MMO Junkie's Racist Director - Should We Hate the Work, or the Jerk?
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 02. 2018
- While we'd like to think differently, great art can sometimes come from bad people. For instance, the director of one of my favourite anime from last year, Recovery of an MMO Junkie, is a Holocaust Denier. Can - and should - we separate good art from bad creators?
Support me on Patreon: / mothersbasement
Subscribe to Mother's Basement for anime and gaming videos every week: czcams.com/users/subscription_...
ANN's Article on MMO Junkie: www.animenewsnetwork.com/inte...
Interesting piece on Ender's Game: www.advocate.com/arts-enterta...
Validate me!
Follow me on twitter: / g0ffthew
Also on facebook: / mothersbasementofficial
And check out my Steam Curator page: steamcommunity.com/groups/moth...
and the new Mother's Basement Subreddit: / mothersbasement
In the depths of his Mother's Basement, Geoff Thew creates videos analyzing the storytelling techniques of anime and video games. He has been named the number one Worst CZcams Anime Reviewer by The Top Tens. - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Edit (10/26/2021) lol nevermind Jontron still sucks
I just want to clarify my points re: jontron
I'm aware he's apologized for what he said, and I can appreciate that he was exploring different politcal stances at the time. I went through similar stuff when I was younger. I don't think he's a bad person, necessarily.
I was using him as an example because 1. he's a creator whose work has had a big impact on me and 2. he's a good example of bad ideas being amplified by unrelated content.
Even as someone who thinks Jontron should be forgiven it would be hard to deny that what he said in the past was misguided and deserving of criticism.
It's been a while but I got the impression he was caught in a rhetorical trap with Destiny whose a nasty little shit at the best of times and managed to get a couple of nasty soundbites because jontrons dumb and awkward in the spur of the moment rather than some sort of hateful crazed white supremicist.
Yeah, people should be able to learn from their mistakes and grow as people
Next time leave that example to the video itself instead of sticking it with a title like that in the thumbnail g.
Mother's Basement Ah...the Mel Gibson of anime...
Friend: I'm Gay
Geoff: That's Cool
Friend: I also like SAO
Geoff: Get out.
You do realise he was joking when he said "Unless it's SAO", right?
@@EightThreeEight that was also a joke
@@AceDice That was also probably a joke
@@vgarzareyna And that was also a joke
EightThreeEight you do realize that op is joking right?
When Kenshin is your favorite manga...
I died a little when I discovered what he did. It’s really hard to read it now
Yeah... that's why the anime is the definitive version for me.
I loves the anime as a kid but I just cant watch it because it gives him money and I refuse to support a pedo
Fing right, i had no idea til this video, was one of my first anime :(
@abrahamWCE not a soccer fan but it's hard to be worse than a literal pedophile... even murderers look down on them
@abrahamWCE actually your definition is not quite accurate. A pederast is specifically an adult MALE (not female) who engages in pederasty. The specific definition of "pederasty" is an adult male (again this word is only applicable to males specifically not females) who engages in sexual activity with a young boy. In other words, the term pederasty is a more specific term to describe a sexual relation ship between an adult male and a young boy. It is different from a pedophile who can be either male or female and has feelings for either male or female underage children. An adult male who has feelings for an underage female is NOT a pederast. An adult male who has feeling for and underage male is not a pederast either. But an adult male who is actually in the process of engaging in a sexual relationship with an underage male would be the only correct definition of therm Pederasty.
The only option therefore, *anime villain pushes up his glasses, reflecting the sunlight*, is piracy.
That's what I was thinking during this
didnt he talk about this?
@@theblandcharlie822 Yeah, he did, the difference between piracy and boycotting is astounding, but a difficult choice to make. I hope they didn't miss the message
@@theblandcharlie822 yes but also his viewpoint on Piracy is kinda Ill-informed
Piracy: solves all yah problems
As a librarian, I'm sad you didn't mention the library ONCE
*Sighs* What's wrong with library's...
What is it now
@JAMS Dream A bit late for an answer, but, in case someone else wonders the same thing, no, that's not how things work. Libraries buy the work (or receive it from a donation) at which point its theirs and they can lend it to whoever they want as many time as they want without having to pay the creator just like anyone can.
They would have to pay royalties if you had to pay them to borrow the book/movie/album/game/etc, but since no money is changing hands, there is no reason why the copyright holders should get anything.
@@lhumanoideerrantdesinterne8598 thanks bro
Lol
If it helps, MMO Junkie’s director has been fired and blacklisted by the company that made the show. Even their Western sponsors know not to work with or support him anymore. And while it’s a shame that a talented director can’t make more good art, it’s ultimately for the best that a Neo-Nazi has lost the chance to increase his revenue.
As for your point on legally obtaining the work without financially supporting the creator, there is a solution to that: instead of buying your own copy of Chinatown, head to your local library and borrow it. Nothing about that act is legally or ethically wrong, and you’re not putting money in the pockets of evil people.
borrowing art so you can watch it is a great idea when the people dont deserve the money. you can also try to support the people that were not jerks in other ways and avoid the jerk and only the jerk
Um, actually, renting an item at the library does support it's creator. See, libraries have to pay the authors/publishers based on how often the book is checked out, so it's just as bad as streaming it on Crunchyroll, even when you get 14 days free with the code in the description.
@Electro_blob the comparison here is stupid af, McCarthyism is using the state, which has a monopoly on violence to beat down on Leftists. Social ostracisation of neo-nazis is not the same thing. And is good praxis, fuck them. They chose to be a neo-nazi, as long as it's not the government breaking their skulls I'm okay with it. Being a Nazi isn't a protected class, they chose to be a Nazi and will face the consequences of that, if that means they have to shed their beliefs to make anime then so be it.
Electro_blob You changed your mind when presented with a well-reasoned argument. That’s a good thing that should be encouraged. Don’t feel ashamed because you said something that you now think is wrong and had to change your mind; feel proud because you have the maturity and courage to public ally admit to it and grow as a person.
hey, plus 1 for libraries! I think you've hit on a great point. sometimes even works themselves can be morally disgusting, but may still beg study. Libraries are the prefect resource for this! I worked at my university's library and it was an eye-opening experience for me-- such a huge wealth of knowledge collected in one place.
Here’s the thing with piracy: once the show is finished, the amount of watchers doesn’t matter. The artists, animators, and compositors? Have ALREADY been paid. They’re settled and moved on. The only people who continue to profit from viewings are those who own the IP and the company behind the work. You are not stealing from innocent artists by pirating works
yeah lmao i heard the piracy take n was like... homie... nobody is stealing anything from the artists here-
@@aolivep yeah. indie games are the only thing you shouldn't pirate but even then someone that pirates a game probably wouldn't buy it if they couldn't pirate it so it doesn't really matter
Honestly YES
Everything, from books to movies to shows to games, can (and should) be pirated
Only exception is if y9u want to support the works of smaller/indie artists or writers, but that's up to the individual
@@morgoth_bauglir Unfortunately books are an entirely different matter. To make a very complicated system as simple as possible:
Authors are given an advance to write a book. That advance is peanuts compared to the actual time and work that goes into writing. Any other money they make is _directly_ related to sales because they only start getting paid once sales have paid the publisher back for that advance. So if you get paid $2000 to write a book you won't see any more money until the publishers have made that back off your sales. Keep in mind that $2000 was at least a year ago, if not several years because writing takes time.
But it goes beyond that.
Book sales _also_ determine whether an author is likely to get picked up for publication again, and how much of an advance they get and how much negotiating power they're given.
Unless you're Stephen King or Neil Gaiman or someone, you're not gonna be able to sell your books that easily.
For proof, look up 'The Raven Cycle Piracy' for examples on how low book sales almost lead to the cancellation of an author's series entirely and definitely lead to cancelling some editions. (Haven't read the books, don't have a horse in the race, it's just an example.)
Supporting book piracy also supports the systems that pirate other books by artists you might love. It basically means authors are never the sole source of their own work and labour.
Don't pirate books, ever. There are libraries which will get you a book for free if you're willing to wait and there are second hand copies at op shops for peanuts. Don't make exceptions for 'arseholes' because someone is always someone's definition of an 'arsehole'. It's not like movies where a select few directors get a strangehold and will basically always have work. Piracy contributes to a scenario in which only independently wealthy people can write and that scenario sucks, we've been there and it sucked.
Sure. But I guarantee an artist would rather have a project that earned $10m in sales on their resume rather than only like $10k. While one illegal download doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, it seems disingenuous to say the practice couldn't possibly have any effect on their income.
This only feels more accurate after the JK Rowling scandal. I'll still love Harry Potter, just not it's creator anymore
Unfortunately, Rowling let many of her attitudes slip into Harry Potter and it's made it pretty hard for me to appreciate it anymore after being made aware of them
@@TheIonicMan I can see where you're coming from, but I feel I can still enjoy the books for their positive messages. And the movies even more, given the amazing support of all the actors.
Aren't the creatures who own all the banks in Harry Potter an incredibly thinly veiled illusion to Jewish people?
@@enotsnavdier6867 yup, and Rita Skeeter is a thinly veiled allusion to the idea of trans people sneaking into spaces they "shouldn't" be, and lycanthropy is a shitty allusion to AIDS.
@@TheIonicMan I haven’t read the books in awhile so I don’t remember how is Rita skeeter related to trans people
"Rouroni kenshin doesnt have pedophilia bleed over into it"
Kenshin himura is in his thirties in the manga. His main love interest is 16.
Hes 28, Karuo is 17.
@@thesamuraispirit7686 I mean, still.
TheSamurai Spirit7 There’s still an age gap between a grown ass adult and a girl under the age of consent, who would be a highschooler. Someone who could have already got a bachelors degree should not be dating high school chicks. It’s not “child predation” in the way the word “pedophile” is typically thought as, but it still is pedophilia in the legal sense. The fact that the main protagonist is, legally, a pedophile, yet is treated as a good guy, with nobody commenting on the ages or treating it like a bad thing, normalizes this terrible behavior, at least in his art. Of course the pedo makes art where being a pedo isn’t bad, or noteworthy. Even if this age gap was smaller, or more legal, it’s still a noteworthy detail that he did that in the first place.
@@mayatunes yeah but the way Kenshin acts, he always seems to be avoiding Karou. It isnt until much later when they both get married.
@@thesamuraispirit7686 Sure, but why is Kenshin 28? Why did Karou have to be 17? Why did they hang out, over the course of the show, at these ages? Why did the author think there was enough chemistry between the two that he made them get married? They could have had a brother-sister dynamic, they didn't have to be made into love interests. But they were. These were all conscious decisions, made by a known pedo, because he didn't see anything wrong with any of this.
Well considering most of us have smartphones, we all have contributed to a random kid working in a rare earth mineral mine or a kid in a factory to make the phone parts. Or a sweatshop kid making some of our clothes. So its probably impossible to not contribute the bad stuff financially.
Edit:
Some more ideas if gathered from the replies.
Your tax dollars are contributing to saudi arabia which have some fucked up ideologies. The US military frequently does drone strikes on civilians.
So we are all guilty. But we are basically powerless to stop it because of the military-industrial complex. So moral of the story is d̶o̶n̶t̶ ̶p̶a̶y̶ ̶t̶a̶x̶e̶s̶ "dont think about it or do something about it?"
3 things: Sustainably/Ethically, Cheaply(normally) or Comfortably(with the latest tech and not in the woods)
Pick 2
Haha no
Haha yes.
You typed that on a keyboard made in a chinese sweatshop.
It is a lot easier to find a different anime about an otaku to watch than it is to buy a smartphone that wasn't made thru some egregious exploitation of labour.
Ethan Noakes
Its still impossible. Buying food contributes to the GMO company Monsanto which have been fucking over farmers. (im not against GMO, im just against the company's doings). Buying milk contributes to cows being forcibly inseminated that are never even fed grass(kinda ruins the point of being a cow). Using a bank like JP morgan or goldman sachs, supports the CEO's that caused the 2008 crash that got off scott free even though they were convicted. And probably will cause another crash in the next few years. Many people fell into poverty because of that. So indirectly we helped them in poverty.
MightyNacho
Even if that was the case, the minerals leach into the ground water nearby which indirectly kills kids. Many cases of factories that make batteries in china have been known to pollute the ground nearby. Making vegetables toxic to eat since they contain cadmium and stuff. So regardless, simply existing in modern society, you, me and everyone reading this has contributed to some kid far away being poisoned or being born with a deformity caused by the heavy metals in the vegetables/water.
The thing that I think a lot of people and critics miss when talking about "separating the art from the artist" is that it's an easy enough thing to do when it's not you that's personally being persecuted or mocked or excluded. When you're not the one whose existence is considered a threat by bigots (because it all comes from a place of fear), it's much easier to look past instances of harmful rhetoric because you're not impacted on that level, even if you're well-meaning and genuinely believe that the people who are deserve better. Every single person has internal biases from the way they were raised; that's just the way our society is and no individual can change it on a larger scale, but I do wish more people examined those biases critically and understood that "even if I'm not being targeted, I can still have empathy for those who are." Make a personal choice and stand in solidarity against people spreading hate with whatever that means to you, whether it's avoiding their platform and content altogether or consuming it without giving money through pirating or buying secondhand. It's getting harder than ever to make choices that don't negatively impact others, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying completely.
Wait the death of the creators and then buy their works. Solved.
Caíque Aparecido Brite XD
I don't have time to wait for that.
@@DragonWagonzXL watsuki is only 40 or 50 lol
they still have the copyright, and the money goes to whoever inherited the copyright, which may well be their children and who may well share their parents' views. then again, they might not.
Ain't nobody got time for that. Besides, I'd rather not buy or pirate anything from those horrible people. Sure, their former staff who also worked on the animations and shit won't benefit, but at least I won't be stealing from the genuinely good people. I'm ok with missing out on good media if it means horrible people don't get their royalties anymore.
I lean more towards the hate the jerk not the work angle, but I'd say it's important to be acknowledge the connection between the two. The reward for creating something good shouldn't be reduced due to the creators' misdeeds any more than the punishment for said misdeeds should be reduced for the creators' positive accomplishments. To do either would be unjust.
The problem isn't that lousy people have the gall to create things well and truly worthy of appreciation, the problem is that when people admire these creations they like to imagine that the creator matches their idea of an admirable person. And they like to imagine that people they would condemn have nothing of value to offer. This kind of mindset is instinctive and easy and simple, but it is harmful and must be overcome. If we're going to hope to judge actions on their own merit, that is. Otherwise it's all a matter of whose side you're on, then you can excuse or condemn pretty much anything.
"the reward for blah blah blah" bad people should not be rewarded for creating art full stop.
MMO Junkie is a web manga created by Rin Kokuyou. It's HER work. Yaginuma is just one person out of many who adapted it into an anime, but it's not his work. So no, I see no reason to hate the work nor do I see a reason to boycott it. If it really bothers someone that much though then they can just read the web manga. As far as I'm concerned, this situation is way different compared to something like Nobuhiro Watsuki and Rurouni Kenshin.
You see no reason to boycott, but you can at least respect people who choose to boycott themselves, or do you think they're stupid?
They're free to do what they want, but yes, I do think they're overreacting in this particular case. Stupid isn't really a word I would use here though. Maybe ignorant if they're unaware that MMO Junkie is not anime original and actually belongs to somebody else.
right on,my friend
"MMO Junkie is a web manga created by Rin Kokuyou. It's HER work. Yaginuma is just one person out of many who adapted it into an anime, but it's not his work. So no, I see no reason to hate the work nor do I see a reason to boycott it."
I'm pretty sure he said something of that sentiment after like 3 minutes into the video
also buying into child porn, and buying into neo-nazi ideology that supports violent antisemitism; sounds like both condemn-able things that lead to abuse and exploitation of people.
GodOfWar187 its a bit different in the sense we do have a "bargain bin" version of MMO junkie to consume without watching the anime...in a way. We can enjoy the story and the original intent and direction. Anime is made as a commercial to sell volumes of the manga or comic that it's story is taken from, that's why manga magazines are so willing to help facilitate licensing their authors' series.
This is quite a nuanced topic, so here’s my take on it. Let’s start with a well known writer who also heavily influenced an entire genre: HP Lovecraft. I don’t think it’s controversial to say that he was just about every kind of -ist and phobe, due to how he was raised and also the times he was living in. Those themes are also present in his works, and not in a subtle way. The man seemed to be afraid of pretty much any kind of progress made in any field. Just look at how he viewed air conditioning and light invisible to the naked eye.
Then let’s look at JK Rowling, who also was a pretty influential figure. While not exactly as explicit as Lovecraft, there were also very not subtle problematic themes in her books. The goblins running the bank, the Weasleys, the house elves, etc.
Here’s the main differences between the two: first and most obvious, one is dead and the other is still alive. This feeds into my next point, as far as I know Lovecraft did not actively campaign against anything, because he only rose to fame after his death. Rowling on the other hand is very famous now and is using that fame in an extremely terrible way, by proclaiming herself to be an LGBT ally, while supporting people who are actively working to make the lives for those people an absolute hell. Next is that times were different back then, finding out that a white dude who was raised by a family who thought very highly of themselves way back in the day was a racist is not exactly a big shocker. Absolutely not an excuse, but it can be waved away to some extent. Rowling wrote these books in modern times, where these issues have been debated for a very long time, with the general public paying more attention than in Lovecraft’s times.
For me it really comes down to how the author/director/writer/whatever uses their fame and whether they own up to their mistakes in the past. Like Rowling saying that Dumbledore was actually gay all along, that’s just desperate and not true. As well as the severity of the actions they took in the past. I cannot enjoy a work that was made by a paedophile or a nazi, that thought will always be in the back of my mind keeping me from enjoying it
He was just about every kind of -ist and phobe *by the standards of his time and his immediate social group*. It wasn't normal, and served to isolate him massively. Lovecraft's postmortem success and influence on the field have very little to do with anything he actually wrote or even anything he actually did and what he would have seen as the important parts of anything he committed to paper are all-but nonexistent in the genre he spawned.
This is even more important now with the debate online over Hogwarts legacy
@@iusethisnameformygoogleacc1013 "by the standards of his time" wtf is that supposed to mean.
by the standards of any time, he was a piece of shit bigot.
him being born into a racist family is no more an excuse back then than it is today.
the idea that is used to be more okay to be a white supremacist is itself a white supremacist idea. a way to pretend that we shouldn't be criticizing "historical figures" by "modern moral standards" as if anti racism is a new thing.
the dumbledore gay reveal apparently dates from 2007 (a long time before all the lgbt controversy happened), and also dumbledore being gay and his relationship with another man is a major plotpoint in the prequel movies (also written before the controversies) so i dont agree with it being characterised as a desperate move to save face.
i think the lovecraft situation is different as he is dead and not directly profiting from the work.
our modern perception on issues affecting things is true as there definitely wouldnt be as much debate over this let alone lgbt stuff in lovecraft times
I like a principle I heard from the comedian Pete Davidson with regards to listening to R. Kelly's music. Sure, you can still enjoy the art as it stands on its own. But to acknowledge the fact that you're financially supporting someone doing terrible things, donate to a cause that helps counter whatever that artist does in their personal life. Bought the Ender's Game novel? Donate some money to an organization that helps LGBT youth too. Watched Recovery of an MMO Junkie? Support the Anti-Defamation League. Acting in this way will directly support your principles a lot more than a refusal to engage with art only indirectly connected to the things you oppose.
I suppose what you recommended is a good way to assuage any guilt someone might have for enjoying a work by someone who holds views that are hateful, dangerous, etc. or who has done some really awful things. But some of those examples, namely R. Kelly, isn't really something I'd be comfortable with recommending for a number of reasons, including that a lot of his music was made flaunting what he did and that he was able to keep doing the things he did with no consequences. Also if your money goes to someone who is actively hurting people, donating to a charitable organization that MIGHT help victims of people like that particular artist doesn't remove the fact that they are still receiving money that they use to hurt others.
Add to that a lot of charities aren't actually using the proceeds to directly help victims or people in need, and that opens a whole other can of worms.
Honestly, I'd feel a lot better if there could be legal recourse to strip the royalty rights from someone convicted of serious crimes, so if people still wanted to enjoy their music, movies, literature, whatever, then they could rest assured that the money wasn't going to the person in question. None of this is an easy, clear cut deal. I think context matters a whole lot. I like a lot of Kevin Spacey's movies. I watched "American Beauty" a few years before the allegations against him came out, and even though I'd only seen the movie once, the context of all of it made me very uncomfortable and I will never watch that movie again (didn't like it enough to buy it at least). Sorry to give you a wall of text in response, you do make a good point! But I'm not sure it's that simple with any of it.
never support the ADL
Honestly this sounds like a way to cancel out your own personal guilt than anything else. If I put a quarter in a man's child porn fund it doesn't really matter that I gave money to the NCMEC cuz that man is still gonna contribute to the child porn market with my money. Fact is I'm retroactively helping someone but I can't act like I'm helping the people my money will hurt. I'm not saying don't do it, I'm just saying it's kinda shitty to use charity to make yourself feel better.
Pete Davidson is so fantastic. He’s almost single handedly carried SNL at home by making goofy rap videos about how he’s stuck in his mom’s house with her appearing in them. Love this man.
I say pirate that shit and don't contribute to these people, use the money you would've used to buy their stuff and donate that instead- and I say this with pain considering that I just found out about a wholeass controversy with my favorite manhwa series... why can't people just be decent, dammit
Judge the work by the work, and judge people by their actions.
well yeah but the point is that if you buy or support a piece of art then you are supporting the bad person ... by default
@@callumreid6936 fair. I LITERALLY just found this out. I'd say your only seeing it to support the achievements of everyone who worked on it, especially to help the animators pay.
Emilio Reyes including the creators bad habit as well remember that as well ;)
Their work is their action you know
Bad people need to eat too.
This is a complicated issue and I appreciate your take on it.
My views on this are conflicted. Every case is different and can't be treated with a single, blanket solution. In general, my take is to enjoy the art, content, food or whatever, but keep that asterisk in my mind about the creator/actors/CEO/whatever. If that asterisk takes me out of my enjoyment or unsettles me too much, then that's that. But blindly dismissing a creation just because someone involved in it is a bad person or has controversial views is a bit extreme for me.
that is kind of how I feel. there are times where knowing that by buying stuff I'm contributing to terrible people that takes me out of the experience and ruins my enjoyment of a piece of media. I probably won't ever watch any of Roman Polansky work because he is a terrible person. Maybe when he is dead I might watch his movies...
I agree. that hidden line of judgement in my eyes is where man becomes a monster. If the artist was a rapist, pedo, or serial killer fuck them they'll never see a penny of mine. If they're an asshole, unguided or educated as they may be, its a different situation when no one gets hurt.
I only judge the content, not the person behind the content. Were all human, no one is all the way perfect or righteous. Don't get me wrong, being a Pedo or Nazi is horrible, but having 1 or 2 bad morals doesn't dictate who you are as a person.
I say this is a Case By Case situation. If the Artist is a Vile person (like a criminal) then most likely no (pretty much 100% no), especially if you will be supporting their vile actions. If the Artist is not a Vile person (like political stance) then maybe; if supporting them will not help spread or support any certain action then I think treating it as just another piece of art is completely fine. You will already be making the entertainment value calculations in your head like for any other piece of art; like deciding if you would Rather get a Box set of five books for $35 (and the other Box Set of five books for like $47.95 part of the same series) or a Box set of seven books for $105.50
NerdA Itami why don't you just watch the movie online? You know for free.
This video struck a chord with me. I’ve been a huge Marilyn Manson fan since I was a kid, and growing up in a pretty religious part of my country as a bisexual his anti religious message made it easier to ignore the harassment I received. I draw a lot of portraits and I have a folder full of MM drawings some of which are some of my work I’m the most proud of. And then the abuse allegations came out. We all thought his cartoonishly “evil” stage persona was just that, a persona, a reflection of how he viewed the church and its officials of sorts but after more and more women came forward and other people in the same scene who had witnessed the behavior supported their allegations it’s pretty hard to ignore them. I love his music and at first I thought of pirating but the songs don’t sound the same anymore. Just knowing what he did ruined part of the reason why I liked them to begin with. The fact that I’ve experienced some abuse similar although nowhere near as bad as what his ex-partners endured didn’t exactly help either. So now I kind of love the memory of his music but when I try to listen to them now they sound off.
I used to like Lostprophets. Not a lot, but enough to listen to their first album. Someone else gave it to me on a burned CD and I still feel like I supported Ian Watkins too much by listening to it.
@@nightmarefanatic1819 fuck man, rooftops is such a good song but God damn it, it feels bad
Hey. Hope you’re doing ok.
Same with William Control. He even ayed a character for a concept album thing with black veil brides for like half an album, thats actually how I found out about him.(that's no fault of Bvb's given they had no idea about any of it. I think very few people did actually. Will isnt very popular) 4 years later his wife left him and took their young son because of allegations. Now his son is gonna grow up with out a dad and probably won't even know why till he's much older and ready to handle it.
The whole discussion on separating the art from the artist honestly comes down to a personal decision on what you're willing to support, overlook for the sake of something you love, and what you can't overlook. Its also important to be critical of things you love and be critical of what the artists views are so you can see them in the work and acknowledge them.
Just look at the Harry Potter fandom. After the last movie came out, the entire fandom _divorced_ J.K Rowling because of all the BS she did after. But do you have less fanatics? Nu-uh
M & M Excellent example! I was actually thinking about us (the fandom) and how we reacted to jkr and her decisions and views (like being transphobic) a lot of us grew up with her works and so we find it difficult to completely cut out something that made us who we are.
And so a lot of us decided just to never support her in the future and ignore anything she says or tries to add after-the-fact about her works. Most of us have decided to read her works as they are and take what we wish from them.
For me it’s not hard to ignore her because I bought her books through my school when I was 9, her books as they are helped me grow up. For me they’re two separate things.
In fairness, more than a few of those fans divorced Rowling for suggesting Hermione Granger might have been black this whole time as her ethnicity was never made explicit in the books.
Raziel312 You know that’s literally a part of our argument here, right?
Like, that’s a part of the reason people ‘divorced’ her. There isn’t always one reason why. Personally that also played a huge ass part in me ignoring her existence.
@@Raziel312
It says in the books that shes white
@@JackJames-exe people divorced themselves from her because some stuff she said was taken out of context and made it seem like she was trying to change stuff after it happened. If you actually put what she says in context it makes perfect sense and people have just been made to hate her.
You have to learn how to separate the person from their work. When I was a kid I heard some good advice. No matter the person you look up to, there is always horrible flaws about them. This includes your parents, teachers, co-workers, sports teams, religious people, and so on.
If you can't separate the work from the person, then you will always be disappointed when you get to know the person.
UPDATE: Someone recently commented and I took a look at what some said. Some are saying stuff like "MB already covered it in the video: you can’t separate people from their work. It will always be tied to how they perceive the world," This is total BS. Throughout a week, you might overlook the person themselves and you just look at the work. For example, if you go to a restaurant, get your car fix, etc. How many times have you actually looked up the person fixing your car, making your food, or even your doctor? Sure you might see if they are good at their job. Like you don't want a bad doctor or whatever. But, on a personal level. How often have you went out of your way to get to know the person. I'm sure the answer is 0 times. Most likely you use Windows on your computer. Did you know that Bill Gates even today openly calls for eugenics (which is literally what we fought against in WWII and what Germany was doing with groups, and with this excuse even in America. They cut out the reproductive organs of many "undesirables" to keep them from reproducing.)? Oh you use a Mac, and you think that protects you. That's cute, because there is a shopping list there. Even Linux has had seriously questionable people working on it. So are you just going to stop using computers, ATM, most other systems including your phone now? Or do you just care more about the work and a lot less about the person?
OK, you might say some BS about this being art and those things aren't. OK, your phone, the websites you use, the person who design the building you sleep in, or even the person who crafted that thing you bought off Etsy. Have you went out of your way to get to know those people? I'm guessing no.
The only reason why people try to get in an uproar when something like this has happened is because THEY THEMSELVES put someone else in an always losing spot. There is no way someone can 100% meet the image in your mind. Like it or not, you're mad, upset, etc not because of them. But purely because of yourself.
And you might get on a high horse and say well I'm not giving some bad person money. Again, you already done that and most likely about to do it again. In fact, you using CZcams itself shows how much of a hypocrite you are.
__
Oh and just to prove my point a bit more. Look up anyone in modern times, and you will find something. This is to include the founding fathers of America (like George stole money and things from the gov when retired, and you can find where John Adam's wife talking about this in a few letters that was sent to their daughter. Even Lincon didn't really want to get rid of slavery. But he only did it out of need, and he illegally fought against American people and locked up reporters who spoke against him and the crimes he was committing.) Even Jesus has dirt. There is written accounts where he flip some tables in rage and went off on some people when he found out some people were making money from selling religious artifacts. (I guess the turn the other cheek and treat my enemy with love went right out the window, because no one is perfect. Not even him)
My teachers, parents, and coworkers aren't rapists, and I'm not transferring money directly into terrible people's bank accounts
That's actually a good advice.
so you buy their work or not in the end?
That's great but it's more complicated than that. When you consume art legally you are financially supporting a person. If that person's spending money on child pornography then you've enabled them to pay for that by paying them.
Ideologically I agree with you but the practicality of the sentiment varies greatly context to context.
Obviously not everyone's "flaws" are something like being a pedophile but the point stands: not every flaw is as easy to seperate when it's so closely tied to a creators own finance.
@@mickymcbryan4814 This is true. I think everyone has to ask themselves where the line is drawn. I don't even have an answer myself.
I know this video is 5 years old, and yet, the "shoplifting Nesquik is the same as pirating an anime" analogy is so bad that I couldn't resist pointing it out even when I am fully aware I'm screaming into the void.
This is a really good take, except that piracy is not theft. Watching a downloaded copy of Chinatown doesn't remove a copy from the world for someone else, and it doesn't mean the filmmakers lost a sale. I was never going to give Roman Polanski money to begin with, it literally changes nothing whether I watched the movie or not. To call piracy theft, you have to assume that everyone who pirated the film was going to buy it otherwise, which is absolutely not true.
@@andrewsharpe7630 you could be a lawyer if only leading questions weren't a thing.
Exactly! Weird people always think pirates would pay for everything they pirate. But noone would. They would wait for actual good work and pay for that
Yeah, hearing people pretend 'piracy is theft' is a reasonable take in this day and age is fucking bizarre. It's baffling how much more pro-corporate internet culture has become since the beginning of the 2010s.
@@iusethisnameformygoogleacc1013It is theft. Your cognitive dissonace makes you pull all those mental gymnastics to justify your behaviour.
I pirate too but i don't have the nerve to say it's not wrong. You use a product/service you didn't pay for. If you want to use prettier words than "theft" to feel better that's on you.
@@meciocioit’s theft, but the type of theft that you’re not hurting real people with.
many westerners forget that japanese empire was ally of Nazi, and they done similar things. Like killing civilians at china, korea, southeast asia, and doing human experiments in "731". And there are many more artists who miss the "glory" of the past. And that blocks me, korean otaku to fully enjoy anime. I like japan, and japanese people. But i hate the one who want to rebuild the empire including current japanese goverment.
And the real problem is that there is some anime company full of those who miss "glory" (not like single nazi guy, )
Hyunsik Oh Sometimes you cant not think about the past when viewing modern events even in something as mundane as Anime/Hobbies :(
Jason Hymes Did I force them "Western ethics"? So you mean that invading your neighbors and making them into colonies and doing cruel human experiments would be a kind of "ethics"?
Jason Hymes and i was tried to say "that blocks me, korean otaku to fully enjoy anime" not "makes"
Hyunsik Oh I’m korean American and I’ve been questioning that. A lot of Japanese really want to go back to the glory days and I forgot his Korea was under rule for hundreds of years if I’m not mistake. I’m not updated with the current status between the two countries but I know more Japanese hate Koreans than Koreans hate Japanese
I'm a medieval historian. I read a lot of view points from people I morally disagree with.
But there's a vital rule of academia I can't separate from this discussion. "Address the point not the person".
The authors intent and subconscious biases are relevant to the study of a work, but they are not the summation of the work, much less so in a shared project like a film or anime.
As for the supporting of evil? Our governments use taxes to fund terrorism, and prop up blatantly amoral regimes. Your ability to fight the finances is limited at best, and a few pennies going to an edgy Internet nazi are hardly the worst thing your money will ever be spent on. So fight their ideology with discussion and debate, not by limiting your own scope of knowledge and experience. Censorship, isolationism and fear help no one.
Alan Chenery "...a few pennies going to an edgy internet Nazi are hardly the worst things your money will ever be spent on."
But that's entirely within our control. Consciously deciding not to do that should be encouraged, not discouraged.
Utube comment of the year award
Alan Chenery great comment
"Address the point not the person" is a fundamental principle within an isolated, enclosed (usually verbal or psuedoverbal) argument over an issue with an opponent. That's a limited frame. You're trying to then extend that out to a situation in which it doesn't work and doesn't really even apply; a wholly interconnected world of non-isolated things that actually do in a very real sense affect each other.
Well, think about song lyrics for a good example. Someone bragging about what they do to girls who look so fine, and someone else warning his fans that women naturally aren't dependable. Now, those might not be the best messages in the first place but within a catchy song that hooks itself on your brain and you might personally have enjoyed attraction or suffered through disloyalty? It could be the tonic you need in that moment, or even besides that you could just like the music and not think too badly on whatever it's saying. However... find out that the first singer is a paedophile, and the second singer is a wife-beater, and then you're really gonna tell me that the meaning of the art isn't changed by those observations? Because it absolutely is. Songs are a very direct way of giving an example of that because they're typically so short and subject-simplistic compared to other mediums, however the same idea does apply in other mediums (just in usually a much more difficult way to explain).
People get into modes sometimes that are a bit too dry and academic, and forget that nothing exists in a bubble. When you start grabbing mantras out of the air and applying them to real life, you know you've gone wrong somewhere along the line and need to step back and get a bit of perspective, because that's the wrong approach - it should be real life that's informing you of what mantras apply, not the other way around (starting with mantras and reframing real life in order to concur with them).
The most capably clever among us really are the ones who get the most easily lost when it comes to actual wisdom. And I say that whilst counting myself in that group.
I think a lot of it comes down to who we're talking about. In the case of MMO Junkie, it's a director of an adaptation - not the source material's writer - that's a POS. Something like Kenshin is the other way around, and to a worse degree. While I agree in general about piracy, I will never willfully give money to a creator who's so depraved they're an actual pedophile that supports the sex trade. Art SHOULD be judged on its own merits, and you can't help it if something is influential/you really love it, but there are some lines I won't cross - I'm willing to operate in that grey area.
Oh, and, while I'm no esteemed critic, Polanski is overrated. Never got the hard-on so many people have for his filmography. Plus, you know, he's a serial rapist, which makes it even more confusing.
Literally the only film of his that I was ever interested in seeing was the Pianist and that interest fucking EVAPORATED once I realized he was the dude who directed it.
Don't feel negative stuff on art since people like you and i done really bad stuff.
We steal, we lie, we hate etc
Sometimes we have moral opinions that others hate.
So, what your saying is that we should rent out either the manga or blu ray of anime made by bad people from our local libraryy
Don't libraries also pay royalties?
@@CutsiePie_ no, because you don't pay the library to use it.
@@_ikako_ I mean, you do. At least where I live, you pay to lend the book, don't you?
@@CutsiePie_ if you pay a library to borrow a book, then you're not going to a library. You're going to a rent store.
@@_ikako_ Damn, you're right. I was thinking of Library cards, but apparently you only pay when you pass your borrow date
Here before taken down by copyright
Yaginuma actually responded to this video perfectly politely, despite how antagonistic, insulting and dehumanizing MB was being.
Boo Machine now that's ironic how he was the one dehumanizing him... The jew hater.
MonarchTherapsids Inostran
Yaginuma never called someone a garbage human, and is actually arguing against the horrible righ-wing Japanese government. You should at least try to understand his perspective before hating him.
Boo Machine How was MB being insulting, and dehumanizing? I didnt see him say anything that couldnt be proven true, and if just saying the facts is insulting or dehumanizing then its the person committing those acts doing that to themselves, not the people reporting it.
Ainz Ooal Gown it was the tone of voice he used and some of the words he used this video felt way too political than it should’ve I mean he’s comparing someone who has committed an actual crime to someone who denies the holocaust
I felt conflicted with the Cosby show. It has been a big part of mine childhood. It got my mom through college. The characters are likable, the stories and lessons are compelling, and it's one of the few tv shows that shows a positive portal of a wealthy black family.What Bill Cosby did was horrible and he should definitely rot in jail for the rest of the remaining years his life. However, I’m still gonna watch and enjoy The Cosby show, but I won’t associate Cliff Huxtable with Bill Cosby. As far as I’m concerned those two aren’t even remotely related.
MAGAMan. Z er0 having sex with an unconscious woman is rape. The end
Watch this shit written by Bill Cosby & see if you're still so sure he's innocent.
czcams.com/video/SBDRwiSZBg/video.html
That shit sounds creepy even without the new context the rape brings. His character's so insistent about it & sounds so villainous & pervy & the whole thing goes on so long without ever starting to sound even remotely funny.
It's like he was thinking "Ha, I'm putting a metaphor about me being a rapist in a family show & using kids in the joke & no one knows it. I love being a piece of shit."
@MAGAMan. Z er0 well, he convicted now. U happy?
The same goes for me. I LOVE the Cosby Show. I always watchd it as a Kid an have the entirer Series on DVD. I hat Bill Cosby. That dosnet stop me from rewatching the entirer Series once a Year.
@@beautifullEternal alot of the claims were fake, some consensual, and a small amount might have been real.
How did Harry Potter go down the hill?
By walking
Jk, rolling
Another person to mention, the Dragon Quest composer. Japanese nationalist and war crime denier, also gave the west worse versions of his music because Square Enix gives composers rights to their own music
90% of stuff I watch/listen to, I don't even bother getting invested in the artist's personal life.
If I like their work, I'll support their work. What they do with their money and influence is up to them and anyone who wants to listen. I personally don't, but if other people want to, it's not for me to tell them what to do or believe.
Me too
I agree
Agreed. I don't idolize the person in the art, I value the art, and if the people in the art seem chill, that only adds to it.
I saw something about an actor from the 1950s who was gay, and he was protected from being exposed by the media by Warner Bros until he no longer worked for them. Like, next-day allegations came up when he stopped working for them. The machine for these things is money, and the machine will defend anything so long as it can produce said money.
It looks like a lot of theses alleged sexual deviants were protected by the house, or machine, and now that there is more exposure, and pressure to expose, pretty much anyone in that space that's been immune to backlash for their misgivings is going to be cut off from that protection. I'm somewhat okay with this, but I'm not going to ignore a body of work from someone due to this information coming to light, doesn't make any sense that I should stop liking and loving Quentin Tarantino movies just because he's had some bad publicity.
I agree, but at the same time doing something like, say, watching any scene of Rurouni Kenshin involving children knowing he's a pedophile and, well, it's a little hard not to get a bit uncomfortable.
Well said.
Did Nazi this coming.
Martin Gustavsson nice
Goddammit
gabe ferrer dont compliment such an overused joke, will ya?
the 3 second after understanding the jokes XDDD
You're horrible. I like it.
A well done video. I seriously enjoy listening to your take by take narration and explanation of whatever video I click on.
As for the subject of this particular video...
I never knew about this horrid crime from the creator of my high school manga obsession, Rurouni Kenshin.
It's highly unsettling to find out and it makes me not to ever want to go anywhere near any of his titles again. Despite me having loved Rurouni Kenchin, Buso Renkin, and wanting to delve into his Embalming series.
I'm very grateful that I found out about this so I would be able to hold off on funding more into this.
I was so convinced that separating the art from the artist was easy but this video put that ideia to the test, and it’s hard
scrolling to the comment section was a mistake
jackkuro your not alone in that thought
jackkuro, even the Mother's Basement sub-reddit had a pretty nasty comment or two. They got down voted to hell though, so no worries.
Yes and Latin America has the highest homicide rate and other news rain is wet. You see what i mean we can be here in the commit section shooting facts all day if you want.
Dank Lemon oh cute, a wordpress made by another fanatical racist; because those are always legit with a myriad of facts. Fuck off.
@@haven7617 Most aren't white though. By ACTUAL logic, most are in Muslim countries. It's not even a remotely comparable number to whites.
As a wise man once said...
"Love the art, hate the artist."
Javier Rico That man doesn't sound wise at all.
@Mitch You don't either.
I think it's "love the sinner, hate the sin"
Joshua Graham fallout new Vegas
Or as he said in the video: "love the work, hate the jerk."
@@reyniki4820 love the character hate the actor
An example can be english dub Goku
Sean Schemmel the voice of Goku violated a fan who wanted to get an autograph by pulling her shirt towards him in order to peek at her cleavage but he gets no hate. While false sexual assault claims were onto Vic the voice of Broly who innocently hugged that same fan.
The problem is ethical consumption is almost impossible under our system so it's not particularly worth it to deprive yourself completely of a service without massive regime change. I think the best you can do is acknowledge that these people do horrible things, and if it does bothers you that bad then go ahead and stop doing it
Agreed, there really isn't that much we the fans of things can do. It is up to the fat cats who sign the paychecks and hire known human scum to stop doing that and support workers who either don't have a scandal waiting to happen, or at least don't YET have a scandal. We can refuse to purchase content, but the number of people who do is usually not enough to make any significant impact on overall income from the product and thus no real reason for the company taking everyone's money to change their marketing to their own possible detriment just to do something ethical to please the fans who actually care enough to do anything.
Morality is irrelevant until it starts hurting profits.
'Almost'. Closer to 'basically impossible'. A racist worked on your favorite video game. A homophobe was a crew member on your favorite movie (especially childhood). Disney was an anti-semite. Liberal comic writers/artists/inkers of the 90s are conservatives of the 2010s. If you start limiting yourself to things which have had 0 bad people involved, you need to gaslight yourself. Also, that wizard game.
Then there's always the chance that even if you did find this miracle product, it's a matter of time before they do or say something objectionable with shifting mores of the times. I've seen Friends accused of homophobic content because of various reasons, but I was there when it aired. They were trying to paint homophobia as a bad thing and we're supposed to laugh at the homophobe. Also, that wizard game.
Enjoying something a bad person made, especially if they haven't been bad yet, is kinda weird to me. I mean yeah if their 'art' is basically shitting on a group of people.. well those who enjoy it for that will enjoy it regardless.. but I'm talking about Kenshin or Ender's Game. Ethical consumption is at best an ideal, at worst a display of hypocrisy. I can understand not wanting to be associated with a specific type of person, but reality dictates that if 1/10 person is 'bad', then 1/10 people working on your favorite thing was bad too. Also, that wizard game.
Did you know for the wizard game warner bros is the one getting money. Rowling only owns the Harry Potter book series not the game.
I'm coming back to this to re-watch it after a good while- my general rule, though obviously not always practical, is to wait till that person is dead. Then the royalties go to less terrible companies/relatives
I'm gonna say some of my opinions here, no need to agree with me.
Let make this clear from the start, I in no way agree with the director's ideology nor am I ok with it being spread but if you look at the show, it doesn't show any Nazi propaganda or even hint at it.
Hundreds of people work hard on this piece of art, encouraging people to boycott them is clearly not the right way to deal with this problem, there are animators, sketchers, screen writers etc. Are you telling me that anyone who has worked with this one director is doomed to fail because of that one person? (again he didn't show his ideology in the anime)
Of course not. I don't think anyone is saying that. In fact, the general consensus is in favour of enjoying the show regardless.
I agree with you.
I agree, I still buy Rurouni Kenshin not because I support what Watsuki did, but because I love the story of RK and I’m showing my support to Weekly Shonen Jump Magazine, while also showing to myself that through this I can move on from what happened, and still love and support my favorite manga of all time.
Omar Animations We can love art while hating the artist. The fact is that many artists in history haven't been good people. The morals of an artist is not always supported by their art.
Guys Talk Radio yeah I agree with you, for example H. P Lovecraft was a flat out racist, still his art is magnificent (though this is a bit different since slavery was very common in his time)
I literally died when he just went "Unless it's SAO"
a lot of people keep bringing up Poe and Lovecraft but here's the thing: they are dead and so who they are as people and their political stances can't harm people who don't choose to interact with their content. But the creators Goeff is talking about? they are still alive and able to do active harm to people who are alive. They still benefit from the money we spend, Lovecraft can't give a shit if I buy his collection because the money goes to his estate (or a foundation or the publisher or whatever) and not him.
but like the other thing: the animators and cinematographers and composers etc etc have already been paid. the only people who still make money from us watching and interacting with the content are the companies and those who get royalties so honestly its super easy to just pirate this stuff because the people who are innocent in this already got paid so what we do won't effect them.
Came back here after hearing someone talk about the Vic defamation suit and boy it just kinda affected me.
I don't think it's wrong to enjoy media from bad people I myself was a huge rurouni kenshin fan but going back I just cannot lose that feeling of dissonance.
I don't want to lose all enjoyment in one of favourite series but I just can't shake that visceral discomfort and seeing fans try to write off accusations because of their love for an actor/director just makes it worse. It starts to feel like I'm tacitly participating if I just pretend not to know about real life scandals.
because that's what you would be doing, tacitly supporting.
separating art from artist is for cowards, so good on you for recognizing that it just isn't that simple.
I'm boycotting you!
Not because of your views, but because you refuse to change your name to Girlfriend's Flat!
Brodie Crain that’s actually hilarious
Brodie Crain
Mother's Basement isn't a place. It's a lifestyle.
@@PredictableEnigma nah, it's just a place, nothing much
Yet another compelling reason to just pirate everything...
Edit: made it to 13:53... He got me.
@JAMS Dream did you not watch the video?
@JAMS Dream gogoanime go brrrrr
@JAMS Dream I'd recommend watching Uniquenamasaurous's video on Piracy. It's a long, 2 part video but well worth it
Solution: Get pre-owned DVD's/Blu-Ray's
Gaming Lakitu or pull out ur good old pirate hat lmaO
Michael Jackson is still hailed as the King of Pop bc his music revolutionialized the industry. I feel like these issues will exist regardless of art being made or not.
Jokes on you, i rarely even look into who makes the media i enjoy, dilemma avoided XD
Colin Osterloh Does doing something bad out of ignorance make that action ok?
I don't really have a solid disposition on this question, but I'll try to answer and say yes. Ignorance lacks malicious intent behind the action, makes it ok. That said, it's also ok to punish the principal offender of ignorance.
TheActionjb But to start with its not really "bad" to watch something because someone has a view. Literally any thoughts, opinions, or ideas can be proven bad if you look at them the right way. Just because someone is racist and a idiot doesnt mean you shouldnt enjoy your life to fuck theirs over.
TheActionjb It does make it okay because everyone does it anyway, by the logic that any money you spend on a product that goes towards some one else doing something wrong or spreading their terrible thoughts is you supporting them that means literally every person in a country with money has participated in such an action one way or the other.
Or do you mean to tell me you track every cent you spend at a grocery store, parking meter, dinner ect. ect. to make sure not one person that is getting paid even a fraction of the amount you spent has done something wrong?
+TheActionjb No just goes to show that it doesn't fucking matter if some asshat spews some garbage separate from something he is involved in creating. Because the garbage never made it into that thing he created.
If the owner of a bakery thinks same sex marriage should be illegal but his store still sells wedding cakes to anyone regardless if it is for a same sex marriage or not. Then why should I stop buying shit there, other then to not get diabetes.
Mozart was a (actually) misogynist douchebag who frequently drank before spending money on his wife, who he was unfaithful to if I remember right. But his work will only be held as one of the pillars of classical music, influential forever to the very fabric of how music came to be. So, I say love the art, and if you must, hate the artist.
Mozart is dead though, so listening to his music doesn't support him.
Paganini was a piece of shit, but his works make me nut. For me, the quality of work and the quality of person do not correlate. If a murderer says 2+2=4, then he's correct.
"People will get more from what he stood for than from the bean he actually was." -Some guy from Rick and Morty
"He drank before spending money on his wife" wait what's the problem?
elronman back then she was probly completely dependant on him for every thing so it's deffintly more of a dick .over there
Ngl when i first found out about jon that shit hurt. Ive been watching him since like 7th grade in 2012
If it makes you feel any better, in terms of the jon stuff and who he is politically, in the very rare occasions other than this one where he talks about politics, he actually does come off as a pretty liberal guy (not saying that makes him automatically good or anything, I mean liberal in the sense that he's very accepting of people regardless of there differences whether it be racial, sexual, etc). The incorrect statistic he brought up was ironically actually meant to push the point that defining racial groups is unnecessary and that discrimination can come from anywhere and be targeted at anybody, and this point specifically was meant to be an example of a statistic that people would be uncomfortable in talking about because it's one that implicates a minority group rather than a majority, however because the statistic itself was false that point sort of fell on it's face in the eyes of the general public. It doesn't seem like he was purposely using this false fact in order to promote racism, it's more like he probably read it off hand somewhere and used it as a point in his argument without realizing that it didn't pertain to the discussion at hand.
@@ccbg1210 Dude everything Jon spewed in the destiny debate was white nationalist conspiracy theories. It sucks but he is likely still far right.
I’m glad you didn’t take a hardline stance in this video - questions like these are *complicated* and don’t have a simple, easy, or universally-applicable answer. And people who insist that they do are usually willfully ignoring nuance. (That being said, I lean pretty hard in the direction of “no separation between art and artist if they’re causing harm” …but I still think it’s complicated and requires persistent active thought and reflection)
Also, I just wanna say that your lamp - with its five goosenecks, lack of lampshades or reflectors, and exclusively CFL bulbs - *STRESSES ME OUT* for completely irrational reasons.
I have the opposite of the idol mentality you mention at the beginning of the video. I run off of a baseline assumption that every artist/creative personality is fucked up in some way or another. Whether it's having skeletons in their closet, or airing eccentric (to put it nicely) opinions openly on Twitter, it never surprises me. I continue to support the ones I like, because I never paid them to be upstanding people to begin with. I paid them to create interesting art. As long as that doesn't change, their work is fine by me.
I agree!
(nice profile pic, btw)
dig deep enough and you'll get dirt on anyone..... There are no saints... It's just that a lot of people seem to hold "celebrities" to a different standard
Interesting stance. I’ve never considered that.
this makes me feel comfortable with life again, thanks mate.
I can say this is true. I came from art school and surrounded with the most effed up people with different effed up mentalities and quirks. But are just the most talented people today.
We are all effed up in our own special way in our own special degree.
We should stop thinking we’re better than others.
Death of the Author is always a complicated subject, but one I firmly believe in. Its not that the author and his problems dont exist, but Creator(the person) and Creator( the...creator) exist as seperate entities. Unless the Creator actively, not through coding, but through analog, pushes their views into a story.
Heck, Geoff I dont agree with YOU Half the time on stuff you put out, but that doesnt mean you arent a major influence on who I want to be as a creator someday.
We cant spend our lives playing seven degrees of MMO Junkie, looking at how our crunchyroll subscriptions affect things halfway around the globe, when there are so many factors in between here and there. And even if we did, sure. One really bad guy does something squicky, but a,whole BUNCH of dedicated animators got to create something awesome, that they probably really cared about. And thats way more important.
All in all, I enjoyed MMO Junkie, and would love to watch more, just as much as I look forward to,your content. Maybe they arent really in the same wheelhouse, but seeing some of the other messages...we could all use a little more positivity.
This isn't really about Death of the Author, which is about who should have more authority when it comes to the interpretation of a piece of art or text. It is more about intellectual responsibility, which is about whether or not a consumer or audience member is responsible in some way for a creator's bad morality by consuming their art, supporting them financially, opening themselves up to the author's influence, and so on. There are numerous problematic ways for a bad creator to make their audience complicit in the creator's morality, either by hiding bad morality in their art to be consumed or by forcing their audience to inadvertently support the creator's actions/beliefs through economic/cultural support.
It's more complicated than just a number of factors, easily ignored because they aren't packaged into the anime we're watching. It's difficult to deal with because as members of an audience we are pretty helpless in influencing a creator's moral opinions and have limited options in dealing with existing bad creators.
True, Death of the Author is similar enough that I tend to use it as a catch-all term. Also I was referring to the point specifically in the video where Geoff brings up that our money is indirectly paying for illegal, and black market business transactions. I don't think its fair for everyone who watches Kenshin to blame them selves for something like that, when the money that we spend on that product is filtered through so many other sources.
In Regards to influencing problematic Creators, yea it sucks. I never mean to support ignorance, I just think there is no answer. All of this information has been aired out about MMO Junkies's Creator, and now we are left with a choice. Continue watching regardless, or Boycott. If I choose to keep watching does it mean I support the Directors beliefs? I say no, Others will say yes, And we will both have our Justifications. My Justification is that the director has no influence over my enjoyment or interpretation of the project.
Now if MMO Junkie got a second season and introduced an Anime Exclusive character who is a Neo-Nazi, well that's..that's a whole different subject all together since now it's clear the director is actively INFLUENCING the subject material. I sometimes have trouble putting thoughts to words, so apologies if this sounds...convoluted or something.
This ignores the issue of financing. If I buy a product that funds ISIS, ISIS will succeed in killing more people with my dollars. That's a moral hazard of the Oil and Drug trades today, among all their other issues.
The idea that they are separate is not reflective of reality. It is a strong philosophical argument in regards to the interpretation of works, but in the real world if you pay for Kenshin you pay to defend a pedophile. There's no ambiguity there, it's a verifiable fact. The Death of the Author in this case is irrelevant: If you pay for Kenshin a pedophile has a slightly higher chance of going free, or at least living in superior luxury until he's sentenced.
Ideologically I agree. Realistically I will now pirate the show instead of legal streaming as I usually do. The only downside for me is that innocent animators may suffer, but that is an understood part of the Capitalist system: Deny profits to an entire organization to demand changes among key leadership.
And that's fine! That's the decision you've made and I for one completely understand it. As I said before, I don't support living in ignorance, but informed decision making. You as a consumer hold all the facts, and thus all the power and decision making.
I think its a little off to compare a full team of writers and animators to a terrorist organization, but I get the point your making nonetheless. My own personal belief is that it IS worth paying all the other animators, writers, as well as supporting the show itself.
Actually I've realized something in the time since watching this video, we are talking about the DIRECTOR of MMO Junkie, not the original Author of the source material, so in that particular case, it would be possible if the manga ever got an official translation and release, to purchase IT rather than pirating/watching the anime.
Kenshin on the other hand is rougher since we are talking about the original creator, but watching the anime through a streaming service, and not buying any of the direct manga, or anything he had a direct hand in, would at least minimize the amount going directly to the original writer.
At the end of it, Yes, the money going towards these people is terrible, and I hate it. But the fact remains that this world would be a smaller place without the Material they produced. Other shows, games, and such media will be inspired by these products, and maybe, just maybe, one of the many different animators who worked on the project will gain recognition and rise to the top themselves.
I am not saying you are wrong AT ALL. We both have very strong views/opinions on the matter, again enforcing that there might not BE a straightforward answer on this one. But it IS always worth discussing.
Unfortunately this metric changes when the author is still alive, still spreading their awful views (or doing awful things) while their work is discussed and praised.
How dead is an author you can just @ on twitter?
0:35 - "Probably says a lot about Japanese Cultures and it's tendency to sweep it's own horrific warcrimes under the rug"
I've honestly heard that they *do* generally teach what Japan did and didn't do but it's presented more like...stark facts rather than anything they should be guilty of.
And remember, this is also a country that hasn't/won't apologize for everything they'd done to Korea and China even *before* WWII.
That seems accurate. I went to the Hiroshima Peace Museum a few years back and it was very much the same thing; aside from the message of peace via paper cranes there was little of anything politically charged there.
How long should they feel guilty for what happened? Most of the ppl around weren't even alive during the war? Why should they be guilty?
@@risensoldier until they, uh, apologize, stop calling sex slaves "comfort women" and slave labor "not slave labor" at least?
"Guilty" is perhaps the wrong word, but outright *lying* about history isn't the solution.
Acknowledge your actions, accept the consequences of those actions and work to better things for the future instead of just trying to bury the past. And definitely don't try that shit where you literally *_buy into your own propaganda_*
It's embarrassing as fuck living in the US and seeing lawmakers either unintentionally or intentionally getting basic K-12 history facts flat out wrong.
@@KaiTenSatsuma they've already moved past it and looking to make something better, does it matter so much whether they apologize or not? and why should they apologise for what their ancestors did, its not going to change anything.
you mentioned that their museum presents what happened as facts, thats how it should be, museums present facts not feeling, not sure what you mean by them lying if its all there on display in a museum
@@risensoldier you're 1/3 right.
They *have* moved past it.
They haven't acknowledged, apologized or accepted what they've done.
This isn't a hard concept. "Moving on" without doing any of the other things isn't actually acknowledging the wrongs you committed. It'd be like if someone did something shitty to you and then ignored your complains because "They've moved on".
History as a spreadsheet isn't history. History needs context, which includes emotion. _Why_ something was done, _Why_ it was right or wrong, _Why_ we don't, for example, Ship people like sardines in from Africa to work our farms anymore. Without that all you're teaching is statistics
"I'm torn. [...[ I guess it ends up being up to the individual: s/he can choose if s/he finds it OK to deprive him/herself from a cultural object of value just because of the despicable ideas or behavior of their creator."
That is the main point, isn't it? Here's how I view it. There is ALWAYS someone despicable involved. If not "the author", then someone else in the production committee, or one of the animators, or the VAs, or one of the support personnel. As Homura from Madoka Magica would say, it's statistics. Statistics tell us that there will always be some despicable person involved, and s/he will get money via royalties or salary that ultimately comes from us.
Considering how complicated the world has become, and how many people are involved these days in doing anything -- from guaranteeing that there are groceries for you to buy at the supermarket to actually producing immortal works of art that shape your soul -- there is bascially no way other than refusing to buy anything anywhere that will prevent your money from ultimately ending up in the hands of people whose personal beliefs or private actions you don't want to support or condone. It's the nature of money in a complex society.
Furthermore, if "death-of-the-author" theories are right (I don't necessarily subscribe to them, but), then the work of art should be considered on its own merits, by itself, independently of the personality and/or preferences of the women and men who contributed to its existence, including the author, the director, the VAs... All of them.
So here's what I think: the work of art and the author (or any other woman or man involved with its creation) are simply different entities. Just as a child is not responsible for his mother's crimes, a work of art is not "responsible" (how could it even possibly be? a work or art is not a sentient being) for the crimes of its many authors (or readers, who these days are assumed to "co-create" it in the act of enjoying/consuming it). And the problem of financial support for bad ideas/behaviors is inevitable, if you take into account ALL individuals inolved. So: enjoy the work of art as much as you want, and criticize publicly the bad beliefs or behaviors of the women or men who created these works of art. Polanski is a bad person, and Chinatown is an excellent movie. Admire the latter, criticize the former. We can do both. It's ultimately more consistent, and more humanistic.
And also: since both positions (don't-support-the-author vs. separate-the-author-from-the-work) are legitimate, and can be held for legitimate reasons... respect those who decide to think differently. If somteone prefers not to consume works of art that s/he admires because of the bad things their authors/producers/etc. did, then that's OK. I'll expect this person not to criticize me for not agreeing with him/her -- as I explained above, I also have legitimate reasons to disagree -- but his/her viewpoint is also legitimate, and I'm fine with him/her doing what s/he sees as right.
You make a good point but i think the great concern with this kind of situation is if the garbage human beings are involved creatively with the work of art, because the work will probably be affected by their views in some way. If the garbage is involved with the finacial side of things is still very, very, bad but the garbage might not inflence so much in the messages that the work is trying to convey.
I also think that using "always" may be exaggerated, probably using "often" is better is that situation.
I believe in the separation of artists and their art. Although I hate the possibility that my money goes into the pocket of an asshat or criminal, in the end their labour is more important than their actions outside it. If they spread hateful or harmful ideas, then I will condemn it, but still respect them for not using their art to spread it. If they are a criminal, well, they will be punished by law whether I support their labour or not, and I will say that I am not supporting their action with my money.
"Their labour is more important than their actions outside it" You do know what Nazi ideology entails right....? You know wanting entire races and ethnicities either exterminated or subjugated and indoctrinating others to want the same isn't just being an "asshat"? Either you're a 7th grader or you have some seriously warped priorities.
LittleDogTobi that was just poor choice of words on my part, as "actions" could mean anything from retweeting a bad message to murder, or even genocide. Sorry for my poor phrasing
if someone likes a piece of art, he should be allowed to enjoy it despite the artist being an asshole or even a nazi... If you can't look past it, than don't consume their art...
I dislike Wagner because he ruined the Nibelungen Saga, him being pretty supportive of the 3rd Reich is just something to reinforce my opinion about him..... Ride of the Valkyries is still pretty good, and him being a nazi (supporter) doesn't change the fact
I definitely kind of agree with you, when looking at a piece of art it's important to separate the finished product from the person who made it, but there are some times where that's not possible. An example of this is Wagner, the extremely talented composer who was also an open anti-semite who wrote an essay decrying the "Jewishness in Music", whatever that means. The operas that he wrote obviously came from his point of view and as such, his anti-semitism plays a part in the narrative (some scholars assert that some of characters are based on Jewish stereotypes). If we didn't know that Wagner was an anti-semite, it would be easy to not notice the stereotyping or to think that it was just an accident, but knowing his views on Jewish people is a necessary starting point for analyzing his work. That being said, not all artworks directly try to argue political points but all are made from a point of view about the world and represent that point of view.
I get that it's a good ideal, but for someone in Geoff's position - His position IS now part of his work. How to square that, properly? I admit to having a devil of a time figuring it out.
I think this was a really great and nuanced look at this subject. I really applaud you for being able to express such a level argument in such a climate. I myself haven't really made up my mind yet, but maybe making the asterisk as obvious as the praise for a stunning work of art might be the beginning of a solution.
"This person watched child-porn at some point which makes him a worthless person" , now that's nuance if I have ever seen one.
Boo Machine Are you implying that people who watch child porn aren’t worthless? Please tell me that isn’t what you’re trying to say.
P. Sqqp well, I would consider kenshin worth my money. That's the quality of the content. However, given the context of who wrote it and what they do with money, I will never watch it, read it, or give him my money.
Jakob Transrud, that's because you are unbelievably bigoted, good job.
Boo Machine I will praise him for his work, but I refuse to give him money for his actions. Note actions, not beliefs. These actions are buying child pornography with the money he made from his work as a mangaka. If I cared enough I'd boycott various products for the actions of the big businesses that made them. This is what a boycott is. I'm not boycotting MMO Junkie (the BELIEFS of one man who DIDN'T create the original story). I'm boycotting Kenshin (the ACTIONS of a man who DID create the original work).
This same question has come up regarding Marion Zimmer Bradley. One issue there I've read of is that knowing of the allegations against her, a different, darker meaning of her work comes about. Her husband (Walter Breen) was a published expert in the numismatic field, and there is reluctance in that field to use his reference books or reference his work in general. Granted, with Breen it's easier to ignore his works these days, but MZB's Darkover series had been influential for other authors and readers, who now wonder if they can ever read them again.
I like the idea that, especially for art reviewers and critics, the work is left to speak for itself but with an asterisk of "and FYI, the director is a [insert horrible thing here]".
The art should be allowed to be art, but the audience deserves to be made aware of the horrible thing that is involved with, even if only tangentially, to it's creation so that they can make an informed decision on how to react.
lol maybe don't say "X is a pedophile" and then show some unrelated person on screen
BUT if you show a Person on the Screen when you Say that... Then:
X = "Unrelated Person" {You'd be Saying That Person is One}// Whether you would meant it to be or not
I think it was an interview with the author. The person whose back is faced to the viewer seems to be him
dDeckon what
AH, didn't see the word "Don't" there...
I thought Your comment was about a Way to talk about a Subject without referencing a Named Person
I study literature and sometimes that includes studying authors who hold values I don't agree with especially some of the older ones. For example, i love gothic horror especially Poe. Poe has inspired me as a writer and an artist but he was a person of questionable character. I tend to separate art and creator because I like what I like too much to live without it. I like their art, not their personality. I don't know if my way is right but its just how I handle it.
I had the same sentiment with regards to Lovecraft. His work, albeit being the modt primitive and prototypical examples of cosmic horror, is an excellent and unique brand of horror so impactful it is a genre we pay tribute to today, and yet, Lovecraft himself is a xenophobe, a racist. Don't get me started on his cat.
Despite that, he's still an important figure in the history of horror. It also helps that he's long dead, so...
I would say that's easier to do if the person is dead and no longer receiving financial support from their works. It's another issue entirely when the awful person is not only still breathing, but stands to gain from that support and use it to further their awful behavior and/or agendas.
I know this post is three years old, and you've probably changed your views, but I have to point out that Poe and Lovecraft were different. Poe was a pedophile. His wife was 14. Lovecraft was racist, but later married a Jewish woman and recanted everything he once said. Lovecraft was so paranoid and distrustful that he pretty much hated everyone. I don't know if this changes his clearly, horribly racist views on black people, though (as seen in his stories). So I think it's childish to continue supporting works of clearly bad people all because it made you warm and fuzzy at some point.
I don't know why you didn't mention the grey market in this video. Creators don't get royalties when you buy a used DVD from a third party, and it's actually legal.
It's an interesting question and a hard one to answer, your use of the enders game example is a good one
I tend to separate art from artist, if the artist doesn't really come across within the work of art itself. Like Mozart, Michael Jackson, Lovecraft, etc. Their creations are something I highly appreciate, while I don't really care for what the people themselves were necessarily like or what they possibly did. I will thank a doctor for his work and still call him an asshole for being an asshole.
Arexion5293
Jackson wasn't a pedophile and Jontron isn't a racist. No need to sperate them from their art.
Still do it anyway, especially in cases where it is unclear whether or not something has indeed happened. I treat people as people and their work as their work.
in regards to love craft you can argue his hardline anti immigrant stance and racism kinda helped improve his work in the case of a few of his storys at least
I generally agree. I had to figure this out when I found out that Marion Zimmer Bradley molested her own 2 year old daughter (allegedly).
Kenshin's entire character, his entire arc, revolves around atonement for his horrible war crimes, namely mass murder of civilians. His commitment to his oath, his growth as someone who knows that his sword only brings destruction to his life and the lives of those around him, and the manga's overall message about how we can grow as individuals, makes Watsuki's situation ironic. I find it fascinating how it's so easy to treat a fictional character as a hero regardless of their past deeds and act as if, if they were real, things would be the same, yet with a real life human being it's nigh-impossible to think of them as anything other than a monster, even if they donate to charity the rest of their life.
Is it possible for Watsuki to ever get the help he needs and atone for his horrible sins? Let's be clear that he did plead guilty and swore to reflect and remorse for his actions. Even if he did, would it matter? And would your view of Kenshin as a character be colored by this?
It's worth remembering that we are talking about the Japanese justice system here. Even if they apparently don't see anything wrong with it, gave him a slap on the wrist, and decided that him losing his job was punishment enough, once he was before a judge there was no real chance of ruling of Not Guilty, even if he was genuinely innocent. Once you're brought to trial you either plead guilty or are convicted. Their justice system is hilariously rigged and the only people with any knowledge of the subject who say otherwise are Japanese. Winning, as a defendant just isn't a thing that really happens. So he made the decision that lessened the impact on himself. They also had him dead to rights.
It is also worth remembering that we're talking about very different things here. Kenshin fought in a war for what he believed in and came to regret the actions he took, devoting every aspect and moment of his life to atonement. His author financially supported the rape of children, paid a fine, and went on with his life. They are not equivalent in any way. Even if you ignore the atonement side of things and pretend it's possible he really has committed to somehow making up for his crimes...it's the difference between being a murderer and a rapist, effectively. One is something a person can atone for and can have multiple mitigating factors; for sex crimes like that, there just are not. They're things done for your own gratification and there is no excuse for them.
@@iusethisnameformygoogleacc1013 did... did you just say murder is better than rape?
@@randomrandle9141 no he said murder can be somewhat understandable depending on the circumstances like war or self defense. but you can't rape in self defense, there can't be any mitigating factors to that action.
@@wesleywyndam-pryce5305 Irregardless he still seems to try and paint murder in a more flattering light than rape even though it is far more detrimental to the individual than rape
@@randomrandle9141 we can talk on and on if murder is better or not but the point still stands. The author did some irredeemable crimes and had a net negative on our society
Thank you for you views on the topic of author's opinions and ideas affecting the viewing experience and reach of great pieces of art.
For some people, including myself, it's difficult to separate the art from the artist... Even if I try to engage with their art like before, there would be a voice in the back of my head that would remind me that it was made by a bad person.
If someone could make that separation, then good for them ig... But my perception of art tends to be affected by my perception of the artist and I don't think I can fully enjoy or appreciate work that I know has been done by someone who has committed crimes.
"The Jews fear the Samurai."
Will C. The samurai fears the communist
the communist isnt afraid of anyone in particular, he's just really fucking hungry
hunger is afraid.....money?..
Will C. Well, that’s because of the history of the past, they were allies with the x-axis and were allied with the nazi’s so don’t be surprised, because that’s a part of their history
Tom Pearce kek you son of a bitch
This is why I actually DO separate the person from their work. Nothing is completely good and nothing is completely evil. It’s how we ourselves judge things that matters.
The way I see it, there is no such thing as a truly good person, but rather people who have never been put in a situation where they would do something evil.
Whether someone is good or bad, you have to remember the ramifications of your actions. If you continue to buy De Beers diamonds or pay for Disney movies, you're doing the equivalent of giving an assault rifle to a deranged madman. You're helping to seriously harm people, even if you never get to see who you harmed.
You can enjoy the products as much as you want, but you should never actually pay the terrible people for them unless you went out of your way to ensure that the terrible people never actually get your money.
commode7x commode7x should we remember the ramifications for everything we buy? Nearly everything we use causes unnecessary harm to species around the world- our oil, our minerals, our technology, our food, our transport, our materials and our enjoyments too, yet we still buy products from Nazi sympathiser creators just as we support an oil company that got a country to hang several peaceful protesters in their way.
Unless you completely support yourself and use only what you need, you like I and everyone else has paid many terrible people who, in giving you the product have done terrible things behind our backs.
It's difficult to preach this, when it's practically been the normality ever since civilisation began.
One of the most depressing moments in growing up is not in realizing that there are people that don’t act on their words but in the real amount of people that don’t act on their words.
When the creator is shit, then I stand behind being a pirate.
Wait John said that!?!?! Dude where the hell have I been.
How do you feel about pirating after watching the video?
1) It's an age-old problem, in many genres. Richard Wagner is big example. Genius as a composer, reprehensible as a person, and there are many more besides. But some would say that's the very PURPOSE of art, for the artist to create something that transcends human flaws and shows us something better, for both themselves AND us.
2) Your point about how there are a LOT of people besides the 'big names' (Directors, writers, actors) who work on anime, film, TV, heck, pretty much any industry, can cut both ways. With so many people making a living from any given product, what are the odds that at least one of them believes something you find abhorrent, criminal, etc? The only way to avoid supporting them is not to support anything.
Same could be said about P.T. Barnum. Gave the world one of its greatest sources of entertainment, but exploited people to become a legend.
If someone contributed to the world in a meaningful way I don’t care what they think or say .
Hell depending on the person I’ll excuse violence to a point.
AskAScreenwriter ikr
how about Michael Jackson? His songs are the soundtracks to some of the happiest times of my life, but it has nothing to do with his personal life. Honestly, we can extrapolate this further to the opposite side of the coin: A homosexual cannot poignant content involving heterosexual relations, Being white cancels any commentary on racism?
To a degree, our with of equality should eliminate such factors in judgement of a work.
Why are you lot all signalling how ''atrocious'' this person is lol. You're opinions aren't that moral. Grow up.
Another thought: Being exposed to an opinion is not the same as adopting that opinion. I can hear anti-semetic opinions all day but that doesn't mean I'm stupid enough to adopt them, because I know the facts.
Maybe instead of just getting upset when someone influential has a gross opinion, we should also be teaching people how to think critically.
He made that distinction on the video multiple times.
True.
You have a point when it comes to someone just saying/tweeting/whatever something stupid, but what about when the creator is an actual paedophile rapist? The video was less about some specific people and more about the principle: could you support someone that did something you personally cannot accept
@@exantiuse497 so what do u think? If a pedophile can make a good piece of anime that suits my taste, I'll support him
@@exantiuse497 u don't have to support the idea of pedophilia to support a pedophile sorry.
Just one thing to point out though, in the case of Rurouni Kenshin, can we really say that his pedophilic tendencies are separate from the work when Kaori was 17 at the start of the series and Kenshin was 28? The two maintain romantic tension from the beginning of the series and it culminates in the two marrying at the end at ages 22 and 33 respectively. That is a 10-year age gap. And although it is certainly not as extreme as depicting, say, a literal child in a relationship with an adult man (like Lolita for example), I think that still reflects the sentiment of an author who is older and fantasizes about younger individuals. Even before everything came to light, I remember that age gap making me uncomfortable when I first red it as a child but being able to reconcile it because the series as a whole was fantastic. That being said, I own Rurouni Kenshin and will probably still read it again despite knowing.
However, I think society as a whole still has a responsibility to address these issues and find alternatives to allowing those bad people to continue thriving with their bad opinions/actions. By funding Roman Polanski, how many young girls had to be traumatized so we could be entertained for a 2-hour runtime? Using the Polanski example further, art (such as Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown in the video's example) that is already in existence for us to enjoy made before the fact is one thing, but to allow someone like Polanski to continue to make films and receive praise for using art and art's benefits at the expense of another is a completely different issue that the "separate artist from the art" argument consistently fails to account for. Artists should be held accountable when applicable (i.e. crimes of any sort) and unfortunately, they can't be held accountable without what I agree with the video to be rather severe methods, such as boycotting or pirating media, to avoid benefiting artists that use their position to harm others. Once accountability and consequence is established, eventually (and hopefully) we can transition to allowing good art to exist without 1.) punishing those separate from the offending artist and 2.) allow artists that abuse their power to continue abusing their power. I want to be able to read Rurouni Kenshin guilt-free, but I think I could only ever do so once I know he has been convicted, done some jail time, and apologized. Polanski fleeing the country after conviction, making more films, raping more girls, and yet receiving praise means that he was never held accountable. We can separate the artist from the art, but only after creating a culture in which there is simultaneously accountability.
By the way, quick example about a world that only punishes the offender in an ideal world: acknowledge that Polanski made a good movie but then give the award to the runner-up and publicly say and do so. Things like that. But idk that's just me as someone who also has trouble with the finding the balance between appreciating art and struggling with the moral dilemma that sometimes brings.
I don’t exactly believe that the creator of kenshin intentionally put his horrible message in his work because I’m pretty sure age of consent in Japan is 17 or even 16
But yeah the whole 17 and 22 year old is baaaaad
@@silvertipstudio9622 The age of consent in japan is 13
@@wintershafts5024 oh
@@wintershafts5024 i live for the day idiots like you stop saying this. no, it's not. It can be as low as 13 but there are additional laws in every prefecture that raise it to 16-18.
also, would yall believe murder is ok if it was legal? is murder only bad bcs the government says so? stop talking about laws in relation to stuff like this
@@tofire2261 If murder was legal there would be a lot less ignorant fuckwits, who refuse to admit their stupidity and grow because of their pride that rivals Vegeta's, in my area.
Can easily apply this to the Harry Potter series too. It was devastating to a lot of people to see Rowling’s transphobia when HP is loved so much by a lot of LGBTQ+ people.
What is transphobia? I think an there's an argument to be made on operations that can cause diseases over the long term in the case of wellfare states. What amount of bodily atonomy is allowed in such cases?
@@user-df9hw5yc2p ok so as an example....imagine you are incredibly depressed and one day you hear about skydiving. You do some research and eventually you realize that skydiving is what you’ve needed. You continue to research and you inform yourself of the risks and everything. Eventually you decide you still want to go skydiving and that being happy is worth any of the risks. Now imagine someone tells you that you can’t go skydiving because some people got hurt...you already knew that you did all your own research and you made the decision that your happiness was worth it...that other person has no right to override your bodily autonomy in that situation or any situation. Hope that helps you understand.
@@mycatiszen so, paying for someone else's self gratification is normal? It sounds a bit like addict and enabler to me? I could just replace the word skydiving with: stealing, taking heroin or drunk driving. Whats the difference?
@@user-df9hw5yc2p the difference being that someone’s personal transition doesn’t affect you. Things like stealing and drug abuse cause harm to more than the the person doing them. Transitioning only affects the person going through it.
@@mycatiszen Great response
You are giving these people money for their work, not for their views. Both their views and what they do with their money is their own private concern and responsibility. A youtuber is not responsible for one of their fans harassing someone they made a video on, unless they encouraged their fans to do it, the fan did that in their own free will. Similarly what a creator does with the money they get from your purchase, is also their own responsibility, not yours. You aren't a better person because the director of a movie you bought, gave to charity and you aren't a worse person for buying from someone who uses their money for drugs or child porn. That is none of your responsibility. In regards of firing people, unless the person in question does something illegal, i see no reason to strip them of their livelihood. If the creators politics start to pollute their work, stop buying it, but don't get the social lynch mob to get them fired. If their work is consistently non political and high quality what does it matter whether the creator wants to seize the means of production or enact an ethnostate?
It is even more worrying that when in Black Panther has a literally a black isolationist traditionalist ethnostate it is still praised, but when someone has any political views against the current views of social justice they should be fired even if they make non-political content
Shehab Omran dude cat woman 2004 did it first, they took a shit hole movie and say who ever hate on it was sexist, if we was doing the same movie now they will use it like black panter of a situation to create drama, every of the sjw cause, mass religious morron that are ready to die for a giant dude in the sky or cheating girlfriend are drive by a desire of drama and want be remember for the drama they ave cause as if they ave save the world.
I wasn't living in the west (or at all in touch with it) back in 2004 so forgive my ignorance on the subject
Shehab Omran yea nobody remember cat woman 2004, its better like that even if forgot our past mistake made us do it again, damn that 2004 was full of bad movie...
Never once is the society in Black Panther praised, if anything the movie condemns the society as being hypocritical and the movie ends with the T'Challa vowing to change that. Promising to cease their isolationism and non-interventionist policies and share their technology with the outside world. T'Challa also calls Killmonger out on his own hypocrisy, stating he's no better than the people he claims to hate and fight against.
I don't really want to get in to the debate on this, it's honestly way too time consuming because the subject is definitely that complicated to reconcile. I do want to throw this thought out there though: It would be a really neat thing if judges could, as part of their sentencing, redirect part or all of a person's royalty payments to either the victim or a suitable support/advocacy group.
What I mean by that is, imagine if a judge could say "the court finds Polanski guilty of rape, as part of the sentencing I order that all royalties he would receive from contracts signed before this date are to be given over to a rape prevention charity." That way when you buy Chinatown you're actually helping fund people who want to prevent rape instead of enriching a rapist.
MegaDeathRay10 you make fair points, but they apply equally to any form of criminal justice sentence. Plenty of people have no issues with a death penalty or life without parole, the idea being that such punishments are intended for cases where there is proof beyond any doubt and a crime of appropriate level.
We already have asset forfeiture as a sentencing option in a criminal case, the basis of my suggestion was to treat royalty income as an asset in the same way shares or deeds might be. It's not a perfect idea but little in law is.
Well technically you do lose many of your rights by going to prison.. but I think that's a bigger debate that many societies need to talk about especially in the US.
thelawdictionary.org/article/what-rights-do-convicted-felons-lose/
Ed L - oh yeah, the balance between appropriate consequences and long term rehabilitation is an even bigger can of worms
A portion of the royalties, yes, but all royalties seems to much. They did bad stuff, true, but that doesn't change the fact that they created the work.
I think this only really works in cases where the person actually commits a crime. Being a nazi, racist, bigot, etc. is not and should never be a crime, so it's not exactly something that works most of the time.
I had a year to think about this and the only right answer is there isnt one. In my teens, Kenshin was one of the few times i felt safe and empowered. It helped shape my world view and gave me something to look forward to in some of most abusive and depressing times of my life. Even after more then a decade and with the knowledge of what the creator is, i still find myself putting it on as back ground noise as i work from time to time.
At the same time, Michael Jackson was maybe more influential in my life and yet i can't bring myself to listen to any of his music. Maybe its the fact that, while I loved his music, it was just something that was nice and fun, where as Kenshin might have saved my life. But either way, i treat them differently even though they are the same monster. I have alway felt that it is a cop out to say "Seperate the art from the artist," and still do. I think it is more valuable to accept that the artist is shit but also accept that sometimes the art is still imporant to you.
Well you do know Jackson was innocent right like without question innocent. As for others if you can't separate the art from the artist there is a total of 3 pieces of media in the world you can enjoy who doesn't hold at least one view you can find morally disagreeable with.
@@michaelkeha facts
This is why I never delve into the personal life of artists at all. Everything I learn colors my view and that changes how I respond to said art. Not because it changes the art but because I can't stop thinking about what I learned
"Nobody's personal enjoyment should outweigh the outrage...."
Ok, so about this point. I personally think people are selling their own personal enjoyment far too short. Heck, it could even be argued that your own personal enjoyment is the one thing that makes life worth living. Supporting an author'd work only means that you like their art, not necessarily the person.
Heck I can't even name that much authors from the top of my head but I sure as hell can name their works. It is within their rights to spend the money that they earn however they want and use their platform however they want, except for when they use it to do illegal stuff(Which are reasonably illegal, not bs laws) but in those cases, they are at fault and not you.
Got to disagree, our personal enjoyment of life is only a western value that removes proper purpose from life. Only in the service of a whole do we have any meaning and choosing personal enjoyment over the treatment of our fellow humans means we choose ignorance above meaning. On your point of not knowing the artists i do agree there as its unreasonable to expect someone to research every author or creator they enjoy to make sure they uphold reasonable values but when we are made aware of it we should take reasonable action not to support them. (not a communist btw i just value the joy of others over my own)
First of all, I'm asian, not from the west lol, and I have been bombarded with "For the greater good" bullshit ever since I was little. I think I subconsciously took them to heart as I used to conform... or at least try to conform to society's norms. As one would expect, I failed, miserably. I did the things that pleased the people around me, specifically the adults, and it all felt so empty, though I didn't realize this at the time.(There's more to this story but damn I could literally write an entire novel about this, and I plan to at some point lol)
I have lived a life trying to please others, and it fucking sucked lol. Only in the acceptance of who I am and my own selfishness did I find true happiness. Heck, everyone's selfish. Some realize it, some don't. To do things for other people bcos seeing them happy makes you happy is an ulterior motive in and of itself.
Look no further than Japan if you want some sort of proof towards the claims I made on my main comment. Japan where group mentality is the strongest(Or at least among the strongest). Now look at it's suicide rates. It is often talked about, how this group mentality thing negatively affects the Japanese people. They are, dare I say, trained from a young age, to do what is best for the group, what the group wants, and look at where that shit has gotten them.
I would admit though, to some, perhaps making other people happy is the only thing that can give them satisfaction. You have to understand though, not everyone is like that. It's not something you can learn as well, at least in most cases. If it could be then Japan would be one of the happiest countries right now.
Don't expect other people to find value and purpose in the same things that you do. Everyone's different, we have different values, and even morals. What makes you happy can be hell on earth for some else, and living as you described is something that I have gone through, and it literally made me depressed for 6 whole years.
There's a number of things wrong with the "you're supporting this guy's awful ideas/activities by paying for their work" approach.
First: no, you're supporting *their work* . What they decide to do with that money is their choice, and if their choice is and keeps being immoral, then they are the ones to blame for it. Granted, you could say that for someone we *know* acts immorally it's basically sure he'll use it badly, but then...
Second: it's hypocritical, because before these second-order issues, where your money goes in the pocket of someone who might use it immorally, there's plenty of cases where your money *itself* supports immoral activities. Anime has terrible work practices. Who knows how many electronics or clothes or even foodstuffs we buy that are the product of sweatshops or literal slavery. And so on. If we had to curb immoral activities, it would make much more sense to focus on the practices we support directly rather than on those where someone else's immoral choices are the major determinant. And...
Third: it's overestimating the impact of the money itself. Buying child porn is one thing. But spouting Nazi nonsense on Twitter is basically for free. What are we suggesting exactly, that if only we all stopped paying for this guy's work (or watching it on Crunchyroll) he'd soon finds himself in straits dire enough that he couldn't pay for an internet's connection? Seems unrealistic. The argument "Nazis should be fired/not given money to" is more about personal satisfaction that any true ethical calculation. Sure, I wouldn't want this guy to have enough money he can start actively lobbying politicians for his ideas, but that's not the kind of money he'd make on this job. I know I won't ever go again into an APA hotel in Japan and will tell people not to do it either because their owner is not just a crazy right wing nationalist, but is actually close to politicians. He has *the power* to do more harm with that money. And I would not want to advocate literally pushing all Nazis or people with unsavoury political ideas into joblessness until they starve either. Expecting them to see the light thanks to being fired or making less money is effectively out of the question.
Hagane no Gijutsushi
I couldn't have said it better.
Well said... We don't need more witch hunts, what is the natural rote ideas like that would take you...
I don't know, I think a quite reasonable case can be made that providing financial reward to people who are rock hard about the Holocaust and actively want certain races eliminated is something that should be avoided. While this particular individual might not get to government bribing level there's no reason to assume that its impossible for that to happen. Take Orson Scott Card for example, while I don't know his actual net worth I am going to make a safe bet that he is at the level of wealth to actively effect politics via bribes or "campaign donations" as we like to call them. Perhaps not national but certainly local level and possibly state. While I don't know that he does such a thing it is a bit unsettling to me as someone who owns all the Ender and Shadow series to thing that money I spent could be used to fund an attempt to reduce legal rights for gays.
fascism and communism started with "quite reasonable case" and end up killing millions of people in the name of "quite reasonable cases". If we all only pay for services and products of people who ideas we agree with we are all ending up in a bubble and pretty much dying of starvation in the end. We are not "providing financial reward" we are paying for a service that we consume, enjoy and approve. What the person does with that money is entirely up to them.
What we don't need is thought police and living in a society that everybody is accusing somebody of something. MB accused Trump of rape, and everyones who disagrees with his moronic statement "in denial". Simply put, I don't want to live in a society were people with such level of stupidity, regarding to political and social analysis, are policing others and proposing to take their livelihood as punishment. We have laws for that, we just need to ensure that those laws are being followed. The the justice in their own hands is barbaric and idiotic, and I cant see how people cant understand that this line of thought will backfire horribly.
The endpoint of that argument is that a fantastic painter who can create works of art that bring even the most stoic to tears but is actively funding a project to kill all white people because he hates all whites should not have that as a factor in the patronage of his work. Or if someone makes the greatest TV series of all time but also actively encourages people to kill cops and their families shouldn't receive some level of "hey maybe we don't buy this persons stuff even if their work is great".
The Kenshin premiere coming up at Anime Expo this year reminded me to come back to this. No matter what praise it may get, I don't even have it in me to open up my old copies of manga much less watch a new series.
in my opinion: its a case by case basis
1) is financial gain supporting the bad thing
2) how horrible overall is that person
Lovecraft was racist, but I still love his books
He's also dead.
Back then he was actually considered progressive, if he lived in today's society he likely would not have held the same system of beliefs.
Racism wasn't seen to be a bad thing at the time. Same with Walt Disney. People who are of a fully different era, such as even the 50's, and are dead now, are obviously going to be less than stellar people by modern standards. But due to their deceased condition, it can be seen how their products are especially great, despite their boorish nature.
Yes, bad people can make good art, but it's what we do involving the bad people that can really help influence things for the better.
Lovecraft and Walt Disney obviously came from an era where people didn't know racism what bad, so they can be excused somewhat, especially with their products being so well renowned to this day, with the Lovecraftian horrors, and Disney's classics such as the elaborate Pinnochio and the basic Steamboat Willie.
he's also dead so none of the money i'd spend on the books would go to him, so
That's an absolute lie. Back then, he was considered extremely racist, even for someone of the time. Sure, he mellowed out towards the end of his life (after marrying a jewish woman), but that absolutely does not mean, he was not extremely racist for his time. He absolutely was not considered a progressive.
(Seriously, just read the plot twist in "Medusa's Coil" and tell me he's not absolutely ridiculous).
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree on some of your points. While I do believe it is possible to separate the work from its artist for me I can only do it in two instances. The first one is that the artist cannot IN ANY WAY profit from my support which is usually very rare unless they are dead (such as Lovecraft, who was a raging racist but who has very good and inspiring books in my opinion). the OTHER is if their shitty behavior only comes from opinions and not actions and even then it depends. In the case of Jontron I couldn't continue watching his videos after he said something along the lines of how race mixing is wrong since I am myself a mixed person. There are times where I'm willing to overlook if someone has a questionable/bad stance on something, it varies on a case by case bases.
However.
I very strongly disagree with your stance on people like Polanski or Watsuki. I cannot support them no matter what. I truly, truly can't. And it's precisely because as you said, it puts money in their pockets and can indirectly hurt children or even adults if we're talking about someone like Weinstein. I want to work in film one day, I understand how many of these people created "classics", I understand that in order for me to have a firm grasp on film I SHOULD watch rosemary's baby or other movies but I just can't. Even if eventually my work is pure hot shit because I didn't watch classics made by terrible people I'd honestly rather take that than possibly enabling polanski to rape another child. Even if I pirate it, I still contribute to a culture that glorifies the work of rapists and pedophiles. I still contribute to these people's legacy and I refuse to do that. What you said about the other people working on these, and audiences possibly missing out on enriching experiences: the people who worked on these movies and anime and tv shows etc WILL continue to get other jobs, work on other things and spill out their passion in their works. Meanwhile, for audiences, there's a TON of movies, animes, games, and media made that can enrich their lives just as much. I will use jontron as an example: many channels that have a similar sense of humor to him exist, such as caddicarus and chadtronic. There will always be alternatives to these bad people and hell, they can sometimes even be better. Caddicarus is genuinely funnier than jon in my opinion. What I'm trying to say is that you can still enrich your life and support people working in the industry without supporting rapists, pedophiles and other tremendous assholes who will benefit from your support until they die and sometimes even after that. I honestly feel bad for contributing to Lovecraft's legacy even if its by a small margin but his work is genuinely very good, and he never actually hurt any racial minority other than expressing shitty opinions so I'm willing to overlook it. His ideals are dying out anyway. Maybe in the future when people like polanski or watsuki are dead or in prison and cant benefit from my support, I might be able to separate their art from them but right now, when im putting money in their pockets and food on their tables I just can't.
With that said, I do love your videos and respect your opinions and you as a person! I'm glad you keep making detailed analysis and its always nice to hear your commentary. Cheers!
Even though the Hollywood situation got complicated and the weinstein situation got serious and sides of situation that are very complicated but it had done some small good to bring about shady things in Hollywood with a movement but the movement itself was a double edged sword that affected later to become a witch hunt that even speakers on the movement regret and are retracting as its hurting both sides and causes more distrust and a sense of recording or signing as evidence to protect themselves.
This was well written and it was interesting to hear a difference stance. Thanks for sharing!
I can not take you seriously with that D.W profile pic.
@M_MKULTRA PREACH IT, especially for what you said about how for every shitty content creator there will always be someone else who is better than them and makes content that doesn't rely on offensive and cruel "humor" or "opinions" to gain popularity/followers/fans or to sell their work to the masses. There's just no excuse for that kind of mess and they should be held accountable for their actions/opinions (whether their work is good or not doesn't mean a damn thing to me).
Unless those 'alternatives' found their source of inspiration/creation from a completely different source than works created by the racist/bigot/whatnot people, it is still indirectly contributing to said people's legacies. Definitely a whole lot more complicated than "find a similar alternative" for this. People are STILL going to point back to those works if they were "first" or if they seem to be "sources of inspiration" for other people. I won't say it doesn't help if you seek alternatives instead of the works that were made by said racist/bigot/etc people, because it does contribute/help in a small way. But there is no complete victory to be had there, unfortunately.
I've always preferred the RuroKen anime to it's manga counterpart, and one of my favorite arcs is a filler to boot - so I think I'll keep on enjoying it as one of my favorite anime of all time while finding relief in the fact that I never really cared about the author's later works (RuroKen-related or otherwise).
You know I’m like Jeff’s opposite: I’m a Christian conservative libertarian, pro-Republic, pro-life & well I don’t really stand against gay anything because I’m pro-live-your-life-your-way as long as I can live mine my way. Any case, despite all that I enjoy these one off videos like this because I have the same questions of supporting horrible people. And movies more so because you have a hundred other people other than the director or writer or whatever. You don’t want to support the one but it’s still a great work of art & others worked hard to bring it to life. It’s a very tough question no matter who you are. Anyway, just wanted to show my appreciation for the video & the channel also. Love the content.
One point that needs to be made clear is that the audience is in no way responsible for the views and actions of a content creator or anyone who had a hand in the production of a piece of media. The only situation where that would be the case is if someone directly endorsed and intentionally funded that individuals views and actions.
But then how are you supposed to argue to have power to dictate what other can and cannot watch?
Something I think is important is to LISTEN to everyone's opinions, including terrible peoples stuff. Reading Mien Kampf can be enlightening. Not in the way of "Oh I should follow this" more of "Wow, this is what they thought" way.
I agree but the tone & understanding of the audience varies. That is why there was controversy around 13 Reasons Why because some did not recognize it as illogical overreactions & blaming others because of mental health issues but more that someone acting & thinking those unhealthy things whilst not taking any personal responsibility is normal & acceptable.
I watch some disturbing documentaries because some peoples acts are so dark & their way of thinking a polar opposite to mine that I literally cant imagine what they are thinking or have done. I like to understand other people & unfortunately giving undesirables the spotlight is a way to spread awareness. (Again as long as those viewers do not look up to this horrific person, which unfortunately happens.)
When I was doing my childcare & education course I did research about child abusers so I could better understand the grooming process, what signs to look out for & to understand so I could better protect children.
Grinning Goat isn't mein kampf just boring and poorly written?
Reading Mein Kampf was boring. I expected more from it. xD
I really appreciate this video. I have shared it numerous times.
One thing I heard that particularly resonated with me is... well, that the sad fact of life in the world as it is right now is that most people who are famous don't tend to get there by being great people. There's only so many titles you can boycott before you have to decide between going off to in the woods and just... making your peace with it, and doing what you can to mitigate the harm in the world, or at least in your corner of it.
Jontron doesn't deserve to be on that thumbnail tbh
Fodimin true, it seems that he didn't do research outside of the surface level, what about Destiny? Him being a garbage person.
If you watched the whole video, yeah, he kinda does, even if it's to a much lesser extent than the other characters talked about in this video
Didn't it come to light recently that Destiny likes little girls?
He absolutely does.
He does.
The ability to judge one's work and personality separately is something I see as a virtue worthwhile developing for it allows to transcend simplistic black-and-white thinking.
Seeing the world in terms of all-good and pure-evil actually creates evil in the process. It breeds blind hatred which makes people oblivious for whatever was good and justifies other acts of evil in combating this pure evil thing.
Also the believe in the all-good makes one put people at pedestals being completely blind for their flaws or even seeing them as virtues instead.
You just said a whole lot of nothing
Personally, I’m willing to make the sacrifice of not experiencing and supporting media made by bad people, just cause I feel like there are so many different shows and books out there, that avoiding a few doesn’t bother me. But of course I can’t make that choice for everyone, and it’s even worse if you love a piece of media and THEN the creator is revealed to be a monster.
I really appreciate this measured response to a difficult subject.
Jokes aside I think we absolutely must separate someone's works from their actual character. I absolutely loath the beliefs and opinions of many actors and CZcams content creators but I still watch the things the produce because it is entertaining.
It isn't until their views bleed into their medium that I'll keep supporting them... Unless if they do it sarcastically.
Moebs Chan yeah i agree. I hate some directors like Roman paliski but he contribute to cinema alot.
I just watch Jon Tron with ad blocker on now. And now I'll just pirate mmo junkie and Kenshin.
Ken Kaneki considering I'm one of those "minorities that are killing America", yes it is to me.
I get that; H.P Lovecraft was a complete racist but his product is still good and influential but for me I just don't feel comfortable supporting said product if the creator is getting money out of it. with that said Im not gonna judge anyone who does support the product despite the creators actions or beliefs so long as it is despite them and not because of them.
this comment section is a total fucking train wreck.
This shit seems to happen all the time on a lot of Geoff's videos. Though I don't think it's his fault.
EightThreeEight I don’t think it’s his fault either. Sadly, a lot of anime fans subscribe to alt-right and white supremacist ideology.
1. id rather leave it a mystery.
2. what are you even gonna do whit it (apart from the obvious part)
+Aquabreeze lol good one
Aquabreeze that's...not true, in fact, that's just an assumption, even if they are alt right, that doesn't mean they are a white supremacist.
Judge art, not by the artist but by what it is
I think this seems to be overlooked far too often, but it's more than the way their beliefs do or do not seep into their art: by supporting their art you are enabling them to continue doing shitty things.