With the rise of cancel culture, it’s something that’s got me curious, why are so many works (music, literature, tv shows, etc.) no longer separated from their controversial makers? Is it purely to do with money (e.g. not wanting to give money to people you don’t agree with?) and what about controversial people who are dead? They don’t gain anything, so why isn’t the art separated from the artist? What’s your opinion on this topic?
This is the first thing most conservatives say right before they start offering opinions on traditional gender roles, homophobia, transphobia, isolationism, nationalism, and a whole myriad of other things that tells us you need to read more broadly and stop listening to Joe Rogan.
Yes but I’m not going to do so. Because I am genuinely not conservative.
Maybe now is the time to explore why you feel so strongly about cancel culture and how people should separate art from the artist then.
Mainly because in my country we have too much examples of stuff ‘cancelled’ because of the maker’s bad behaviour, that’s why I find it a semi interesting topic.
Now I’m curious what your personal line is on how bad a maker has to be before the product is tainted for you.
I’m sure you are
Really not beating those accusations of being conservative, are ya?
I don’t care what other people think. I know what I am
You literally posted this to ask what other people think.