1054
Accepting Donations
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2025
1054 points (98.5% liked)
memes
16179 readers
3062 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because we shouldn't?
We shouldn't support pieces of shit. Not with our eyes. Not with our ears. Not with our dollars or our attention. Its not like there aren't hundreds of thousands of other hilarious people who aren't pieces of shit. Its not like we don't have literally PLENTY of other options.
That is kind of a weak argument. I think lovecraft's work is a decent read, and he is influential and referenced. Still, I am not saying we should adopt his work view. JK Rowing is similar. Her books got lots of kids interested in reading and there is a good message about who you grow up to be. Again, not saying we should adopt her world views. You can pirate their works or find them second hand.
Genuinely think lovecraft is more redeemable than rowling.
Lovecraft's work was more connected to his bigotry, but it was horror; the fundamental theme was a display of his weakness and how he sucked. It makes no claim to virtue, and is onevof the best analyses of the mind of a xenophobe that you can read today; metaphorical as it may be.
Rowling spoke to children, made claims to virtue, and couched her most vile shit in the twee and the benign, turning virulently evil herself as the series went on.
Edit: which is to say: you shoukd read lovecraft because he was such a piece of shit.
Rowling literally uses her Harry Potter profits to fund her TERF agenda. So there is no separating the art from the artist there. The art directly is part of the hate.
There are lots and lots of other great childrens books which will be equally capable of getting children interested in books, but their parents are too lazy and stupid to learn about them.
She's almost a billionaire, nothing will stop her from having the money for her bs anymore. Money keeps shitting out more money. That's not to say that boycotting hp will do nothing, but the impact really is minimal.
Her getting money from it is also not entirely related to seperating the art from the artist, as there are plenty of ways to just not give her money and still interact with the art. I don't really think the books are all that great (and also have some shit messages in their own right) but it's still undeniable that they got a lot of kids into reading and are clearly very good at captivating young readers.
While I think that there are some valid death of the author arguments, it falls apart for me when a content creator turns themselves into a brand. If their opinions are a part of their online presence, then their opinions are part of their brand. There is no separation and I will not listen to someone talk out of both sides of their mouth.