Not most people, most White people maybe, but not most people. Unless you believe that those being mistreated didn't consider themselves human. Or that the rest of the planet didn't consider themselves human. But just because they didn't receive flack for it where they lived doesn't change the fact that it is wrong. You can use the term outdated if it makes you feel better, but since the facts don't support their ideas they are still wrong. We have zero problems looking at some of the scientific beliefs in cultures older than ours and identifying them as incorrect based on current knowledge. How is this any different? It's a fact that people of African decent are human(and always have been human) just like its a fact that the earth isn't flat.First Lastname said:So because he held fairly outdated views, that even though it was considered more extreme than most it wasn't seen as something anywhere near as toxic as it is by today's standards, he should be regarded as if he was alive and saying this kind of stuff today? Look, I get that not everyone was racist back then but the fact of the matter is most people during that time could publicly hold some fairly vile opinions and not receive an ounce of flak from most. Let's not forget that New England was (and still is in some regards) one of the worst northern regions in terms of racism.mecegirl said:SO far as Lovecraft is concerned what seems like a minor flaw won't be so minor to to everyone. And it isn't a controversial opinion, it's a wrong one. It's just flat out wrong. People of African decent are not subhuman. They were never subhuman. Nor were they magically gifted with sentience and personhood once Europeans decided to acknowledge their humanity. If Lovecraft were alive he wouldn't care about Ms Okorafor's talent. He would not judge her based on the quality of her work. He'd think she wouldn't deserve an award based on nothing but the color of her skin. But judging him based on his work is wrong? As a writer if he is not to be judged by his own work then what is he to be judged for? He didn't have to write racist poems, he chose to.
Also, just because he in particular wouldn't judge a person based on the quality of their work doesn't mean we should do the same. Also, a point of contention. It seems his racism was centered on culture rather than race itself. He would probably regard someone of another race who was properly "assimilated" a lot better than one who he believes hasn't.
You would have a point if he didn't insert racism into his writing. If all he ever wrote was about Cthulhu there would be less of a problem. Like I said, he didn't have to write poems showcasing his racist beliefs. So how is ignoring his racist poems properly judging the quality of his work? He wrote them so why shouldn't they be judged?