NHSEB Case Study 14: "American Dirt" by Jonathan Truong https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k To what extent do we have a duty to refrain from telling certain stories, even if these stories are fictional? To what extent does who we are impact the sorts of stories we can and should tell? en-us 2020-10-13 21:22:29 UTC 2025-11-17 20:47:59 UTC hello@padlet.com To me, the only moral obligation we have is to limit art that directly causes harm to an individual or demographic. Satire which could harm or validate insensitive or harmful opinions is questionable, but satire which does so is not effective satire. https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837338697 2020-10-17 03:42:25 UTC https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837338697 I'm not sure if they should; to limit certain narratives to individuals within those demographics seems like it could possibly be somewhat counterproductive to diversity, experimentation, and creativity. I do feel that if one is writing about a demographic they are not a part of, the artist has a moral obligation to make sure that art is well-researched, well-executed, and does not cause direct harm to the demographic at hand. https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837354011 2020-10-17 04:12:10 UTC https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837354011 In my opinion, the purpose of fiction is not to be political, or to make a statement about the world. I think that individual pieces can be written to be political, while others just tell a narrative. Fiction can also be used as a powerful tool to draw out empathy, make a statement, and to advocate for individuals and demographics in a way that can be more palatable. https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837360654 2020-10-17 04:26:51 UTC https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837360654 From reviews that I've seen, it is clear that in some way, shape, or form, she failed her goal. It can be argued that she indirectly caused harm to the community she was trying to write about, as according to others, she reinforced stereotypes about the community. So, she was morally blameworthy in that she had a moral obligation to not harm the demographic she was writing about, and ended up putting out a work which contributed to harm towards that demographic https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837363577 2020-10-17 04:32:55 UTC https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/837363577 https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/849044966 I think an artist's intentions can absolutely impact the quality of their art. Intention can be a large motivation, and depending on the artist's intentions and the work at hand they can absolutely influence how an artist chooses to approach the work, which in turn impacts quality. Similarly, an artist's moral character will have a substantial impact on the quality of art and the art itself. Artists cannot help but put pieces of themselves into their works, and as a result their art will often reflect the artists' intentions and moral character. The sum total of all of this is that artists with bad intentions or morality will tend to make worse works (for example, if you're motivated solely by money or antagonism, it tends to be very obvious), and artists with pure intentions and/or good morals will generally have that trait be evident in their work. However, it should be noted that an artist's intentions and morals are not the end all be all: a bad person, or a person with bad intentions, can still produce good art, and vice versa.]]> 2020-10-21 15:07:52 UTC https://padlet.com/jonathan_truong/thhme2cp7wz9630k/wish/849044966