Quote:
Originally Posted by darryl
My position is that there is no need to justify buying an author's work whatsoever.
|
Except that by citing negligible profit to the author, you
are justifying the purchase.
Quote:
|
Even if someone is aware that they are buying the work of, say, a convicted criminal, and they have qualms about benefiting that criminal, they should be aware that their individual contribution is usually de minimus if anything.
|
And yet, if enough individuals give themselves a pass on a similar justification, it can add up to a bestseller. That was my point. Individual actions do matter. As you acknowledge in the next sentence.
Quote:
|
In the remote scenario where the work is a best seller and the author does profit significantly, any small contribution they may have made individually is more than justified by them having read a worthwhile work.
|
Why? That’s a major moral pronouncement with no reasoning behind it. There are a lot of books out there, even a lot of worthwhile books, and no one can read all of them. Why not have the author’s personal worth in the case of egregious failings be part of the decision process? Especially since “worthwhile” means nothing at all.
Quote:
|
I respect someone's right to choose for themselves not to read a book because of some problematic aspect of the authors conduct or character. They should likewise respect my choice as to what I choose to read.
|
Well, no. I did say that certainly AFAIC, people can read what they want. But expecting someone to respect a choice that he finds immoral is not at all warranted. There’s a chasm there, between respecting someone’s ability to choose and respecting someone’s choice. Such is society and such, one hopes, is how moral suasion works.
Bottom line, to repeat: read as you will, but if you’re going to parade it in the marketplace, you can expect some disapprobation.