Should one read/recommend book from writers with extreme views?

[noname223]

Currently, I read Yukio Mishima's Life for sale.

Only afterwards I realized that the author is an icone for the far right. I only read it because I am depressed and suicidal again. The woman I text with did not text me back. The whole day. This is the first time ever. Zero messages by her side. She told me she has time periods where she needs to be alone. However, our time together decreased over the last 3 weeks rapidly. I have some theories for that. But she denied everything. I think she might lie to me but why. Lying to me hurts so much more than the truth.

I am so so so fucking sad. I still have hope that our communication normalizes. But this hope dies more and more. Today on a Saturday we usually text the most because she has the most freetime. But she did not reply at all. On her full work days she even sent me two messages. Messages that might took 5 seconds each.
First I thought I could stomach that rejection. But I got so fucking depressed today. The book is fascinating though.

 

[SVEN]

Your extreme may not be mine, so the answer to your query must needs be subjective.

 

[reverieheart]

Many people still read and enjoy Harry Potter, despite the author's controversial views.

 

[Grumpy Frog]

I think as long as there book isn't just about there ideology it's fine for me to read.

For example, I like the bell jar by Sylvia Plath which has some racism in it. The book isn't just about her being racist though so I am able to read it. It was also a different time period so there is more understanding on why it was written. Not saying it's right just saying it's not like it's a shock a book written in the 1960s has racism in it.


I wouldn't read something like Hillbilly Elegy by JD Vance though. I haven't read it but from the reviews it shows his shitty views spread into the book too much where it would be unreadable for me.

You just have to know how it makes you feel. And with recommending, in my opinion as long as their views aren't in the book it's fine to recommend.

 

[InversedShadow]

Atleast the book didn't disappoint you as much as that human did, don't be afraid and keep on reading what you like, sometimes it's necessary to treat the book separately without looking at the author.

 

[Pluto]

 

[Aergia]

Easily, yes. In general you should evaluate ideas in their own right. Just because someone's normative views might be bad (to you), that doesn't mean their descriptive views are wrong, and just because their politics are offensive, that doesn't mean their entire philosophy of life should be dismissed. And certainly bad politics doesn't necessarily translate into bad art.

I'd even go so far as saying that since heterodoxy in one domain suggests heterodoxy in other domains, it can be a good thing to read extremists because their ideas are more likely to be original/interesting.

 

[locked*n*loaded]

Here's a good read for you - The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell. Doesn't get more extreme than that.

 

[RoyalBengalAutistic]

Currently, I read Yukio Mishima's Life for sale.

Only afterwards I realized that the author is an icone for the far right. I only read it because I am depressed and suicidal again. The woman I text with did not text me back. The whole day. This is the first time ever. Zero messages by her side. She told me she has time periods where she needs to be alone. However, our time together decreased over the last 3 weeks rapidly. I have some theories for that. But she denied everything. I think she might lie to me but why. Lying to me hurts so much more than the truth.

I am so so so fucking sad. I still have hope that our communication normalizes. But this hope dies more and more. Today on a Saturday we usually text the most because she has the most freetime. But she did not reply at all. On her full work days she even sent me two messages. Messages that might took 5 seconds each.
First I thought I could stomach that rejection. But I got so fucking depressed today. The book is fascinating though.

She simply doesn't love you back. Accept the truth.

 

[livershapedbox]

The term "extreme" to refer to views seems kind of useless to me, because any view that is very socially unacceptable at the time and place could be defined as "extreme" but I doubt that's what most people mean by it since it's always used with negative connotations, if you mean "views you see as incorrect and very dangerous" then the question makes sense.

Getting that out of the way, I wouldn't consider it wrong to read a fiction book by an author that happens to have some very fucked up views that aren't really inserted in the book (well you could argue most fiction books will have some traces of the author's views and values even if unintended, but this is usually not enough noticeable if you don't analyze the book much, so it doesn't usually ruin the book).
Books that do carry the author's views or are even only centered on them aren't inherently wrong to read either, since reading them doesn't mean you agree with them, and it could help you to better understand and thus more effectively fight that wave of shitty views the author is part of.

However I'd totally understand why some people would be very uncomfortable with reading books from such an author themselves, specially if those views harm them on a very personal level

 

[Forveleth]

I think you should read things from every perspective, direction, and point of view. Especially if you disagree with them. Understanding a broad range of ideas makes one a better thinker and you may see things in a way you had not before considered. It can help you create better arguments for your own position as well. Being well-read is never a bad thing.

 

[ForgottenAgain]

I think you should read things from every perspective, direction, and point of view. Especially if you disagree with them. Understanding a broad range of ideas makes one a better thinker and you may see things in a way you had not before considered. It can help you create better arguments for your own position as well. Being well-read is never a bad thing.

100% agree, this is how you avoid living in an echo chamber. It's good to read about different views and opinions, I believe this is one of the paths towards understanding. Having our ideas challenged is good, expanding our horizons. I think that, if more people did this, society could be less judgemental.

 

[livershapedbox]

Here's a good read for you - The Anarchist Cookbook by William Powell. Doesn't get more extreme than that.

That author is actually quite a conformist and status quo supporting guy nowadays, funnily enough. When he wrote the book he was pretty much just the equivalent of the time to the internet edgelords that pretend to have ideologies they know are controversial just for the sake of being edgy and getting a reaction out of people. He wasn't really an anarchist even back then in the philosophy sense, he just used the word in the sense of "chaotic activist that uses violence" that the average person thinks of when someone says anarchist.
Also a lot of the recipes in the book either don't work at all or are quite inneficient, the exception being pretty much just the ones that are just dumb party tricks (this might have been intentional to avoid bans, the intent of the book was just to be provocative after all).
Overall quite a silly harmless book that doesn't live up to its acquired reputation and wasn't really designed to.

 

[livershapedbox]

The term "extreme" to refer to views seems kind of useless to me, because any view that is very socially unacceptable at the time and place could be defined as "extreme" but I doubt that's what most people mean by it since it's always used with negative connotations, if you mean "views you see as incorrect and very dangerous" then the question makes sense.

Getting that out of the way, I wouldn't consider it wrong to read a fiction book by an author that happens to have some very fucked up views that aren't really inserted in the book (well you could argue most fiction books will have some traces of the author's views and values even if unintended, but this is usually not enough noticeable if you don't analyze the book much, so it doesn't usually ruin the book).
Books that do carry the author's views or are even only centered on them aren't inherently wrong to read either, since reading them doesn't mean you agree with them, and it could help you to better understand and thus more effectively fight that wave of shitty views the author is part of.

However I'd totally understand why some people would be very uncomfortable with reading books from such an author themselves, specially if those views harm them on a very personal level

I forgot to add one consideration that might be important with a fiction book from such an author, subtly present views in fiction works can have some influence in certain readers that haven't really learned about the topic (for example imagine someone that doesn't really know about an ethnic group outside of racist depictions in some fiction books, their only knowledge of them would be that).

Of course it isn't a problem for a mature attentive person that would know to bother to actually look up info about those things rather than blindly take a fiction book's word for it. The main group that this affects is children, and quite easily so, so at the very least if you ever recommend a fiction book like that to a child, it would be a good idea to explain to them those topics and how the book has lies about them, rather than let the book be their only source about them

 

[locked*n*loaded]

That author is actually quite a conformist and status quo supporting guy nowadays, funnily enough. When he wrote the book he was pretty much just the equivalent of the time to the internet edgelords that pretend to have ideologies they know are controversial just for the sake of being edgy and getting a reaction out of people. He wasn't really an anarchist even back then in the philosophy sense, he just used the word in the sense of "chaotic activist that uses violence" that the average person thinks of when someone says anarchist.
Also a lot of the recipes in the book either don't work at all or are quite inneficient, the exception being pretty much just the ones that are just dumb party tricks (this might have been intentional to avoid bans, the intent of the book was just to be provocative after all).
Overall quite a silly harmless book that doesn't live up to its acquired reputation and wasn't really designed to.

Ok