The Gaiman conundrum: How to separate the art from the artist

Can we, in good faith, continue to enjoy something made by artists riddled with controversies?


At a glance

  • We have the means to realize why we should not be endorsing figures that discriminate minorities and prey on the weak while masking themselves as allies.


Cover.jpg
(Neil Gaiman photo from IMDB)

 

As per the recent Vulture piece, it has been revealed that many women have come out to speak up about sexual assault allegations against Neil Gaiman. He is best known for breathing life into the obscure Sandman title from DC and for writing iconic children’s books like Coraline, The Graveyard Book, and M is for Magic. Gaiman is also responsible for award-winning works like American Gods, Anansi Boys, and his collaborative piece with fantasy author Sir Terry Pratchett, Good Omens

 

Since the allegations came out last July via a podcast from Tortoise Media, Gaiman has consistently denied the claims. On the podcast, his representatives came out to state how “between consenting adults, BDSM is lawful.” Through a recent Tumblr post, Gaiman stressed his innocence by writing all prior encounters were consensual. From all the allegations that have come out, at worst, Gaiman is a sex offender and, in the “best” possible scenario, is a man in a place of power who made inappropriate advances toward young and vulnerable fans. 

 

Untitled design.png
A NIGHTMARE COME TO LIFE Some fans and former employees of Neil Gaiman have come out to speak up about the sexual abuse they faced under The Sandman author

 

Many of his followers have since aired out their grievances online, declaring their disownment of Gaiman as a literary favorite and stepping away from enjoying his countless works. There are, however, the stubborn few who hold out for a glimmer of hope that Gaiman can still be redeemed and that it was all a misunderstanding. It’s not looking too good as many of the ongoing projects Gaiman has with Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Disney have since been cut short, put on an indefinite hiatus, or pulled out altogether.

 

Interestingly enough, this isn’t the first time a sudden shake in the literary scene was felt in recent years. JK Rowling comes to mind, after tweets from 2020 showed her negative views toward transgender people and caused a divide in the Harry Potter community. Many have since dropped any support for the franchise, expressing distaste in keeping Rowling afloat through royalties as she continues voicing out her trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF) views. A few continue to hold onto the wizarding world, defending their support through the age-old mantra of separating the art from the artist, but can we apply such a practice for these scenarios?

 

And_Then_There_Were_None_First_Edition_Cover_1939.jpg
A DIFFERENT TIME Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None was originally released in the UK with the title Ten Little N*ggers

 

Separating art from the artist can be a tricky line to thread on. For instance, if we were to hold authors like HP Lovecraft, Mark Twain, and Agatha Christie accountable for their questionable views from today’s standards, we wouldn’t be able to enjoy literary works due to the blatant racism in them. Imagine a world without Agatha Christie’s And Then There Were None, a story whose original titles, Ten Little N*ggers in its UK release and Ten Little Indians in the US, are best left out of print, H. P. Lovecraft’s The Call of Cthulhu, where sailors of varied ethnicities are painted as savages, and Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, a tale that has some sympathies toward characters with racist views. We tend to defend such classic works on account of their authors simply being a product of their time or from a different era, when such views were still acceptable. Some could even argue these works are what pushed us to having more tolerant views as we learn from them. 

 

From another lens, think about all the musicians or celebrities who have made timeless songs and movies that we hold so dearly, only to find out years later about them being abusers, predators, or supporters of questionable views.

 

In this day and age, we have access to tools that allow us to information at a rate impossible only a few years ago. We have the means to realize why we should not be endorsing figures that discriminate minorities and prey on the weak while masking themselves as allies. As such, there is little to no excuse for defending ignorant and archaic views by deeming them separate from their art. This is not a call out for you to stop consuming the works of your favorite artists who might have problematic views. Rather, it’s a time to reflect on how choosing whom we support can affect those around us. Would you stand by idly, still voicing praises, if those you follow knowingly stepped down on people close to you?