the actual issue - homophobia, racism, sexism, hypocrisy whatever it might be - and not some random company or creator because they make headlines at the moment.

All that said, looking through my libraries of music, games, literature, graphic novels and movies I must say I supported a colorful crew of murderers, rapists, sexists, racists and egomaniac pieces of shit. There's no way around it when using work created by humans.

Online
#38 Edited by kagato (893 posts) -

Its a fair question and one ive had to deal with in buying comic books recently, i wont name the author but essentialy it came out that he was a huge homophobe and this viewpoint started to show up in some of his writing. Morally i cant support this, his stories where pretty good until he started trying to preach to the masses through the voice of a well known DC superhero. Had he not attempted this i probably wouldnt have had as much of an issue but using popular media to try and preach an agenda to the masses which is negative or hatefull is horrible and he dosent deserve any funding for this.

There is an argument that if i knew he was a biggot and still funded him even though his work had no subtext that i would still be just as bad, im divided on this and it sort of depends on writer is and how strongly i feel about his ideas. Having a whole bunch of gay friends unfortunately puts me right in the middle of the argument and i dont feel comfortable buying the guys work since it feels too much like stabbing my friends in the back.

#39 Edited by Brodehouse (9581 posts) -
#40 Edited by Ramone (2959 posts) -

If the artist's views severely clashed with mine and their views came through in their work then I probably would. But I'm generally O.K with consuming art from an artist I don't personally like or agree with.

For example, I think Jonathon Blow is a pretty pretentious dick but I really like Braid. The parts of Blow that come through in Braid are the interesting parts, the rest of his personality is left out. I'm also really excited to play The Witness.

#41 Edited by ChrisTaran (1565 posts) -

Was literally going to answer 'Yes' to boycott, until I saw the Hitler thing and realized I've liked some of his paintings (as soon above!) and decided I had to answer 'no.'

I'm not sure if this makes me a terrible person.

#42 Posted by forkboy (1115 posts) -

I have boycotted things because the creator is dislikable. In this day & age one of the few powers we have anymore is to withhold our money from companies or people who are morally questionable. That said, if something is really, really good then all that goes out the window. Example one being one of my all time favourite bands is a little Norwegian black metal band called Burzum. Which is a one man band, the one being a crazy, anti-semitic, Odinist murderer. But the music is super great so I can't help myself.

#43 Edited by MildMolasses (3213 posts) -

@jimbo said:

"...because Orson Scott Card is a bigot and a Mormon."

That's pretty funny.

Irony is lost on idiots

#44 Posted by YoungFrey (1321 posts) -

I said "yes" but I view this as being more complicated than "is the creator an asshole"? I decide whether or not said person is doing more harm than good when I decide whether or not to patronize them. Fortunately there is so much media these days nobody can possibly consume it all. So it's very very easy to cut out any one thing. Every book of Orson Scott Card might be amazing (not true) and you'd still be just fine never reading any of them. Because there are so many great books, movies, albums, comics, games, etc ...

I boycott bad people at the drop of a hat. Because it's all I can do, and it costs me very little.

#45 Edited by Turambar (6675 posts) -

@hunter5024: I think its important to let your brother know that Orson Scott Card is not actually profiting monetarily from the film.

#46 Posted by benpicko (1995 posts) -

I think you're missing the point of art if you'd go out of your way to avoid a piece of it made by somebody with dissenting opinions.

#47 Posted by Darji (5294 posts) -

No. However it is more difficult to get me watch this since I am not really interested. But that goes more for his previous works. I do not really care if someone is a racist catholic or whatever. It is his free opinion to think like he does.

#48 Posted by Video_Game_King (35985 posts) -

@beachthunder:

Not according to the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna.

#49 Posted by Liquidus (946 posts) -

I always separate the art from the artist. I think Kanye West is a total asshole but hey, the man's made some music that I like.

#50 Posted by Danteveli (1160 posts) -

No I would not boycott. To be honest I dont get the hate towards OSC. Didn't he just said something in the line of his personal belief. It may not be ok in your opinion but its not like he was yelling something about killing homosexuals or discriminating them. Or did he?