Big controversy right now. Acclaimed science fiction book “Ender’s Game” is going to be made into a movie. But the personal views of its author, Orson Scott Card, about homosexuality have made many people want to boycott the film.
So that makes me wonder: Is the artist the same as the art?
Throughout history, there have been controversies surrounding the creator of something and it’s creation. Should they be one in the same? If the art is not a reflection of the artist, should it be considered as such?
Many creative people have been part of controversial issues: Oliver Reed and his views on feminism, Tom Cruise and Scientology, Mel Gibson and Catholicism, Edgar Allan Poe and his marriage, Roald Dahl and antisemitism, the list goes on. These individuals have their own viewpoints on life that many do not agree with. Does that mean their work/movies/writings should be connected to their personal viewpoints?
I feel that a story/song/movie/etc. is what it represents. If it displays a viewpoint that I don’t agree with, I will not support that piece of work. I personally love the book, “Ender’s Game”. When I first read it years ago, I didn’t know anything about the author’s personal viewpoints. I never found anything in the book to indicate I SHOULD have known. I’ve reread it since the controversy came out, and still I can’t find any of those views in the book. I still think it’s brilliantly written, a wonderful story, with a superb twist and an amazing way to get non-science fiction readers interested in science fiction.
What do you think? Do you find you don’t go to movies because you don’t agree with an actor’s point of view? Or do you ever boycott buying music if the singer was involved in something scandalous? Or refuse to read a book because the author believes something you don’t?
As a writer, I really want to know! Will who I am as a person determine how my books will be perceived?
PS- Coming soon! Release date for HOLLOW’S PRISM: “Aftermath”!