Zia @ZiaMacPine@awoo.space

@FlatFootFox though I think we have good examples of when people perceive something as bad and then must deal with other people liking it and the dissonance that causes

@FlatFootFox I can certainly understand and empathize. In many ways people dont like their personal perceptions on a piece of media to be upended. Admitting you might have to reframe your thinking is hard

@FlatFootFox i can't even be mad because it is so reasonable

Just rambling, I dont have any insights here just talking.

But I think the term "seperate the art from the artist" has gained a new meaning of "dont let problematic creators infringe on my enjoyment of a work"

perhaps that is unfair of me, but if that is the case that comes across as giving up responsibility and my freedom to be wrong.

Though I think the ideal or democratizing interaction with art is a good one.

In other words even if the artist or author did not intend it that way the reader, viewer, or other groups who have a different interpretation have validity in discussion.

This puts a tremendous amount or responsibility on the individual because it means there is no higher authority of appeal your view is valid but so are other people's views.

In which case it can become a question of who can make a better argument (which is problematic).

My big issue with how people discuss seperatint the art from the artist is that the term has been appropriated from its original intent so heavily.

The original idea was part of the post modernist movement's attmepts to argue the validity of discussing art and literature through personalized context.

In that way while the creator's views have value they dont obviate other perspectives and opinions

@oceanotter do you want to supersize that sir? It mostly just means a larger drink.

@oceanotter *narrows eyes*

@artfulreggie yes. Always. 100% wouldnt just be scraps. Gotta keep my best couch fed maybe some chocolate cake too?

@artfulreggie here have some hummingbird cake to tide you over