Exposed, canceled, and possibly blacklisted. A creator behind widely popular work has revealed to be hiding skeletons in their closet. With the work having deep meanings for its fans, parting from it because of what the creator has done can be difficult. Instead, many fans take a different approach: separating the art from the artist.
Take the author of arguably one of the most recognizable and influential series globally, J.K. Rowling, author of “Harry Potter,” the popular franchise set to return to fans’ screens in 2027 thanks to a new television adaptation on HBO.
Rowling has drawn criticism from fans with some labelling her a TERF, or trans-exclusive-radical-feminist, for years. The author has been vocal about her viewpoints, taking to X, formerly known as Twitter, to share controversial takes.
Julia Stierman, University of Iowa second-year student, has been a “Harry Potter” fan since elementary school. She sees the series distant from Rowling’s views, so Stierman doesn’t find it hard to disregard Rowling’s influence.
“I don’t really think about the author a whole lot,” she said. “If it was more a story based around one person, I would probably think about the author a lot more.”
Rowling has not left the “Harry Potter” universe just yet, though, as the author is involved as a producer on the new television series adaptation. With new content coming out, along with the knowledge of where Rowling stands on her views, Stierman thinks consuming the upcoming show should be treated more cautiously.
“J.K. Rowling has a very open field to be very specific about what she wants displayed. The amount of viewpoints she puts in the series would determine how much of my time I spend watching it and giving my money to her,” Stierman said.
RELATED: The reality of parasocial relationships
Aligning with Stirenin’s take, UI assistant professor of instruction Tommy Bobbitt noted the level of separation depends on whether the consumer notices the creators’ controversial viewpoints seeping into the work.
“Thinking about J.K. Rowling and some of the characters within ‘Harry Potter,’ [you can see] some of the viewpoints she’s expressed reflected in the art in some ways,” Bobbitt said. “[Separating the art from the artist] depends on how much of that controversy blends into the work of art.”
For other forms of art, like music, Bobbitt said it can be easier to separate the art from the artist, most commonly to distance oneself from the community surrounding the artist. However, for something much more personal, like creators on YouTube, the works are much harder to separate.
“It’s set up for that kind of parasocial relationship,” Bobbitt said. “Building a relationship with, for example, Logan or Jake Paul through their camera would make [separating] more difficult because that’s very ingrained in the art.”
Second-year UI student Hannah Andreasen used to be a fan of Youtubers Shane Dawson, James Charles, and Jeffree Star, and said she doesn’t believe one can separate the creator from something as personal as YouTube.
“With a lot of YouTubers, you get attached and feel you have a personal connection with them. Feeling like you understand someone on the internet and then they turn out to not be who you thought they were is definitely hard,” Andreasen said.
Regardless of whether a consumer chooses to still engage with the media or not, Bobbitt believes separating the art from the artist disregards creators’ actions.
“It can be a way to ignore having the thought entirely,” Bobbitt said. “The practice of separating the art from the artist is kind of intentionally going to ignore the thought of it.”