All About Books discussion

I thought this would be interesting to discuss. Do you think an author's personal life/views do/should influence whether or not you read their work? Are there any specific authors you have had this reaction to, either in terms of reading or not reading them?

I think that the authors were influenced by their life and historical period when writing their works. So to fully comprehend them one should at least know when and where they were written.
That doesn't mean that you don't appreciate books if you don't "know" them.
There was an essey I studied when in University Reading for the Plot: Design and Intention in Narrative which said exactly this: every now and then, especially for novels, you should read them ... just for the sake of seeing what is going to happen next!!!

There was a living author whose books I used to read. Then I saw some details about how she had bullied someone after they had written a critical review of one of her works. This had left me feeling unable to read her work any more.

Definitely, both negatively and positively, what you know about an author will affect how you feel about their work. Think about those who have survived the holocaust!

I am a person who believes that the book/s should be read for the sake of book/s. The writing is the contribution of the author to the entire human race. It is a common heritage and the personal views or the personal life of the author never counts in this case. But then that is the IDEA, I have.

Personally, I tend to feel more at home with certain authors for their personal views or personal life seems to be very compatible with their writing (at least from my point of view). I love to visit the places/houses/tombs of the authors I treasure most. If he/she is a living person I would also love to meet him/her. Just a glance of him/her from a far distance is enough for me and not necessary that I need to have a signed copy or a photo with him/her (If there is a possibility I would love to have it but I am not that obsessive). It is enough that I had seen him/her or I had been with him/her in his/her house or at his/her tomb.

Also personally some personal views of the authors affect me much. For instance, in my search for reading all the Nobel prize winners for Literature, I am yet to decide on Knut Hamsun. His books are easily available and I still have reluctance. I will read him for sure. But it takes an effort to decide at times.

I understand what you say about Knut Hamsun. I actually started this thread because of the poetry poll, and the difficulties I have with Ungaretti. I can't make my mind up about Ezra Pound either. In Pound's case, I think I'll probably read him eventually, if I can control my emotional response to him and his views.

I had read recently Luigi Pirandello's play and then I realised he too was like Giuseppe Ungaretti. But then, it was already late. I realised it only when I bought the book and while reading the introduction where I found the biographical details. As I said earlier, sooner or later I read the authors. So I would have read Pirandello anyhow if not then.

This is a fascinating thread, thanks Gill! I too like to immerse myself in an artist's life (for me it's the same for composers, painters, sculptors as well as writers), so I feel a lot in common with Dhanaraj's views. But then I get very uncomfortable about Wagner.

I think if someone is major, and the views they held were not embedded in their work, I would try to read them armed with the distasteful knowledge I have about them. Otherwise I'd just be putting my head in the sand. But I would want to be fully aware of the bad facts.

With modern authors though I seem to have a different attitude. When I learnt about Orson Scott Card's views for instance, I resolved never to bother even reading him let alone contribute to his profits. I suspect I won't be missing much! And I got as far as downloading some Ayn Rand to my kindle, but sent it back unread for a refund, once I'd read information on the Net about her philosophical theories, as I personally found them so immoral.

Lynne - I really enjoy Durrell's books. May I quote from one of my reviews? This is from my review of Three Singles To Adventure by Gerald Durrell

"Many of these animals are familiar to us nowadays from wildlife parks, but it is worth remembering that they would have been unfamiliar to his readers in the 1950's. It is greatly through his efforts that we have the privilege to view them in the flesh. And even more importantly that he brought about better transportation regulations and huge improvements in zoos...

Gerald Durrell's fascination and respect for animals shines through every description, and it is this that forms the basis of his later philosophy. He believed that it is fundamentally wrong to remove animals from their natural habitat, unless it is to save them from extinction. In later years of course, Durrell founded his Wildlife Conservation Trust in Jersey, which has had some success in breeding species which are threatened in the wild. Marmosets, golden lion tamarins, Goeldi's monkeys and howler monkeys have all been part of this captive breeding programme, and by returning them to the wild some of what has been lost has been restored... With the wisdom of hindsight, we can acknowledge any scruples we may have about the ethics of "collecting" animals in this way, as being appropriate for the time. It also means that there is a tiny spec of optimism on the horizon when we consider animal conservation."

Maybe it's all a question of degree? And as you say, the context. And we probably have to view fact and fiction differently too!

Principles matter a lot to me, and therefore I don't read books by authors that stand against my principles. For example, I refuse to read anything by Orson Scott Card, not because I disagree with him (which I do), but because he uses any means that his books offer to push his own agenda. Another example, would be me refusing to read Mein Kampf (though I'm sure it's an interesting read) out of respect to all those who suffered because of Hitler's deranged mind.

Dhanaraj wrote: "I am a person who believes that the book/s should be read for the sake of book/s. The writing is the contribution of the author to the entire human race. It is a common heritage and the personal vi..."

I have your same opinion.

I was curious about Knut Hamsun because I have read Hunger so I looked for his life and found out he supported Nazi Germany. I didn't know about this when I have read the book and now that I know it I can't change opinion about his skills as a writer.
There are a lot of authors that don't have a "clean" life and this means we also shouldn't read Louis-Ferdinand Céline and a lot more (I'm thinking also about Greek and Roman pederasts).
I think we must enjoy the reading and don't judge books by the author's life if he doesn't put his ideals in his books. In this case we can't agree with the content but this doesn't mean they aren't able to write. I think we mustn't judge literary works following the author's beliefs. I think this is a limitation.

There were two series I read of the mystery genre, one by Ann Perry, and one by Lee Child. I have a hard time reading Perry now, although I really enjoyed this series, because of her past history and Lee Child I can't read anymore because Tom Cruise was picked as the lead in the movie made from one of these books. Do not like Cruise, or his Church, nor his opinions. So I have to say yes, things do effect what I read.

Will have to say when I was younger I very seldom investigated the authors, now if I really like a book, I do.

Jean wrote: "This is a fascinating thread, thanks Gill! I too like to immerse myself in an artist's life (for me it's the same for composers, painters, sculptors as well as writers), so I feel a lot in common w..."

I read Orson Scott Card's Ender's Game series, not knowing anything about him. I just read them because someone recommended them to me - and I have to say, I thought they were good. So I don't know if I would agree with you that you are not missing much!

The only problem I have with all this is that any author I read could have different views than me, whether it be political, religious or otherwise, and I wouldn't know - unless it's obvious in their writing. I just don't research each author I read, but perhaps I should??

I just remembered a poem of Wisława Szymborska that I had read in Italian translation. I tried to get the English translation in the net. Could not get it.
It is a small poem titled LA MANO (The Hand).
Here it is:

"Ventisette ossa,
trentacinque muscoli,
circa duemila cellule nervose
in ogni polpastrello delle nostre cinque dita.
E’ piu’ che sufficente
per scrivere Mein Kampf
o Winnie the Pooh."

Great food for thought. It's like living vicariously through an author's story.

Yes and no, depending on the subject/story.

I am influenced more if I want to know more about the subject. Then I scan reviews and read the authors' bio how much the author knows their subject matter/their experiences to justify their topic of discussion.

I am also influenced on the story line and an author being an interesting storyteller. That has opened up a lot of genres for me.

I think it's not so much the author but rather the story. It needs to make sense more than perfect because it's all subjective because your now adding the readers' POV and values.

Dhanarah, Think your poem you quote means something like:

26 bones
35 muscles
About 2000 nervous cells
in each fingertip of our five fingers
Are sufficient
To write Mein Kampf
Or Winnie the Pooh.

I look forward to a more accurate translation from someone!

It's an interesting poem though, isn't it?

Gill, The meaning is correct. Thanks for making the effort. I still wonder how the original English translation looked like?

It is true that it is an interesting poem.

Hi Gill! One time I was going through a phase of reading a lot of Phillip Larkin's poetry. It came to an abrupt end after I learned that he harboured very racist and misogynistic views and I just couldn't look at his work the same again.

It depends. If the author is dead and I know their views were opposed to mine, but they have written something I want to read, then I will pick it up. I'll bear in mind that they might be writing from a different time period, with different views to the modern day. In fact many old classics I read are sexist, racist etc. but that wouldn't stop me from reading them.

If the author is alive and still earning money from their books then I won't read them. Not even from the library, as I don't want to contribute to their audience numbers. For example I'll never read Ender's Game as I find Orson Scott Card abhorrent in his views and know that he donates money to causes that I don't agree with.

Pink wrote: "It depends. If the author is dead and I know their views were opposed to mine, but they have written something I want to read, then I will pick it up. I'll bear in mind that they might be writing f..."

This is a good point and I agree with you. I usually read classics so I don't care a lot about the beliefs of the authors because it were different times and if the book is good then it doesn't matter. Or I could read a book only for the seek of knowledge as for ex. Mein Kampf. I think it could be important and interesting from a historical point of view.
I rarely read contemporary authors but it could be that I decide to not read one if I know he uses the money for causes I don't share. But I don't know, I'm not used to be interested in the life of an author. I start to get interested only if I like his books and so I look to deepen my knowledge about his life. And till now I have done it only a few times and their life was ok.

@Gill: in Italian it is 27 bones.

Mostly I don't know anything about the lives of modern day authors that I read, so I could be reading books by people that I would't like or agree with. Some authors have gained notoriety for these reasons though and so I know to avoid them.

An author's views are important to me when I decide whether or not I would like to read them. I would always try to read an author's bio first before reading his/her works. I would prefer for them to have a sense of justice or at least not hold views that are against humanity (admittedly this is a very subjective measure, but I'm expressing a personal opinion here). But I would be a less reluctant reader if the author leads (led) a morally loose life when judged by the society of his/her times.

Dely, cheers re 27. I always have a problem with 6 and 7, and even though I think it through carefully each time, I often get the wrong one. Well I mean I say 6 for 7, I get it right for 6!

This is really difficult to answer for me, I try not to but then again a book is pretty much the author's views that they are putting out. If an author was very openly homophobic, anti-Semitic, sexist etc then I wouldn't touch their books.

Excellent discussion point. I don't know much about most authors I read. I agree with what most people are saying; I would read a classic with the view that it was written in that time but sometimes I dislike it because of those views (Robinson Crusoe for example). I haven't come across a modern author whose views I disagree with yet although I'm going to google Orsen Scott Card and find out why everybody is boycotting him.

I was thinking, are their any classic authors who we now read who were not as widely read due to their views at the time. I know oscar wilde was imprisoned for homosexuality. It's not the same as being a mysogenist/racist/nazi-sympathiser but at the time it was considered a terrible sin.

Charbel wrote: "Principles matter a lot to me, and therefore I don't read books by authors that stand against my principles. For example, I refuse to read anything by Orson Scott Card, not because I disagree wit..."

Hear, hear, Charbel. Principles matter to me too. Would I read Ezra Pound? No. Likewise, the more I read about Hemingway's life; the bombastic attitude he had, then the less I have read of him.

Mein Kampf: how many people do we need reading this crock these days before some new lunatic decides this is really a true 'bible'. No thanks, take it off the book shelves, in my opinion!!!

It's interesting that you should mention Hemingway, Bette. I don't know much about him, but I do know that he was rather fond of war, while I plain despise it.

I also avoid books by authors who prefer to be ignorant when it comes to matters like evolution and climate change.

Heather, it's an interesting point you raise about authors and at the time. One person who comes to mind is John Bunyan, who wrote The Pilgrim's Progress whilst in jail. I don't know whether that meant his book wasn't widely read or not, though.

I don't know either. I think Wilde was quite popular as well.

Pink wrote: "Mostly I don't know anything about the lives of modern day authors that I read, so I could be reading books by people that I would't like or agree with. Some authors have gained notoriety for these..."

That's what I mean when I said I read Ender's Game. I can't change my view of the story he wrote, though. When I read it, I liked it. I might not choose to further support him by buying any more of his books, but I can't turn around now and say I didn't like his books. That just wouldn't be true.

Charbel wrote: "It's interesting that you should mention Hemingway, Bette. I don't know much about him, but I do know that he was rather fond of war, while I plain despise it.

I also avoid books by authors who p..."

War, killing things i.e. animals for hunting purposes only, really bad attitude about women, I could go on.

Gill wrote: "Dely, cheers re 27. I always have a problem with 6 and 7, and even though I think it through carefully each time, I often get the wrong one. Well I mean I say 6 for 7, I get it right for 6!"

Did you translate it? Do you know Italian? I thought you copy/pasted it from somewhere! You did a good job if the translation is yours!

I've checked out Orson Scott Card; his views make me feel sick! It would be so awesome if his son/daughter came home to have a coming-out chat with Mum & Dad one day:)



Would I read him? Not this little black duck!

Pink wrote: "Mostly I don't know anything about the lives of modern day authors that I read, so I could be reading books by people that I would't like or agree with. Some authors have gained notoriety for these..."

That's the same with me, I don't really research authors I read.

Edit: I don't really read any authors that I feel would have controversial views anyway.

dely wrote: "Gill wrote: "Dely, cheers re 27. I always have a problem with 6 and 7, and even though I think it through carefully each time, I often get the wrong one. Well I mean I say 6 for 7, I get it right f..."

Oh, thanks, Dely. I only know minimal Italian, but my Spanish is OK. So I worked from a combination of the two. I had to look up the word for 'fingertip' though!

Gill, great topic for a thread, I just commented on the poll for the seasonal poet to that regard ;) Will comment more here later once I have more time.

If a writer is to be judged for his political or religious views then we can hardly read any author. The writings should be put to the test always. Even though I have personal inhibitions to start some authors, the fact is that once I begin reading his work I get lost there and the author's past does not enter the scene unless he/she advocates it in the book.

I ultimately see the writer and the book as two separate things. I personally love Ender's Game, and am hoping to read the rest of the series, but I absolutely hate Orson Scott Card. I have an urge to write him a letter about how he has no right telling me who I can and can't love.

It's diff if you know a writer harbours negative view in the modern age ... Post-emancipation/ post woman's movement etc that will definitely influence whether or not I read his/her book. For example when I read 'heart of darkness' I was later told that the term racism was not in the vocabulary or understood as we understand it now. Thus, my second reading experience was entirely different from the first!

@Dhanaraj I totally understand what you are saying but sometimes the two are inseparable. For the most part though I read books unaware of the authors background because tbh it does effect my reading... But if the views are explicit in the work, or it becomes apparent to you later, then it could be an issue.

@ Marian: "But if the views are explicit in the work, or it becomes apparent to you later, then it could be an issue." I too agree on that issue.

Or else, it is the work that should force us to the judgment. For instance, recently I read Luigi Pirandello's Six Characters in Search of an Author. The play has nothing to do with Fascism or Mussolini (at least, I could not detect anything). To me it ended up being one of the interesting plays and I will be reading certainly other books by Pirandello.

Dhanaraj wrote: "If a writer is to be judged for his political or religious views then we can hardly read any author. The writings should be put to the test always. Even though I have personal inhibitions to start ..."

I agree with you, Dhanaraj. I tend to judge books by the writing, not the author, although I did take exception to Jeffrey Archer, who had a book published whilst in prison, which I thought was appalling at that time.

Dhanaraj wrote: "If a writer is to be judged for his political or religious views then we can hardly read any author. The writings should be put to the test always. Even though I have personal inhibitions to start ..."

You have a point there, but I believe as readers we have a responsibility to be aware of not just what the book is about, but also any relevant externalities. For example if I buy an Orson Scott Card novel, I know my money then is going to support a position that I find deplorable. Being as obssessive as I am, I can't overlook that fact.

Very interesting topic.
I agree with dely and Pink! If the author is dead I try to understand the historical context, for example at school we talked about Pirandello and Ungaretti's "unexpected" support to Fascism. For what emerges from an accurate study of Pirandello which follows this controversial aspect, it seems that he supported Mussolini mainly for surviving economically in the country, and it's possible too that he at the beginning hoped that the political movement could really bring back some "order" like Mussolini said.
In a second time he changed his mind about Fascism, he understood that behind Mussolini's flamboyant rethorique there was nothing.

Ungaretti..we don't know much about the reasons of his political support. Maybe he did it for convenience too or maybe he supported Fascism because Mussolini in his policy pointed a lot on the resentment of war survivors. The firs thing that came to my mind when my professor talked about this fact is this possible reason, considering that Ungaretti is mainly known for his poems about the tragedy of surviving in the trench warfare. He was against violence (and I think that poems like "Soldiers", "Rivers" or "Wake" are intense, tragic and beautiful :)).

An unpleasant revelation: ...Heidegger's nazist beliefs despite an admirable philosophical production. This is even more controversial.
I wonder how Hannah Arendt immediately reacted when she found out it, given that she was his lover and now she is remembered for her analysis of totalitarism and his fight against it.

For living authors I'm more cautious: like you said, if I known that buying one of his books could help him (economically), I try to pay attention. But I borrow a lot of books from the library and so I known that in that case I'm not helping him economically and this is at least a positive point. But to be honest, like Shirley sometimes I simply didn't know of some aspects of the author's life when I'm reading him and I discover them later.

I'm interested in the distinction between living and dead authors. I must give this some thought.

Gill, this is such a great topic for discussion!

Bette BookAddict wrote: "Gill, this is such a great topic for discussion!"

We aim to please!

Dhanaraj wrote: "I am a person who believes that the book/s should be read for the sake of book/s. The writing is the contribution of the author to the entire human race. It is a common heritage and the personal vi..."

This is how I feel as well. In fact, I would rather NOT KNOW about the author's personal life, as I don't want it to influence how I read their books. Once I do know, however, it of course impacts how I feel - Anne Perry is a good example of an author whose mystery novels I now have trouble enjoying as much as I did before knowing (view spoiler)[while a teenager, she and a friend murdered someone (hide spoiler)].

Leslie wrote: "Dhanaraj wrote: "I am a person who believes that the book/s should be read for the sake of book/s. The writing is the contribution of the author to the entire human race. It is a common heritage an..."

This is how I feel as well. In fact, I would rather NOT KNOW about the author's personal life, as I don't want it to influence how I read their books. Once I do know, however, it of course impacts how I feel - Anne Perry is a good example of an author whose mystery novels I now have trouble enjoying as much as I did before knowing (view spoiler).


Leslie, I admit, I leaped across to Google after reading your comment. I remember the film but was not aware of the author connection.