Separating The Book From The Author

About two weeks ago, I did a Top Ten Tuesday post on authors that I really want to meet. One of the authors on the list was Patrick Rothfuss despite the fact that I haven't read anything he's written. I own the first two books in his Kingkiller Chronicles, yes, but it's weird how I really want to meet an author without reading a thing by them.

The reason I'd like to meet Pat Rothfuss is not because of his books, but because of him, the author. His blog is hilarious, as is his twitter feed, and after watching a couple of interviews I'm pretty certain that I'd buy anything he released, despite having read none of it.

(I realise that this may just be because I have a book buying addiction. Shh.)

On the other side of the spectrum is Orson Scott Card. I own two of his books (I dnf'd both of them) but I refuse to buy anything else that he writes, or read anything more for that matter. The reason? Orson Scott Card comes across as a massive douche. He's homophobic and said that he will 'bring it [the government] down' if gay marriage is legalised.

I first started reading Enders Game before I found that out about Card, but I can't bring myself to read a book by him when I completely disagree with what he stands for on every moral level. Should there be a link between art and artist, or should both things be held separately?

Is it fair to discount the work of an author because I dislike them? It's my right not to read Enders Game because I disagree with Card's belief's, isn't it?

Homophobia might be the wrong example as there is no way that it will ever be right, but if I disagreed with an author on something small, is it going against their freedom of expression to refuse to read their books? Of course reading a novel such as Lolita doesn't mean that I support a relationship between an adult and a child (again, bad example--I haven't read Lolita), so reading Enders Game doesn't make me a homophobe.

I don't condone people who do separate the book from the author and have no problem reading Enders Game whilst not believing the same things as Card, but I just feel uncomfortable. I don't like the idea of giving money to him. Saying that, am I being narrow minded and ignorant by refusing to read his works, just because I dislike a man that I've never met?

Writing is all about freedom of expression, so it should be the authors right to write about whatever the hell they want. Equally, it's the readers right to read whatever they want to.

From my point of view, the line between the writer and the book is blurred. Books are primarily there for enjoyment, and even if the writer is an ass with a capital A it doesn't mean that their books can't be enjoyed.

On the flip side, I'm more likely to buy a book if I love the author as a person. I used Pat Rothfuss as an example earlier, but I'm so excited for Susan Dennard's Truthwitch to come out in January. The book does sound absolutely amazing (and the first chapter is fabulous), but a huge part of the reason why I want it so bad is because of Susan herself. Her online presence is amazing and she seems so darn lovely.

I don't know if I'm ever going to reach a conclusion with this debate in my mind, but if anything I believe that it is ultimately the readers choice to decide whether to separate the two. There are things that I feel comfortable with and things that I don't, but as much as I'm an advocate of free expression there are things that I cannot support.

I'd love to hear what you think on this down in the comments!