I think the creator's ego is a very large factor in Romanticism.
I don't, but I don't know which creators or which artists you are thinking about. I'm not sure why Romanticism would be different in this respect than other writings. Do you think the writing of the Romantic is more likely to be subject to the demands of the ego than other types of writing?
can't say I've ever head of this writer before; but what about his other work? Unless the homophobia informs the rest of his writing?
He's a popular American SF writer. I'd read a few of his short stories - one in particularly that I very much loved - before I read the essay. After the essay, I couldn't bear to read any of his works, so I know nothing about the content. It is probably very good and probably the homophobia doesn't show. (He's a Mormon, so his homophobia is motivated by religion. As is so often the case.) The thing is, he put me off so badly, I can't motivate myself to read his subsequent works.
I'm not sure why Romanticism would be different in this respect than other writings. Do you think the writing of the Romantic is more likely to be subject to the demands of the ego than other types of writing?
Yes. I think it was part and parcel of Romantic ideology: the cult of the "suffering artist", and the personality-cult of the artist.
I'd read a few of his short stories - one in particularly that I very much loved - before I read the essay. After the essay, I couldn't bear to read any of his works, so I know nothing about the content. It is probably very good and probably the homophobia doesn't show. (He's a Mormon, so his homophobia is motivated by religion. As is so often the case.) The thing is, he put me off so badly, I can't motivate myself to read his subsequent works.
I think this is a good reason why it's better for artists to stay in the background, and not push themselves forward as 'personalities'.
this is a good reason why it's better for artists to stay in the background, and not push themselves forward as 'personalities'.
Some artists - actors and singers, say - have to push themselves forward as personalities as part of their art. John Barrowman is a good example of this - he has an incredible talent for creating an image, for the PR side of his career. He doesn't hide in privacy but presents a vocal public face as if it were an intimate, private face. It's a facet of his talent.
With writers, it's easier to stay in the background. But I think it would be intellectually dishonest (not to mention artistically dishonest) for writers to hide their opinions. Actually, I think everyone, writers or whatever, should be free to express their opinions - and be judged accordingly. Free speech and all that. It makes for healthy, open discussions.
To be fair, Card does not push his politics (or his religion) on the public or dwell on it in his books, as far as I know. He keeps a fairly low profile. The article I read was one he wrote many years ago for a Mormon publication - not well known, and most people, most of his fans, have no idea it exists. Or existed.
Yes, and I am generalizing about all types of art, all types of creativity, including performance. For the writer, the book (or novel or poem or whatever) is the public face, the part of the individual that gets to strut around in public and enjoy the limelight. So writers have a different buffer between themselves and their public.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 11:24 am (UTC)I don't, but I don't know which creators or which artists you are thinking about. I'm not sure why Romanticism would be different in this respect than other writings. Do you think the writing of the Romantic is more likely to be subject to the demands of the ego than other types of writing?
can't say I've ever head of this writer before; but what about his other work? Unless the homophobia informs the rest of his writing?
He's a popular American SF writer. I'd read a few of his short stories - one in particularly that I very much loved - before I read the essay. After the essay, I couldn't bear to read any of his works, so I know nothing about the content. It is probably very good and probably the homophobia doesn't show. (He's a Mormon, so his homophobia is motivated by religion. As is so often the case.) The thing is, he put me off so badly, I can't motivate myself to read his subsequent works.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 11:59 am (UTC)Yes. I think it was part and parcel of Romantic ideology: the cult of the "suffering artist", and the personality-cult of the artist.
I'd read a few of his short stories - one in particularly that I very much loved - before I read the essay. After the essay, I couldn't bear to read any of his works, so I know nothing about the content. It is probably very good and probably the homophobia doesn't show. (He's a Mormon, so his homophobia is motivated by religion. As is so often the case.) The thing is, he put me off so badly, I can't motivate myself to read his subsequent works.
I think this is a good reason why it's better for artists to stay in the background, and not push themselves forward as 'personalities'.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 02:07 pm (UTC)Some artists - actors and singers, say - have to push themselves forward as personalities as part of their art. John Barrowman is a good example of this - he has an incredible talent for creating an image, for the PR side of his career. He doesn't hide in privacy but presents a vocal public face as if it were an intimate, private face. It's a facet of his talent.
With writers, it's easier to stay in the background. But I think it would be intellectually dishonest (not to mention artistically dishonest) for writers to hide their opinions. Actually, I think everyone, writers or whatever, should be free to express their opinions - and be judged accordingly. Free speech and all that. It makes for healthy, open discussions.
To be fair, Card does not push his politics (or his religion) on the public or dwell on it in his books, as far as I know. He keeps a fairly low profile. The article I read was one he wrote many years ago for a Mormon publication - not well known, and most people, most of his fans, have no idea it exists. Or existed.
no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 04:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-12-14 04:43 pm (UTC)