Yeah, that’s not too surprising given the strong allegations against Neil Gaiman. While I enjoyed Dead Boy Detectives for what it was, I don’t particularly want to watch or read anything Gaiman has a hand with now.
I just wonder how Sandman and Good Omens will be handled. I can’t imagine either show being scrapped at this point given the fact that both have been in production for so long, though I would be shocked if they were renewed for additional seasons.
Can we, for once, separate the art from the artist? It is possible to enjoy something created by an absolute bastard without endorsing their shitty behavior. Lots of people play Call of Cthulhu without endorsing eugenics. Or Mission Impossible without supporting Scientology. Can I still watch Emma knowing Gwyneth Paltrow sells vagina rocks to gullible women and the movie was produced by Harvey Weinstein? Absolutely. It’s a gem.
Stop 👏 Cancelling 👏 Shows 👏 Because 👏 One 👏 Person 👏 Is 👏 A👏 Cunt👏
Of course, if it sucked, that’s different
Edit: the main creative force continuing to profit from production/distribution is a fair point. There’s nuance to be had here
If Gaiman could be separated, that might be okay, but I don’t want to buy his shit anymore. I don’t want to support projects that make him rich. I don’t even like having his books in my house now. Gross.
Honest question, and this comes from a place of genuine good faith:
Where do you draw the line? Hollywood is rife with abuse. SA of women, men, and minors. Toxic work environments. Labor abuses. It’s easy when there’s a single point that one can direct their anger towards. Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, Harvey Weinstein, etc. And I’m not advocating that abuse in any form, once brought to light, should be ignored because others are getting away with it. But when it comes to boycotts, where is the line? It’s easy for me, I just pirate everything and directly support the artists I’m interested in supporting. But I’d like your perspective
I’m gonna ask a couple of other commenters in this thread as well, because I’m curious
Same as everybody else, I think, it’s a case by case basis, weighed against my own baggage and preconceptions, balanced as much as possible with not compromising so far on morals, ethics or principles that I agonize over it.
I haven’t gotten rid of my Gaiman books yet, but I’m not going to be able to read them again without thinking about him, so eventually I’ll figure out how I want to dispose of them. I got rid of anything by Rowling years ago.
I think where we differ is abandoning a story, or a world, because it’s creator is garbage. I’m not saying I’m right and you’re wrong, just that we’re different on that point.
Part of it might be because of Star Wars.
Stay with me on this, it’ll make sense in a minute.
I grew up on the original trilogy. The prequels were enjoyable, except in episode 2 where Anakin was a creep and Padme was a cock-tease (this is through the lens of 20 year-old me, mind). So I made some head canon to explain it. When George killed extended universe stuff that he had authorized, more head canon. By the time the sequels came out, I could enjoy them for what they were without being upset like so many other nerds. I could do that because I had learned to choose what was canon and what wasn’t. It’s make-believe. And it’s now mine. The same is true for other IPs. And it’s my head canon. I don’t get upset if another nerd gets assertive about what is “real”. We each have a universe in our own mind, and that’s okay.
So yeah, Sandman is bigger than Niel. Hogwarts is bigger than Joan. If it turns out that George Lucas, Kathleen Kennedy, and Dave Filoni are in a cabal of pedophiles that eat babies and hate Africans, I’ve still got my little Star Wars universe, and it’s mine.
But I get it. I can’t listen to Chris Brown or Drake. It’s a matter of degrees I suppose. I’m typing this on a device made using child slave labor, produced by a company that poisons well water, and sold by a company that sells personal data to the highest bidder. That’s the world we live in. No wonder I take worlds and make them my own
“But I want my fun thing! Why can’t we just pretend this person didn’t force himself on these vulnerable people? This slightly INCONVENIENCES me!!!”
STOP 👏 Canceling 👏 shows 👏 because 👏 the 👏 main 👏 creative👏 force 👏 behind 👏 it 👏 who 👏 will 👏 profit 👏 most from 👏 its 👏 success 👏 is 👏 abusing 👏 women 👏
I had a snarky reply, but then i spent two days in the woods and realized you have a point (although I’m not inconvenienced, just in outrage burnout)
Honest question, and this comes from a place of genuine good faith:
Where do you draw the line? Hollywood is rife with abuse. SA of women, men, and minors. Toxic work environments. Labor abuses. It’s easy when there’s a single point that one can direct their anger towards. Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, Harvey Weinstein, etc. And I’m not advocating that abuse in any form, once brought to light, should be ignored just because others are getting away with it. But when it comes to boycotts, where is the line? It’s easy for me, I just pirate everything and directly support the artists I’m interested in supporting. But I’d like your perspective
I’m gonna ask a couple of other commenters in this thread as well, because I’m curious
It’s a dynamic thing and an ongoing struggle frankly. The goal isn’t perfection though, the goal is to not avoid confronting objective truths about these people once they are clear/valid. It’s also about not allowing myself to conveniently forget when I want to. Pirate and direct support otherwise is a valid layer, but you can’t pirate a trip to a theme park for example. So it’s also about missing out on some things unfortunately. Not great, not perfect, but an effort I’ll make.
Good to hear you reconsider and stay open to thinking about general approach.
If Gaiman wasn’t still alive getting rich off his art, then maybe. But while they’re still alive, I’d rather not celebrate or consume the art created by people like Polanski, Weinstein, Rowling, and Gaiman.
Do you boycott everything produced by the Weinsteins? It’s a big catalogue, of which Harvey has more involvement in some than others. Polanski I get, he continues to produce new works after his gross behavior came to light. By the way, my question below is partly inspired by Polanski’s continued acceptance in Hollywood…
Honest question, and this comes from a place of genuine good faith:
Where do you draw the line? Hollywood is rife with abuse. SA of women, men, and minors. Toxic work environments. Labor abuses. It’s easy when there’s a single point that one can direct their anger towards. Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, Harvey Weinstein, etc. And I’m not advocating that abuse in any form, once brought to light, should be ignored because others are getting away with it. But when it comes to boycotts, where is the line? It’s easy for me, I just pirate everything and directly support the artists I’m interested in supporting. But I’d like your perspective
I’m gonna ask a couple of other commenters in this thread as well, because I’m curious
That’s a valid question and I’ll try to give you an honest answer. It’s certainly easier to boycott works of specific actors, writers, or directors, than it is producers, though I try. I have undoubtedly watched movies from Weinstein’s production company without realizing, as you noted, his catalogue is enormous. Though if I’m aware of Weinstein’s involvement in a project beforehand, then I try to steer clear.
I guess I boycott on a case-by-case basis. It’s a lot harder to boycott full production companies than it is individuals.
That being said, there’s a reason I haven’t watched Chinatown despite hearing how great it is, or Shakespeare in Love, or American Beauty, etc. It’s also why I lost complete interest in Harry Potter and ignored Hogwarts Legacy. And going back to Neil Gaiman, I have several of his books, comics, and enjoyed most of his film and TV adaptations, but now thinking about any of his work leaves an unpleasant taste in my mouth.
Yeah, that’s not too surprising given the strong allegations against Neil Gaiman. While I enjoyed Dead Boy Detectives for what it was, I don’t particularly want to watch or read anything Gaiman has a hand with now.
I just wonder how Sandman and Good Omens will be handled. I can’t imagine either show being scrapped at this point given the fact that both have been in production for so long, though I would be shocked if they were renewed for additional seasons.
Can we, for once, separate the art from the artist? It is possible to enjoy something created by an absolute bastard without endorsing their shitty behavior. Lots of people play Call of Cthulhu without endorsing eugenics. Or Mission Impossible without supporting Scientology. Can I still watch Emma knowing Gwyneth Paltrow sells vagina rocks to gullible women and the movie was produced by Harvey Weinstein? Absolutely. It’s a gem.
Stop 👏 Cancelling 👏 Shows 👏 Because 👏 One 👏 Person 👏 Is 👏 A👏 Cunt👏
Of course, if it sucked, that’s different
Edit: the main creative force continuing to profit from production/distribution is a fair point. There’s nuance to be had here
If Gaiman could be separated, that might be okay, but I don’t want to buy his shit anymore. I don’t want to support projects that make him rich. I don’t even like having his books in my house now. Gross.
Honest question, and this comes from a place of genuine good faith:
Where do you draw the line? Hollywood is rife with abuse. SA of women, men, and minors. Toxic work environments. Labor abuses. It’s easy when there’s a single point that one can direct their anger towards. Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, Harvey Weinstein, etc. And I’m not advocating that abuse in any form, once brought to light, should be ignored because others are getting away with it. But when it comes to boycotts, where is the line? It’s easy for me, I just pirate everything and directly support the artists I’m interested in supporting. But I’d like your perspective
I’m gonna ask a couple of other commenters in this thread as well, because I’m curious
Same as everybody else, I think, it’s a case by case basis, weighed against my own baggage and preconceptions, balanced as much as possible with not compromising so far on morals, ethics or principles that I agonize over it.
I haven’t gotten rid of my Gaiman books yet, but I’m not going to be able to read them again without thinking about him, so eventually I’ll figure out how I want to dispose of them. I got rid of anything by Rowling years ago.
I think where we differ is abandoning a story, or a world, because it’s creator is garbage. I’m not saying I’m right and you’re wrong, just that we’re different on that point.
Part of it might be because of Star Wars.
Stay with me on this, it’ll make sense in a minute.
I grew up on the original trilogy. The prequels were enjoyable, except in episode 2 where Anakin was a creep and Padme was a cock-tease (this is through the lens of 20 year-old me, mind). So I made some head canon to explain it. When George killed extended universe stuff that he had authorized, more head canon. By the time the sequels came out, I could enjoy them for what they were without being upset like so many other nerds. I could do that because I had learned to choose what was canon and what wasn’t. It’s make-believe. And it’s now mine. The same is true for other IPs. And it’s my head canon. I don’t get upset if another nerd gets assertive about what is “real”. We each have a universe in our own mind, and that’s okay.
So yeah, Sandman is bigger than Niel. Hogwarts is bigger than Joan. If it turns out that George Lucas, Kathleen Kennedy, and Dave Filoni are in a cabal of pedophiles that eat babies and hate Africans, I’ve still got my little Star Wars universe, and it’s mine.
But I get it. I can’t listen to Chris Brown or Drake. It’s a matter of degrees I suppose. I’m typing this on a device made using child slave labor, produced by a company that poisons well water, and sold by a company that sells personal data to the highest bidder. That’s the world we live in. No wonder I take worlds and make them my own
I want refund on his wife shitty book as well.
“But I want my fun thing! Why can’t we just pretend this person didn’t force himself on these vulnerable people? This slightly INCONVENIENCES me!!!”
STOP 👏 Canceling 👏 shows 👏 because 👏 the 👏 main 👏 creative👏 force 👏 behind 👏 it 👏 who 👏 will 👏 profit 👏 most from 👏 its 👏 success 👏 is 👏 abusing 👏 women 👏
That’s you.
I had a snarky reply, but then i spent two days in the woods and realized you have a point (although I’m not inconvenienced, just in outrage burnout)
Honest question, and this comes from a place of genuine good faith:
Where do you draw the line? Hollywood is rife with abuse. SA of women, men, and minors. Toxic work environments. Labor abuses. It’s easy when there’s a single point that one can direct their anger towards. Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, Harvey Weinstein, etc. And I’m not advocating that abuse in any form, once brought to light, should be ignored just because others are getting away with it. But when it comes to boycotts, where is the line? It’s easy for me, I just pirate everything and directly support the artists I’m interested in supporting. But I’d like your perspective
I’m gonna ask a couple of other commenters in this thread as well, because I’m curious
It’s a dynamic thing and an ongoing struggle frankly. The goal isn’t perfection though, the goal is to not avoid confronting objective truths about these people once they are clear/valid. It’s also about not allowing myself to conveniently forget when I want to. Pirate and direct support otherwise is a valid layer, but you can’t pirate a trip to a theme park for example. So it’s also about missing out on some things unfortunately. Not great, not perfect, but an effort I’ll make.
Good to hear you reconsider and stay open to thinking about general approach.
Too right. What’s the saying? Perfection is the enemy of good?
I appreciate the response, thanks
Today I learn
If Gaiman wasn’t still alive getting rich off his art, then maybe. But while they’re still alive, I’d rather not celebrate or consume the art created by people like Polanski, Weinstein, Rowling, and Gaiman.
Do you boycott everything produced by the Weinsteins? It’s a big catalogue, of which Harvey has more involvement in some than others. Polanski I get, he continues to produce new works after his gross behavior came to light. By the way, my question below is partly inspired by Polanski’s continued acceptance in Hollywood…
Honest question, and this comes from a place of genuine good faith:
Where do you draw the line? Hollywood is rife with abuse. SA of women, men, and minors. Toxic work environments. Labor abuses. It’s easy when there’s a single point that one can direct their anger towards. Neil Gaiman, J.K. Rowling, Harvey Weinstein, etc. And I’m not advocating that abuse in any form, once brought to light, should be ignored because others are getting away with it. But when it comes to boycotts, where is the line? It’s easy for me, I just pirate everything and directly support the artists I’m interested in supporting. But I’d like your perspective
I’m gonna ask a couple of other commenters in this thread as well, because I’m curious
That’s a valid question and I’ll try to give you an honest answer. It’s certainly easier to boycott works of specific actors, writers, or directors, than it is producers, though I try. I have undoubtedly watched movies from Weinstein’s production company without realizing, as you noted, his catalogue is enormous. Though if I’m aware of Weinstein’s involvement in a project beforehand, then I try to steer clear.
I guess I boycott on a case-by-case basis. It’s a lot harder to boycott full production companies than it is individuals.
That being said, there’s a reason I haven’t watched Chinatown despite hearing how great it is, or Shakespeare in Love, or American Beauty, etc. It’s also why I lost complete interest in Harry Potter and ignored Hogwarts Legacy. And going back to Neil Gaiman, I have several of his books, comics, and enjoyed most of his film and TV adaptations, but now thinking about any of his work leaves an unpleasant taste in my mouth.