Quote:
Originally Posted by MGlitch
Ok we’ve established that consideration needs to be given for when the society held different views than we do now, but what about authors within our time or who took action which was immoral and/or illegal in both their time and ours. MZB being a great example though not at the 100 year mark yet, I would be rather surprised if our views on her actions shifted dramatically in the next hundred years. She also has the benefit of being the author who got this thread going.
Milo would be another example who I think would fall under similar lines.
I think they’ve the right to publish, their work doesn’t call for harm to be done to specific individuals or groups. Though the two of them held/hold views which did/could lead to the harm of individuals. But so to do publishers have the right to not publish them. People are of course free to read or not read their books as they see fit.
|
Yes. That's the case for each reader to decide for themselves whether it's ethical to read such authors or not. Personally I read them if I'm interested in their work. I don't support banning of books or authors on any other ground than directly and intentionally trying to harm someone. And even these grounds are dubious at best.