Anonymous #2 12w

this^ most people aren’t trying to pull books by problematic authors from shelves. they more advocate for consumer awareness

3

Anonymous #3 12w

book banning, however, is when a person or government forbids a book from being placed on shelves (yes it’s still banning even if it’s only in schools or libraries). there’s a difference between “Please don’t support this author” and “you’re legally not allowed to read this book”

7

Anonymous #3 12w

This! And also, typically, banning books is used as a way to erase the voices of marginalized peoples and vilify them and their experiences. It’s a way to control the narrative of a society (typically towards a fascist ideology) whereas canceling an author is usually a way that consumers use their own buying power to send a message to authors that actively spread hate and/or abuse people

7

Anonymous #2 12w

I feel like this overly simplifies and straw mans the whole issue. Cancel culture may have started and intended to be as you described, but it’s a lot more intense than that now. To the point where the movements want to stop any future projects from the “cancelled” creator, or shame the people who still do consume their work. In practice it aims to do the same thing as banning books, with different justifications and applications.

1

Anonymous #5 12w

The difference is a matter of public opinion vs some kind of governing body oversight. This is the same fucking logic to every modern political movement: You have a CHOICE to consume it or not, that does not free you from public opinion. Banning takes away that choice.

4

Anonymous #5 12w

And honestly, if you’re cancelled for being racist, transphobic, or generally consistently problematic? Good, you SHOULD be scrutinized continuously until you prove you’ve changed

6

Anonymous #2 12w

Yeah I totally agree that the way you’re describing it would be ideal, I just don’t at all think that’s how cancel culture is practiced.

1

Anonymous #5 12w

That’s because of how much parasocial relationships with social media people of any kind have started heavily influencing people.

2

Anonymous #5 12w

Authors getting other projects cancelled because of cancel culture is just consequences for their actions though. Unless a government entity steps in, that’s just the market doing its work. If an author does something consumers don’t like and they stop buying their works, it makes sense that a publisher or production company or whatever would decide it’s no longer profitable to work with them. In fact, that’s the intended outcome of a boycott, even outside the bookish community

1

Anonymous #3 12w

I’d say the only time it goes too far is when people start harassing and threatening the author in question, but unfortunately that’s not exclusive to any side or political affiliation or movement

1

Anonymous #3 12w

I think a huge problem I see that bothers me is how threatening people can be to authors and other readers over it. I also see so many claims being made with little evidence to back it up, yet everyone is so quick to jump on the ban wagon. We are a society of followers so people tend to join the side of canceling rather than being canceled. Don’t get me wrong there are valid reasons to stop consuming someone literature, but I think you better have receipts with those accusations.

3

Anonymous OP 12w

I also think ruining someone’s career and saying terrible and violent things about them over their political, religious, or personal beliefs is extreme. Especially when their art doesn’t make those issues a focal point. I think as a society we forgot how to coexist and respect others with different opinions.

2

Anonymous OP 12w

There are plenty of classic authors that reflect different values and beliefs than most of society today, yet their works still prove valuable despite it. We learn from those we don’t agree with.

1

Anonymous OP 12w

i def don’t support threatening people but i understand not wanting authors with horrible views to get publicity and then use their fame to spread hate ykno

5

Anonymous OP 12w

We do, and as someone who used to be uber conservative Catholic and is now a leftist socialist, I know that better than anyone. And as I said before, I don’t support threatening authors (and ig I didn’t say this, but definitely not other readers). I do read books from people I disagree with, but I will never financially support them, and that’s my right. That’s every consumer’s right. Nobody owes any artist support of their work and consumers have the right to make informed decisions about how

2

Anonymous #3 12w

they spend their time and money. People are well within their rights to not support or platform artists they don’t agree with, and they are allowed to share why they believe others should quit supporting those artists. I do think some people go too far with this, and that’s an issue, but that doesn’t negate my right as a consumer to spend my money how I choose

3

Anonymous #3 12w

I do think people should be responsible for how they throw around accusations, but tbh artists don’t lose their livelihood as often as anti-cancel culture people like to imagine. JKR still has tons of supporters and a new TV show coming out. SJM is still one of the biggest names in booktok. TJ Klune is still a cornerstone of cozy fantasy. I even still see people recommending Tillie Cole books

3

Anonymous #3 12w

The only person I can think off the top of my head that may have actually ruined their career because of accusations is Niel Gaiman and I don’t think you want to be in his corner right now tbh. The only power consumers have is how they spend their money, and it’s up to publishers and distributors to decide whether the profits are still there to keep backing any given artist

3

Anonymous #3 12w

I didn’t realize SJM or TJ had controversies? The SJM one makes sense, I can see it. I haven’t read any of TJs books but from brief superficial search I don’t… really get it?

1

Anonymous orangepopcornn 12w

more than just the reasoning. the scope, the methods, and the impact

4

Anonymous #3 12w

i more meant like people ban books because they want to silence peoples stories and voices whereas people cancel authors because they don’t think that author should have the fame and space to spread hateful views

6

Anonymous #2 12w

SJM has had a few controversies. I don’t really read her books so I don’t know all the details, but she was “cancelled” for being a Zionist, and for poor/harmful representation of LGBT and POC characters, and her big one was using Breonna Taylor’s death to promote her new book (basically “this sucks but anyway don’t forget to preorder my book!”)

1

Anonymous #2 12w

TJ was lesser known, but The House of the Cerulean Sea was based on the residential schools in Canada, which feels really gross (the analogs of indigenous people are monsters, and it reeked of white saviorism and just “hey be positive and love and turn the other cheek and the bad guys will leave you alone!”) so a lot of people, especially Canadian indigenous people, were saying it was offensive

1