If you don’t like X but like X’s work, there’s a good chance X’s views and politics are in said work. For example, I occasionally watch Act Man videos mostly to figure out what is going on with gaming and how it got ruined (not killed), but as you can probably guess he is a well-known anti-SJW chud and I have actually seen his politics in some of his videos like his infamous Feminists and SJWs vs video games. Another YouTuber I watch often called ThunderStruck115 is a lib given in videos with sections where he does talk abt politics (keep in mind he mostly makes response videos to usually bad takes in video games) it’s pretty much enlightened centrist.
Another example is Call of Duty. You may like the gameplay and experience but the politics are still there. It still whitewashes the West including it’s subjugation of the third world. Side note: This isn’t to say gameplay shouldn’t be ignored, it should take precedence over everything else including politics.
Youtube videos where the person expresses their opinions are not art, they’re just videos of a person expressing their opinion. Call of Duty and other such video games are made by dozens if not hundreds of people, and not all of those people will have the same politics and it’s unlikely most are able to insert their politics into the game. Big, mainstream games, like movies, are made to appeal to as large an audience as possible, therefore they will have or perpetuate the mainstream narrative and worldview.
A better example would be Papers, Please, a game made by a single person that takes place in a vaguely Eastern European, socialist-esque state and the game is a reflection of the designer’s liberal view of (post-)Soviet countries.
I mean I guess that depends on the medium. The creator’s political positions are generally less present in drawings for example.
Though as a rabid book enjoyer, I must admit that I abandoned quite a few due to their political undertones. A nice example would be World War Z, which despite being well written (at the beginning at least) contains so much american propaganda that I sometimes got the feeling that the author had a checklist. As far as I remember, every enemy of the US is bastardized, except maybe Iran. And of course there’s bootlicking for Israel and the US.
But even then, guessing that the author is a reactionary doesn’t necessarily make their work unreadable, it depends on how much they let their thoughts transpire into their works.
The creator’s political positions are generally less present in drawings for example.
You’d think that, but choice of subject matter and style will reflect a person’s politics and upbringing, as well as the context in which they make their art. Pablo Picasso, for example, with the famous Guernica and his propaganda work The Dream and Lie of Franco.
I know nothing but attack on titan but what I read in an article about the fascist themes and creator. Now, I cringe every time I see something or hear something related to it. Same with Harry Potter, though I used to be a huge fan. Why the hell are “progressive” parents still reading it to their kids.
I will separate the art from the artist. By force.
Counterargument: Yes you can.
?
You can separate the art from the artist.
That which can be claimed without argument can be dismissed without argument.
That which can be claimed without argument can be dismissed without argument.
I don’t get it
The “Death of the author” concept has been around for a century. If you’re going to try to debunk it you have to actually make an argument. You can separate the art from the artist.
