Cancel Culture: Canceling Authors

This is all based off of something that happened a long time ago, but I still have a lot of thoughts about it. As many people might know, I'm an English major who genuinely likes to read, so I spend a lot of time in book spaces online. Sometimes people have some really questionable takes that they share, and this is one that particularly gets to me.

In late May, a somewhat prominent "bookstagram" (the side of Instagram that discusses book things) account made a post that was "a warning to woke bookstagram." They said that if we keep canceling authors, eventually you will have nothing left to read. She compares the canceling of authors to burning books. This is an exert from the caption of their post:

"Let's go down the list:

Emily Duncan writes about blood magic in her fantasy novel - antisemite, cancel her!

Sarah J Mass supports her Israeli family - Zionist, cancel her!

JK Rowling believes biology is important - TERF, cancel her!

Jay Kristoff criticizes a black woman's comments - racist, cancel him!

Dr Suess made a racial stereotype - bigot, cancel him!

Stephen King, Naomi Novak, Michael Crichton, Jm Barrie, Tomora Peirce, Brandon Sanderson, Amie Kaufman, Cassandra Clare, Marissa Meyer, Orson Scott Card, Rainbow Rowell, Isaac Asimov - Cancel cancel cancel! I could keep going, but I don't have space."

So, if it's not abundantly clear to you already, this is a bigoted person who is mad that other bigoted people are being called out on their bigotry. I'm not familiar with every case here, but I know a few and can explain to you why I'm confident in my conclusion. JK Rowling doesn't "believe biology is important," she's transphobic, homophobic, and racist. The transphobia in particular was the tipping point into people deciding they no longer wanted to financially support her. Dr. Suess was racist in a few (relatively unpopular) books where he used racial stereotypes. After some public outrage, the foundation decided to stop production of those books to show that times had changed and they recognized why what he did was wrong. The original post simplifies these situations a lot by trying to paint the author as having innocent opinion that got crucified online, when in reality there was actual bigotry present that was addressed by people. So I don't really trust the original poster's version of events with all the others.

Anyway, I do think this opens up an interesting aspect of cancel culture: Are we going to eventually run out of books if we keep canceling authors? Is "canceling" authors just another form of censorship?

So, the answer to the first question is obviously no. A lot of the things I talk about on here are my opinion, but this is just a fact. I don't know how she thinks she's going to completely run out of books. Do you have any idea how many people are writing and publishing books, either professionally or on their own? How many people have already written and published books? There are no shortage of books to read; if you're running out of books to read, it sounds like you're really limiting yourself.

Additionally, the book community has ways to still enjoy books from authors if you don't want to monetarily support them. Let's use Rowling as an example again. I adore the Harry Potter books, but am sure to not give money to Rowling anymore by not buying official Harry Potter merch. I read the books that I already own; if someone wants to read them and doesn't own a copy already, they can borrow from someone or buy them secondhand. When it comes to merch, there's a lot of unlicensed fan merch being sold that can be found easily. It comes down to knowing what your money goes to: if you're cool funding Rowling's transphobic rampage, that's your business. But if you want to avoid doing that, it's not that hard.

I didn't quote this from the original post, but this woman was really concerned about the loss of the classics. If a book is considered a classic, it's not going anywhere. You can -- AND SHOULD -- critique these books and authors without advocating for discontinuing publication. Besides, what's a dead guy gonna do if he gets canceled? Is HP Lovecraft going to be really sad about his reputation online? Not everything is going to age well, and things should get criticized if they're bad. And honestly, not all the classics are that good. If the language is hard to understand or the work is riddled with intolerance, modern readers are not obligated to read it (if you want to read more about my thoughts on this, you can find that here). Say it with me: just because something is a classic, doesn't mean it's worth reading.

Moving on to the next question. I don't think canceling is a form of censorship, and I really don't think you can compare it to book burnings. Book burnings are done to ban books, but with flare. It's an aggressive way to both limit the spread of knowledge and ideas while also sending a violent message. And that's simply not what canceling is.

When books are banned or burned, they are absolutely not allowed to be read or sold. Authors that are "canceled" are not seeing their books completely taken off of shelves. In fact, in many cases there are still plenty of people who decide they can separate the author's actions from their work and will continue to support them. Let's use Rowling as an example again. I am not calling for Harry Potter to be outlawed. Instead, I'm saying that her books are full of examples of the different prejudices that she holds. I'm saying that our monetary support for her story is actively funding transphobic legislation in the UK. We shouldn't ignore these things just because you're nostalgic for her story.

But here's the other thing: no one is entitled to a career as an author. Yes, if a smaller author gets canceled, they might not be able to sustain their career. But readers don't owe anyone anything. If someone is going out of their way to have a controversial opinion or be bigoted, they know the risks. Being "canceled" is not being censored, it's consequences for their actions. People who agree will continue to support them, and others will not. They're not owed anything more than that.

Now, this brings us to a more interesting question: is it even possible to cancel authors? I don't think you can.

When it comes to big authors like those mentioned in that original post, getting canceled is really impossible. I have been talking about Rowling nonstop in this post -- does it seem that she's canceled to you? If she were truly being deplatformed, we wouldn't be talking about her negatively either. But all press is good press, and all of my complaining is continuing to give Rowling a platform. This is what we see happen with all big-name authors that get "canceled:" they do something problematic, they get a bunch of constant negative media attention, and they never actually go away.

Furthermore, most of the time what people consider to be "canceling" is just education or awareness. Let's finally talk about a different author: Rick Riordan. Last year I read all of the Riordanverse mythology books. These are really beloved books for a lot of people, and one reason they got so popular was because Riordan's intentional diversity was some of the first that a lot of people saw (I've even talked about his ace rep before). But it's irresponsible to act like all of his representation is good. It's full of questionable and harmful stereotypes. So, many fans (particularly those who are queer and/or not white) will work to educate other fans on why it was wrong, what would be better, and what can be done moving forward. This isn't Riordan getting canceled, he's just having his work criticized. And sometimes online people will get really aggressive about this! "Oh, what, are we going to cancel everyone now?" No, we're not. But not every piece of media is perfect, and it's fine to acknowledge that.

Maybe this is the English major in me talking, but I genuinely believe that people should be able to look critically at all the media they consume. This doesn't mean that I believe people should be trying to whip out a high level analysis essay every time they read a book. But every author will have subconscious (or fully intentional) biases and prejudices that works their way into their writing somehow. As readers, we should be able to identify these issues and recognize the ways they can be harmful.

In case it's not abundantly clear by now: no, I don't think "canceling" authors is as big of a deal as this Instagram page believes it is. We aren't running out of books, and no one is going to sentence you to death for reading a book by a racist author. But no one is owed support: not businesses, not influencers, and especially not authors. If you do or say something that people don't agree with, they are allowed to stop supporting you. There are some genuinely good people out there writing books, and there are so many more books than those written by and for white men. Try to diversify your reading, and I guarantee that you'll discover someone with a lot better morals (and books) than the likes of JK Rowling.

From yours truly,

Kendall