"With your Lovecraft example: the fact that (arguably) bad people doing bad things has resulted in worthwhile writing doesn't stop them being bad things (or people). One can admire the great works inspired by death and war and still be a pacifist, or admire the pyramids and still be against slavery."
I think the two other examples you give sort of blur the picture. I wouldn't advocate rounding up thousands of slaves to build a pyramid today no matter how beautiful, or starting a war to inspire Wilfred Owen to a new collection (though I'm sure some interesting poetry is being written in Gaza at this moment).
In the Lovecraft example the badness (racism) is contained within the text, and I haven't heard that HPL had to hurl hate-fuelled invective at anyone IRL in order to work up his prejudice for the main event of The Unusual Case of Charles Dexter Ward (though he may have done). But what I also noted above is that I think his racism perhaps even enhances his work, and isn't something despite which I enjoy it. I actually enjoy reading that racist drivel leaking out the side of his pen, knowing he was a damn fool, and appreciating the rest of it for what it is anyway. If he was writing today, on the other hand ... hmm.
Conclusion: reassessing, ends up in the too hard basket. I don't think hard and fast rules can be made, any more than they can for courtesy in social situations. But I do think the umpire should give the artist the benefit of any doubt in a case of possible leg before wicket -- art is "better out than in" ;-)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
In the Lovecraft example the badness (racism) is contained within the text, and I haven't heard that HPL had to hurl hate-fuelled invective at anyone IRL in order to work up his prejudice for the main event of The Unusual Case of Charles Dexter Ward (though he may have done). But what I also noted above is that I think his racism perhaps even enhances his work, and isn't something despite which I enjoy it. I actually enjoy reading that racist drivel leaking out the side of his pen, knowing he was a damn fool, and appreciating the rest of it for what it is anyway. If he was writing today, on the other hand ... hmm.
Conclusion: reassessing, ends up in the too hard basket. I don't think hard and fast rules can be made, any more than they can for courtesy in social situations. But I do think the umpire should give the artist the benefit of any doubt in a case of possible leg before wicket -- art is "better out than in" ;-)