One dichotomy I've found helpful is empathy versus sympathy.
Empathy says "I can emotionally relate to what you're going through."
Sympathy means "..."
This reminds me that, for those of us who find empathy rather elusive (and hard-won, if it exists at all), the premise about empathy having an ethics is even more mysterious.
I'm intrigued that it could be emotionally destabilising to discover that an inspirational / admired / respected author appears to be other than you'd imagined them to be.
From another perspective, in terms of being able to critically appraise texts, it would seem useful to be able identity with someone's writings without identifying with the author.
That's interesting. I find empathy easier than sympathy. Maybe it's roleplaying games? Or maybe it's a habit of certain kinds of self examination for a white guy, but I can dig around in my soul, flip a few switches and go "yep, I can see how in an alternate reality I could do something like that." Maybe this is what actors go through when they have to perform the role of a "villain."
Empathy is easy. Sometimes it's intuitive. I find sympathy harder, because to me that gets closer to the question of "what am I supposed to do with this monster?" I feel the difference between me and a guy like that is sometimes a matter of training, and - ironically - empathy. And I don't know how the heck you deal with someone who seems to be that poorly programmed.
Far as shock...it depends on the celebrity. Each one is their own particular thing. I think it's harder when the person who committed the offense made a lot of hay about how they were committed to not being that kind of person. It'd be like a respected local entrepreneur who lectured everyone about the sanctity of honest business and then getting caught in embezzlement. The irony burns a bit. And sexual crimes are a lot more visceral to people than financial crimes, for understandable reasons.
And yeah, detaching work from author seems like a good way to read. There are many good ways to read, that's a valid one, for sure.
For empathy to have an ethics, there would need to be an element of choice about it. So is empathy with authors something you have a choice about, or is it something that just happens, involuntarily?
More generally, I'm wondering what the benefit is, for human beings, of an apparent significant level of emotional identification with another human being you've never met.
And that's a thing. For me, empathy isn't a matter of ethics, maybe it's a matter of survival. If I live in a world surrounded by werewolves, it behooves me to understand how to keep them from eating me. So I must understand them. And I also have to learn how not to be a werewolf. I think for a feminist cis-straight-white-guy, that might be the healthiest approach to society in mixed company. We are monsters, and the goal is to learn how not to be a monster, or how to be a more useful monster.
Sympathy is where it hits ethics to me, because sympathy feels like a social emotion while empathy is just me internalizing someone else's internal states, either as an object lesson for my own development (a cautionary tale, as it were,) or to learn how to notice similar problematic figures in the future, assuming there is a "type" that can be recognized, if people like this are in some way distinguishable from people like the rest of us who, one presumes, aren't serial sexual predators.
Weird thing for me is that empathy is a reflexive action, it's not a conscious choice. For me, to not try to feel someone out is what takes cognitive work. The idea of making it an ethical question is interesting, since empathy, especially for people who are morally repugnant, is generally something I keep to myself. Might be one reason I tossed this thread out. It does feel dangerous.
I’m not sure that empathy or sympathy are quite the right words. Things like books and music can become part of our identity or provide gateways into a community of like-minded people. They become part of our lives, and we build memories around them.
That may lead us to believe the creators are better people than they are. Often that’s not a problem as they’re just the normal level of flawed human. And we unlikely to meet them anyway.
Then there are the other ones. The ones who are actively horrible. Whose behaviour / beliefs are completely at odds with what we believe to be “good”. What do you do when that happens?
Some people carry on enjoying the works and gloss over who made them. Others acknowledge it in their own way. Others put them aside as they can’t give over it and go onto find a new love. I'm not sure what the answer is. But my annual re-read of Neverwhere has been cancelled until further notice.
Maybe a better question is what do you do when something you love turns out to have been created by someone you’d hate …
Maybe a better question is what do you do when something you love turns out to have been created by someone you’d hate …
Personally, it's not a big change. I think I've always been averse to making idols out of famous people. I remember when Obama was elected and thinking "welp, this guy seems better than average, I'm sure he'll screw up and people will be really upset when that happens."
And as I've quipped, the gentleman in the OP hasn't actually put out any new written work in a long time. I read a commentator seeing a possible correlation there, as if his life had generally taken a turn for the worse and this was part of it. That's all speculative and genuinely not my business. But since I'm not generally a re-reader of books when there are too many great books to read that I haven't read, I don't feel much attachment to the artist anymore. I'm past the stage of life when his works were groundbreaking, now they're just part of the ground. And I've been moving to other fields anyway.
It just makes me less inclined to pay attention to any hypothetical work he puts out in the future. But I think his career shifted away from the writing to the career of being a famous person a while ago, which may be a process I had already grieved. There are other authors I'm patiently waiting for. I can take him off the list.
...
That's interesting. I find empathy easier than sympathy. Maybe it's roleplaying games? Or maybe it's a habit of certain kinds of self examination for a white guy, but I can dig around in my soul, flip a few switches and go "yep, I can see how in an alternate reality I could do something like that." Maybe this is what actors go through when they have to perform the role of a "villain."
...
Empathy is easy. Sometimes it's intuitive. I find sympathy harder, because to me that gets closer to the question of "what am I supposed to do with this monster?" I feel the difference between me and a guy like that is sometimes a matter of training, and - ironically - empathy. And I don't know how the heck you deal with someone who seems to be that poorly programmed.
More generally, I'm wondering what the benefit is, for human beings, of an apparent significant level of emotional identification with another human being you've never met.
And that's a thing. For me, empathy isn't a matter of ethics, maybe it's a matter of survival. If I live in a world surrounded by werewolves, it behooves me to understand how to keep them from eating me. So I must understand them. And I also have to learn how not to be a werewolf. I think for a feminist cis-straight-white-guy, that might be the healthiest approach to society in mixed company. We are monsters, and the goal is to learn how not to be a monster, or how to be a more useful monster.
Sympathy is where it hits ethics to me, because sympathy feels like a social emotion while empathy is just me internalizing someone else's internal states, either as an object lesson for my own development (a cautionary tale, as it were,) or to learn how to notice similar problematic figures in the future, assuming there is a "type" that can be recognized, if people like this are in some way distinguishable from people like the rest of us who, one presumes, aren't serial sexual predators.
Thanks, Bullfrog. There's a wide range of perspectives.
In contrast to empathy, I find sympathy rather pointless. As you say, it seems more of a social emotion (or maybe social construct). It can be useful to be able to fake it, in order to avoid casual opprobrium. But with people I know well, I usually don't bother.
As for the monsters, they're within us. (And I can't seem get Forbidden Planet out of my head.)
As a privileged white guy, I don't think it's abusers I need to empathise with. If I need to understand the underlying drivers behind abuse (for example), I can dig into my own thoughts and impulses. To me, it seems more appropriate to talk about "making sense" of abusers.
In contrast, empathising with victims seems more productive in terms of learning and changing - evaluating (and re-evaluating) my own attitudes and behaviour regarding abuse. For example, by actively seeking and dwelling on counter-perspectives - perspectives from the point of view of victims and the unprivileged.
Maybe a better question is what do you do when something you love turns out to have been created by someone you’d hate …
Personally, it's not a big change. I think I've always been averse to making idols out of famous people. I remember when Obama was elected and thinking "welp, this guy seems better than average, I'm sure he'll screw up and people will be really upset when that happens."
And as I've quipped, the gentleman in the OP hasn't actually put out any new written work in a long time. I read a commentator seeing a possible correlation there, as if his life had generally taken a turn for the worse and this was part of it. That's all speculative and genuinely not my business. But since I'm not generally a re-reader of books when there are too many great books to read that I haven't read, I don't feel much attachment to the artist anymore. I'm past the stage of life when his works were groundbreaking, now they're just part of the ground. And I've been moving to other fields anyway.
It just makes me less inclined to pay attention to any hypothetical work he puts out in the future. But I think his career shifted away from the writing to the career of being a famous person a while ago, which may be a process I had already grieved. There are other authors I'm patiently waiting for. I can take him off the list.
That maybe the difference - he wasn't an idol but he was someone I believed was okay. Whose new work I would wait for and be genuinely excited to get my hands on.
OTH, I'd already been there and been disappointed by that so it wasn't as big a deal to me as it could have been. Sad, but not that sad.
...
I’m not sure that empathy or sympathy are quite the right words. Things like books and music can become part of our identity or provide gateways into a community of like-minded people. They become part of our lives, and we build memories around them.
...
Others put them aside as they can’t give over it and go onto find a new love. I'm not sure what the answer is. But my annual re-read of Neverwhere has been cancelled until further notice.
Nevermore?
Maybe a better question is what do you do when something you love turns out to have been created by someone you’d hate …
Given the emotional content of the posts on this thread, that had also been going through my mind.
Personally, it's not a big change. I think I've always been averse to making idols out of famous people.
...
But since I'm not generally a re-reader of books when there are too many great books to read that I haven't read, I don't feel much attachment to the artist anymore. I'm past the stage of life when his works were groundbreaking, now they're just part of the ground. And I've been moving to other fields anyway.
...
I can take him off the list.
Interesting. Looking back to the start of the thread...
So, I'm not sure anyone else is following, but an awful lot of geeks (self included, I'll admit) are rather upset because a certain famous author has been accused of some rather impressive feats of sexual impropriety.[/i]
It struck me at the time that this was an unfortunate turn of phrase.
But what had my soul worked into a pretzel was that I found myself struggling to empathize with this almost literal f-ing vampire. I found myself going "Well, let's see, looking at the traumatic backstory, looking at the themes in his work...yeah. I could see someone ending up like that." And at the same time..."Dude! You're older than I am and I'm kinda middle aged! How the heck did you not check yourself?"
I'm afraid to empathize with monsters, especially male monsters. It seems easier, perhaps socially better, to just exile them, if not execute them for the safety of everyone around them. That's not a literal policy suggestion.
...Weird thing for me is that empathy is a reflexive action, it's not a conscious choice. For me, to not try to feel someone out is what takes cognitive work. The idea of making it an ethical question is interesting, since empathy, especially for people who are morally repugnant, is generally something I keep to myself. Might be one reason I tossed this thread out. It does feel dangerous.
Given that empathy appears not to be a choice for you, it feels like you've been doing what you need to do to put some emotional distance between the two of you.
Given that empathy appears not to be a choice for you, it feels like you've been doing what you need to do to put some emotional distance between the two of you.
It's hard to have empathy when we don't know anything about the abuser except the abuse. It's easier when you know more of the person. I had a close friend in college, someone I thought I knew very well, and who I trusted. We lost touch after college, but I still thought fondly of him. The I heard from a mutual friend that he had been accused of some pretty horrible acts of child sexual abuse. He was tried and convicted, and I don't doubt the veracity of the charges, there were some clues though nothing that I could have really foreseen this. But I still feel bad for him, and have empathy, because I know what he was like aside from the evil acts. I know the bigger picture of the man, not just the horrible things he did that landed him in prison.
Thanks for posting that, @NicoleMR . I read over this thread as a favourite teacher of mine (from getting on 40 years ago) has just gone down for 12 years for child sex offences. I feel rather as you describe.
Comments
Sex is fun, power is fun, touching pretty people is fun, sure. There are entire genres of art that thrive on these basic human impulses, and doing them ethically requires a lot of regulation. And sometimes they aren't and the results are revolting, per this article about someone who worked for "Girls Gone Wild" back when that was a thing. Barf. Content warning for some depictions of inappropriate sexual behavior.
Empathy is easy. Sometimes it's intuitive. I find sympathy harder, because to me that gets closer to the question of "what am I supposed to do with this monster?" I feel the difference between me and a guy like that is sometimes a matter of training, and - ironically - empathy. And I don't know how the heck you deal with someone who seems to be that poorly programmed.
Far as shock...it depends on the celebrity. Each one is their own particular thing. I think it's harder when the person who committed the offense made a lot of hay about how they were committed to not being that kind of person. It'd be like a respected local entrepreneur who lectured everyone about the sanctity of honest business and then getting caught in embezzlement. The irony burns a bit. And sexual crimes are a lot more visceral to people than financial crimes, for understandable reasons.
And yeah, detaching work from author seems like a good way to read. There are many good ways to read, that's a valid one, for sure. And that's a thing. For me, empathy isn't a matter of ethics, maybe it's a matter of survival. If I live in a world surrounded by werewolves, it behooves me to understand how to keep them from eating me. So I must understand them. And I also have to learn how not to be a werewolf. I think for a feminist cis-straight-white-guy, that might be the healthiest approach to society in mixed company. We are monsters, and the goal is to learn how not to be a monster, or how to be a more useful monster.
Sympathy is where it hits ethics to me, because sympathy feels like a social emotion while empathy is just me internalizing someone else's internal states, either as an object lesson for my own development (a cautionary tale, as it were,) or to learn how to notice similar problematic figures in the future, assuming there is a "type" that can be recognized, if people like this are in some way distinguishable from people like the rest of us who, one presumes, aren't serial sexual predators.
Weird thing for me is that empathy is a reflexive action, it's not a conscious choice. For me, to not try to feel someone out is what takes cognitive work. The idea of making it an ethical question is interesting, since empathy, especially for people who are morally repugnant, is generally something I keep to myself. Might be one reason I tossed this thread out. It does feel dangerous.
That may lead us to believe the creators are better people than they are. Often that’s not a problem as they’re just the normal level of flawed human. And we unlikely to meet them anyway.
Then there are the other ones. The ones who are actively horrible. Whose behaviour / beliefs are completely at odds with what we believe to be “good”. What do you do when that happens?
Some people carry on enjoying the works and gloss over who made them. Others acknowledge it in their own way. Others put them aside as they can’t give over it and go onto find a new love. I'm not sure what the answer is. But my annual re-read of Neverwhere has been cancelled until further notice.
Maybe a better question is what do you do when something you love turns out to have been created by someone you’d hate …
And as I've quipped, the gentleman in the OP hasn't actually put out any new written work in a long time. I read a commentator seeing a possible correlation there, as if his life had generally taken a turn for the worse and this was part of it. That's all speculative and genuinely not my business. But since I'm not generally a re-reader of books when there are too many great books to read that I haven't read, I don't feel much attachment to the artist anymore. I'm past the stage of life when his works were groundbreaking, now they're just part of the ground. And I've been moving to other fields anyway.
It just makes me less inclined to pay attention to any hypothetical work he puts out in the future. But I think his career shifted away from the writing to the career of being a famous person a while ago, which may be a process I had already grieved. There are other authors I'm patiently waiting for. I can take him off the list.
In contrast to empathy, I find sympathy rather pointless. As you say, it seems more of a social emotion (or maybe social construct). It can be useful to be able to fake it, in order to avoid casual opprobrium. But with people I know well, I usually don't bother.
As for the monsters, they're within us. (And I can't seem get Forbidden Planet out of my head.)
As a privileged white guy, I don't think it's abusers I need to empathise with. If I need to understand the underlying drivers behind abuse (for example), I can dig into my own thoughts and impulses. To me, it seems more appropriate to talk about "making sense" of abusers.
In contrast, empathising with victims seems more productive in terms of learning and changing - evaluating (and re-evaluating) my own attitudes and behaviour regarding abuse. For example, by actively seeking and dwelling on counter-perspectives - perspectives from the point of view of victims and the unprivileged.
That maybe the difference - he wasn't an idol but he was someone I believed was okay. Whose new work I would wait for and be genuinely excited to get my hands on.
OTH, I'd already been there and been disappointed by that so it wasn't as big a deal to me as it could have been. Sad, but not that sad.
Given the emotional content of the posts on this thread, that had also been going through my mind.
Interesting. Looking back to the start of the thread... It struck me at the time that this was an unfortunate turn of phrase.
Given that empathy appears not to be a choice for you, it feels like you've been doing what you need to do to put some emotional distance between the two of you.
Thanks for posting that, @NicoleMR . I read over this thread as a favourite teacher of mine (from getting on 40 years ago) has just gone down for 12 years for child sex offences. I feel rather as you describe.