← Back
Separation of Art from the Artist
On December 19, 2019, JK Rowling tweeted in support of Maya Foraster, a woman who lost her job for criticizing the allowance of people to self-identify their gender. A wave of backlash quickly ensued, with passionate fans and trans-activists expressing their disappointment in Rowling. Rowling fought back, asserting that she is not against trans people: she takes issue in trans arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, believing that there exists a fundamental biological component connected to the niche experiences of womanhood.
Rowling cited her experiences as a much-banned author, sharing the grim reality of being the female writer. In a statement released on Rowling’s website, she stated, “I must have been on my fourth or fifth cancellation by then. I expected the threats of violence, to be told I was literally killing trans people with my hate, to be called cunt and bitch and, of course, for my books to be burned.” Criticisms about her personal beliefs quickly devolved into derogatory, stereotypical remarks about Rowling herself. And while Rowling’s words were ultimately condemned for its harmfulness towards the trans community, many of the condemners extended outside of this argument scope, spewing hatred and invoking sexist rhetoric in response.
I do not agree with Rowling’s argument. In her statement, she boldly stated, “The more of their accounts of gender dysphoria I’ve read, with their insightful descriptions of anxiety, dissociation, eating disorders, self-harm and self-hatred, the more I’ve wondered whether, if I’d been born 30 years later, I too might have tried to transition.” This idea, that transitioning is an easy escape, rather than a necessary refuge, is something I strongly disagree with. Furthermore, the idea that transitioning is something learned or influenced by the external environment, rather than innate in an individual, is simply wrong. There can be emphasis over the subjugation and over sexualization of women without degrading another minority community. There derives issue when two sides attempt to argue and condemn one another while the main issue - the degradation and dehumanization of trans people and women alike - is largely ignored, and the perpetrators of such harmful beliefs remain unscathed.
Despite my contradictory beliefs with Rowling’s, I still love the Harry Potter world. How, then, do we navigate an appreciation and love for art when we take issue with the creator of it? Can we truly separate the art from the artist, or are they inextricably linked in their underlying forms? I love the Harry Potter books and movies, and I derive much joy from reading and watching them. I believe there is a way to enjoy these books while simultaneously understanding and acknowledging the biased perspectives behind them. Still, I have brief impulses and flash thoughts, when delving into a book or movie, where I can’t help but question the lack of minority representation and racist undertones that exist in these so-called wondrous, fantastical worlds. In supporting Rowling’s fictional world, am I not supporting a world that doesn’t include me? In buying into the fantasy and yearning to be a part of it, am I not yearning to carve out pieces of myself and my cultural identity to conform to Rowling’s characters? Overall, I believe the complexity and implications of this question must be personally answered for each person: Can I accept this art fully, maintaining the spheres of the art and artist as completely separate, or do the poisoned ideologies permeate and seep through the surface, between the lines and into the hearts and minds of individuals?