Ezra Pound?
Curzio Malaparte?
. . . the list could go on and on. Methinks we need to separate, at least to some degree, the beliefs of the authors from the work they produced. As long as those abhorrent beliefs do not permeate the work.
Roman Polanski has been a fugitive from U.S. justice, on a charge of statutory rape, for four decades now. But he is also, without much dispute, one of the finest directors of motion pictures who ever lived.
As for people like Eliot, Céline, Malaparte, their anti-Semitism doesn't cleary influence their work, near as I can see, and I've read a lot of all of them. Pound, who was probably worse than any, wound up imprisoned for many years for treason by U.S. military authorities. He's still regarded as a major influence on modern poetry, yet, oddly, very few people ever read his work. I've tried, and not found it offensive, but just obtuse and uninteresting. He's like a painter who understands nuances of color but can't quite assemble those colors into a pattern that pleases very many people.
Eliot, whom Pound championed, could do that, outside the sphere of his abhorrent personal beliefs regarding Jews. I can't find anything in "The Waste Land", "The Hollow Men", The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" that reflects any of his anti-Semitism. But they rank among the finest, most powerful, and most influential poems in the English Language.
And good ol' Bill Shakespeare wasn't exactly a champion of Jews, was he? Go study The Merchant of Venice. That could have been written, without the poetic eloquence, by Joseph Goebbels. But we forgive him, because of his historical time.
I can even separate Card's work from his horrid attitudes, which he has expressed and is thoroughly documented as doing so. I just don't like his work as much as other people do. Solely on the basis of the printed page.
caw
