I've never actually read any of Lovecraft's work, but from what I've heard he wasn't one of those people who separated beliefs and work. Aren't his works filled with racism, both subtle and overt?JemothSkarii said:
A professional, objective, apolitical future for The Escapist...
- Thread starter NinjaDeathSlap
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes. Much of his celebrated work is about "Them" living amongst us, and the horror of interbreeding.FirstNameLastName said:
There's also the odd bit like "He was ugly and degenerate, even for a negro" and so on that pops up.
Oh yes, his racism did show in his work. Some of them at least, haven't read Lovecraft in a while. He also wasn't a great technical writer. But it didn't stop his work from being considered a classic and a cornerstone of horror.FirstNameLastName said:
Yes, many of his stories were outright racist or xenophobic, and his poems even more so, to the point that even as a product of an era where such beliefs were more acceptable, he was remarked by his contemporaries as being a very paranoid man with racist beliefs that were notable even for his time period.FirstNameLastName said:
He did, after all, write this little gem:
On the Creation of Niggers
by H. P. Lovecraft
When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Iove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******.
by H. P. Lovecraft
When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Iove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******.
not all of his writings contained racism or xenophobia, but they were a remarked element of many of his works.
So what your saying as long as he doesn't say anything negative, you're fine. Which ignores that fact that all decision to do with him will go through his perception. The outcome will be coloured by this perception.Areloch said:
Let me give you an opposing view. Steve Jobs, by all reports, a terrible boss. He treated his workers as he did the consumer - very restrictive, uninterested in what others had to say and generally promises of quality were off.
Tim Cook comes along and promotes his ideal of using renewable energy, supports making your own choice of sexual orientation, increases Chinese labour rights and does significant research into helping disabled people use their products. The last is a very costly and the shareholders have been calling him out on it. He said (paraphrased - 2 years ago) that if you are only in the company to make money instead of also helping society then they could leave.
Tim's stance on his beliefs almost lead me to by an Apple product (I still cant until they deal with their restrictive hardware and software practices, but I might forgive them because that was all Steve Jobs being, probably rightly, paranoid and crazy). I would never have conceived of by one because of Jobs' character and now I am considering because of Cook's.
I will be interested to see what happens but this is probably not a good sign. I have yet to met a person who can decide against their beliefs without outside pressure
I'm not contesting his importance to the literary landscape, I just feel he seems rather out of place in a list of people who's beliefs didn't influence their works.JemothSkarii said:
Overall, while I have no bone to pick with this new guy, and I'm sympathetic to the idea of holding the work above the person, I have my doubts that he'll remain apolitical. I don't really know the guy, but isn't he only really known for right-wing political writing? If so, then I feel that telling people not to pre judge might be pushing the limits of the concept.
This was basically my point. It's hard to be sure of what's going to happen. He might actually say some things that add usefully to on going debates at the very least.FirstNameLastName said:
Still his statements on chromosomes just irritated the hell out of me as a physical male with XX male syndrome
Oh, probably should clarify. I was using Lovecraft as an example of political views in writing that became successful. Ayn Rand is also debatable.FirstNameLastName said:
ANYWAYS
I find that just because somebody writes predominantly one thing doesn't mean they're incapable of others. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and see if he can reign his political beliefs in.
If he doesn't, the community will crucify him and he'll get no views.
It is too soon to judge, but the site he writes for, everyjoe.com, isn't exactly filling me with optimism as his writing pretty much drips with his beliefs. His coworkers are people like Tom Kratman, known neo-conservative writer somewhat infamous in literary circles for writing an entire series that was basically just post-9/11 graphic revenge porn against Muslims and regularly insulting Europeans and European politics.FirstNameLastName said:
Still, he shouldn't be judged solely by the company he keeps or just on past history, his writing may be just fine, but he sounds like he's just going to be the political inverse of moviebob, except slagging off progressives rather than "conservabros".
I'm not going to be too hard on his contributions here until I see what they are, but I totally understand why this forums notable LGBT and trans posters are already chiming in with disgust.
He'll probably get fired if he does go of on a bigoted rant and then the community crucifies him.JemothSkarii said:
And has his willful ignorance led to demonstrable harm then? Because I don't see "I disagree with your assessment of yourself" as harm, and unless I missed something, that is the extent of what he has done.MarsAtlas said:
And has his belief in a dichotomy gender identity led to such demonstrable bodily harm? Don't get me wrong, stuff like anti-vaccine rhetoric is a horribly destructive one, but I think the direct relation to health and safety would sort of reveal the added importance in relation to how harmful denial is, especially since it relates to childcare practices. A gender dichotomy belief on its own doesn't have that same danger. Unless I am missing something or his lack of belief in a transpeople radiant is causing actual harm. Note, this does not include actions committed against people because of the belief, just the belief itself as that is all that has been shown thus far from the tweets.
Perhaps. From what I was shown, it was him arguing with someone on twitter though. Consider how often you reject statements and claims from people in these forums yourself, even with links to back them up. I'd say it is a stretch to call it fanaticism for not changing his opinion because of a twitter comment.
Yes, actually. And while I see him arguing with individuals or mocking the concept he disagrees with, I fail to see him Justifying attacking people, using his dislike of their opinion on the issue as excuse to not help them, or as a means to deny them basic human rights. Perhaps I am missing something, I tend to not get all image and video links to go through to my browser, but the entire summary of the guy's stance seems to be "I don't think someone calling themselves one thing means they are that thing because biology". And while his stance is wrong because biology has more grey to it that, I don't think having that opinion nor mocking the perception of the alternative is the same thing as saying group X doesn't deserve the same basic human rights or that group Y shouldn't be helped if in trouble.
I'm preparing a massive bucket of popcorn for me and anyone else who is prepared to sit on the sidelines, not losing their shit.
He was a strange, isolated man who, if it wasn't for the circumstances of his life probably wouldn't have produced the work he did.EternallyBored said:
That said, it doesn't excuse such held beliefs.
Goes some way to explain them, but not excuse.
I'm always interested in anything that draws on or relates to lovecrafts mythos, but I can be fairly certain I'd be reluctant to share a conversation with the writer.
Back on topic.
I'll view this guy the same way I viewed Bob.
Give the content a chance and, should the off site behavior get too much to ignore (and it's close already), avoid said content quietly allowing those escapists who do enjoy it to do so in peace.
I'm not losing my shit here, but this guy is like a right-wing movie bob from what I've seen. So I kinda wonder what people on the staff are thinking bringing this guy on board....visiblenoise said:
Sorry for the wall of text:
Yeah, I guess we're going to spend this entire year watching the actual truth come out about last year's debacle.Silvanus said:
I totally need to add that to a sig at some point and credit you with it, if that's ok.Phrozenflame500 said:
Oh, ADHD's real. I think it can be overdiagnosed in some instances (I grew up in a town where the school counselor played amateur psychotherapist who convinced a lot of parents that their kid had a learning disorder when they didn't), but it's definitely real. I work with a guy who has it pretty severely. On the plus side, he turns it to his advantage, which is really cool to see.Phrozenflame500 said:
You're right. Free Speech is a right AND a responsibility. You can say whatever you want, but you are only allowed protection against arrest and prosecution, not from actual consequence. If you're a hateful moron, no employer is required to hire you (I know there are legal protections there as well, but let's be honest, you'd have to prove that they're not hiring you on political grounds), and no other human being is legally required to associate with you (though there are some that act and think like you that will).PaulH said:
I'm both Christian and I believe in evolution. The two are not mutually exclusive. The two extremes (believers AND non-believers) are guilty of the same thing. It results from the fact that both sides believe in the absolute "rightness" of their beliefs to the exclusion of any middle ground. Also, for the record, my beliefs are my own, and I could very easily be wrong about my beliefs, but the assumption by both sides that they're absolutely right without considering other possibilities is a failing.runic knight said:
I'm surprised Archon himself hasn't come along and locked this thread.Pluvia said:
Then again, if he did he would reveal himself to be a massive hypocrite. Because GGers are apparently allowed to sit in their megathread all day and rant and rave about what Anita Wu is posting on twitter, but if this thread got closed that would mean we can't point out objectionable tweets by a prospective future Escapist contributor.