Im beginning to think that the reason a lot of people are invested in defending tadc, even if they themselves arent fans of it and never were, is because its the kind of thing made for the exact demographic of people who tend to hang out online and especially on Tumblr—very internet young queer art nerds and fandomheads who see themselves as temporarily embarrassed popular indie creators. A lot of them are taking people frustration at tadc personally because it feels personal. Tadc represents the online culture and a future thing they want to make someday.
The idea that tadc, an indie project made by a trans creator for very online nerds, still failed to say something salient feels wrong somehow. The fact that a lot of people are breezing past the creator's racism is just part of that. It suggests theres something wrong with the industry and the culture and that demographics dont salvage that. It suggests the same thing hazbin hotel did before it, but was quickly buried under jokes about edgy humor and kink—just because a project is indie and queer doesn't mean its good, it doesn't even mean its progressive or immune to selling out.
Tadc's story asks a few questions: what does "success" look like? Telling a meaningful story? Telling the story you WANT to tell? Selling plush toys? Making it "big time"? Having a personal relationship with fans? Doing just as good in following and financially as something put out by a bigger studio with more money?
And on the fan side—does it matter if its good, or good by your standards, as long as its not Disney? Do you judge it the same way? Do you judge it at all? Does art make you feel good when it feels like part of your community? When it makes you feel like part of a community? What kind of community? Does art need to do that?
What do you want art to say? What do you want to say back to it?