Author Topic: Separating the Art from the Artist  (Read 6899 times)

Online Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,362
  • Is it getting better?
Separating the Art from the Artist
« on: January 20, 2023, 04:45:21 pm »
Let me tell you the weird story of Eric Gill.

Gill was a renowned British sculptor and designer who did most of his work in the early 20th century. He completed many architectural sculptures and designed several type fonts, creating large, high profile works for central London buildings, including both the headquarters of the BBC and the forerunner of London Underground. His mammoth frieze The Creation of Man was the British Government's gift to the new League of Nations building in Geneva. He also wrote frequently on religious and social issues.

After he died, it came to light that old Eric had taken great pleasure in having sex with his teenage daughters, his sisters and occasionally his dog (as well as presumably his wife).

Anyway, what got me thinking about Gill was Justin Roiland, co-creator of Rick and Morty. Folks, I fucking love Rick and Morty. However, it has recently come to light that Justin is awaiting trial on domestic abuse charges of a fairly serious nature. He has pleaded not guilty.

Or you could mention Bill Cosby, who was a beloved entertainer in my childhood and whose name is now synonymous with sexual assault and rape.

R Kelly is another example, singer, songwriter and convicted sex offender and racketeer. You may not have known about Gill but I'm guessing you knew about Kelly yet when Ignition comes on the radio, do you turn it off? I don't. It's a banging tune. Am I going to stop watching Rick and Morty if Roiland is convicted? I don't think so. I'm not sure, though.

I think if we investigated the lives and times of many great artists, we would find countless skeletons. Michael Jackson, Woody Allen, Pablo Picasso. Jerry Lee Lewis, who died recently, married his 13 year old cousin. John Lennon admitted he used to beat his wife.

So is it a case of turning a blind eye, or can we in good conscience separate the art from the artist and enjoy their output while condemning their actions?

Online tubby

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 25,140
  • Destroyed Cowboy
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #1 on: January 20, 2023, 04:57:53 pm »
I've never had an issue with it.  I still listen to The Smiths, even with Morrissey being a bit of racist dickhead these days, and I can happily watch old Chris Benoit wrestling matches, knowing he murdered his family before killing himself.

Honestly doesn't bother me at all but I think that's only in instances where I was already a fan of the person before finding out what they did.  I'm not going to ever start listening to Lostprophets music, for example.
Sit down, shock is better taken with bent knees.

Offline Barneylfc∗

  • Cross-dressing man-bag wielding golfer. Wannabe Mod. Coprophiliac. Would like to buy an airline seat if he could. Known 'grass'. Wants to go home to He-Man
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 59,613
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #2 on: January 20, 2023, 05:07:26 pm »
A huge portion of the population adored Prince Philip, who of course groomed oul Liz from a young age but no one was ever bothered about it.

I can still appreciate a good actor, footballer or musician while at the same time thinking they are absolute scum.
Craig Burnley V West Ham - WEST HAM WIN - INCORRECT

Online Elmo!

  • Spolier alret!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 13,335
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2023, 06:54:05 pm »
Does anyone still listen to The Lost Prophets?

Offline Boston always unofficial

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,227
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2023, 07:15:46 pm »
I wouldn't be switching stuff off or throwing albums out if it's from a dodgy artist but probably wouldn't buy anything new from them.It does tend to drift towards the whole bullshit cancel culture that is so prevelent these days.

Online Stockholm Syndrome

  • Djurgården Disease
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 7,739
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2023, 07:42:47 pm »
It's an odd one.

Everyone has the right to do what they want within the law, and that includes listening and supporting who you like.

Much like my view on Sportswashing though, I feel that if you support someone or something that is or said or has done something terrible, if you wish to keep supporting them that's fine, but I think you have to be honest about what they did wrong. Supporting the art but not the artist does fall into this; liking what they made but acknowledging they are a knobhead.

Where issues come up to me is when you blindly support the artist and deny what they have done, or try to argue that it isn't too bad a thing.

So yeah I think it is more than possible but just be aware and honest of what they've done wrong.

Although I would say there are some lines which are so monstrous that I can't find myself able to seperate the art and artist, such as Gary Glitter or Lost Prophets.

Offline gazzalfc

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 22,701
  • Well done boys, Good Process
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #6 on: January 20, 2023, 08:50:21 pm »
This one may be out there and not really 'art' in the music/film etc...

One that always sticks with me is Chris Benoit. One of the greatest technical wrestlers of all time, had amazing matches on TV and PPC events and was at the pinnacle of professional wrestling. A future hall of famer alongside the likes of The Rock, Hulk Hogan, Undertaker etc.

Yet he murdered his wife and son before killing himself.

Now his entire broadcast history his been wiped from the record books, never spoken about, never mentioned in passing. It's like he never existed.

Some apologists say he was brain damaged (he did have the brain of an 75 year old) and suffered from steroid induced paranoia and grief at losing his best friend to steroid abuse and try to make the case for his 'art' to be separated from the artist. But there's no chance of it happening

Online FlashingBlade

  • Organised a piss up in a brewery. Ended up in his pants with a KFC bucket. Future MP. Eats only Fish Heads and Tails. Can't spell 'DOMUM'. Now has no balls.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,776
  • From a Shankly Boy to a Klopp Man
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #7 on: January 20, 2023, 09:21:54 pm »
You pays your money and takes your choice.

Like above I can listen to Smiths and there is genius there ..love the songs....but Morrisey has gown into an old man with imo shit views...his preceding art is untouched for me...the problem starts when someone becomes abhorent whilst your enjoying their art.

But this morality question goes beyond art...what about Von Browns work on the Apollo mission...arguably mankind's greatest asperationalonal achievement....yet some of its technical roots go back to Nazi Germany.

its a good Opening question...and a challenging one as more 'truths' are revealed about artists who's work we admire.

What if it was one of your favourite footballers.



.

Offline Black Bull Nova

  • emo
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,697
  • The cheesy side of town
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2023, 12:27:50 am »
I suppose if they were that person whilst the work was being created it certainty changes the way I feel about it, especially if that work is something that attempts to take a moral position.


My view is that it depends what they did, if it's bad and they knew it was bad, I struggle to enjoy their work in the same way, who can listen to 'Two Little Boys' in quite the same way as used to be eh.


« Last Edit: January 21, 2023, 01:02:45 am by Black Bull Nova »
aarf, aarf, aarf.

Offline John C

  • RAWK Staff
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 42,105
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2023, 08:32:15 am »
just over 20 years ago my mate was having a big 40th birthday party, at the time he was a popular lad, loads & loads of friends and he wanted a big doo. Something to remember.
He contacted Gary Glitters agent and tried to book him for the night. This was just a few years before the charges that led to his imprisonment. Glitters agent said he was living away and would only play in front of a minimum 2000 people, not at a small event. My mate was practically saying just name your price, get him to come to Liverpool because he won't be disappointed. It couldn't be arranged and my mate was actually gutted, we all were to be honest, it would have been a spectacular and mad night.

Fast forward over 20 years and a few weeks ago the lads are all at a funeral together. After it, when as usual things become light-hearted, I said to my mate "we'll get Gary Glitter to play at your funeral". The lads were in stiches, but then (putting aside the fact that he's locked up) we had a discussion about whether it would morally possible, would it be unthinkable or would it just be a great send off for the lad who has been popular and out-going all his live.

Offline Hedley Lamarr

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,285
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2023, 08:47:48 am »
I think Roman Polanski is one of the greatest filmmakers of all time but what he did was deplorable and his Hollywood pals defence of him isn't great either.  It won't stop me watching Repulsion, Rosemary's Baby or The Tenant though.

Regarding cinema in the 60's and 70's, I think it was a bit of a cesspit morally, a lot of its biggest names probably have more than a few skeletons in their closets.   

Offline moondog

  • dot com! Wake him up before he go-gos.....
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,424
  • Bring the noise
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2023, 09:13:46 am »
What a phenomenal talent Phil Spector was, produced dozens of incredible records but always seemed a little odd. Ronnie Spectors book iirc brought to better light his controlling and violent behaviour, before he finally pulled the trigger and ended up in jail. Still, Baby I Love You , Da Do Ron Ron and the rest hold great affection .

Offline liverbloke

  • Prototype RAWK Genius. Founder of stickysheets.com and prefers it solo. Gotta hand it to him, eh?
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 4,388
  • i neither know nor care
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #12 on: January 21, 2023, 10:11:28 am »
apparently hitler was a half-decent artist...

depends on the severity - and the viewer

you might still enjoy a child abuser's 'art' but what if he had abused your child

perverts - once their 'other work' has come to light, the 'art' would always make me choke up a little sick in the back of my mouth forever more so for me it's no problem fuck them there's plenty more art to enjoy buy people who aren't/weren't sickos

morals do come into play - thing is, it's your fucking morals and if you think it's okay to quietly look past the indiscretions of the abuser/pervert/sadist ete etc etc then you need to take a long hard look at yourself

i mean, taking music as an example, how could you justify listening to someone who you think is vile?

'hey mick that's a good tune'

'yeh it is isn't it'

'yeh apparently the guy that wrote it hates black people and messes with little girls but y'know'

'and you're enjoying this?'

'yeh it's a good tune woohoo turn it up!'
Quote from: Lee1-6Liv
Who would have thought liverblokes no draws idea would not be his worst idea of the weekend

Offline ToneLa

  • you know the rules but I make the game.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,754
  • I AM FURIOUS, RED (STILL)
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2023, 10:15:29 am »
I typed out a message generally saying No you shouldn't worry about it

then imagined putting on an Arcade Fire record. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

I think it depends. Some art stands alone and distinct. Morally speaking I think morals = intention

if you are the kind of person who absolutely has to listen to Lost Prophets every morning at this point, the punishment is the crime itself

I don't mind a bit of ignorance. If it's really heinous stuff for current artists I think it absolutely should be reported as the artist is a going concern

Listen to loads of old stuff though. This morning Ronnie Stein soundtracks, he's quite good. Know nothing about him. Might be a bad bastard, a total nutter who did human trafficking, I don't know.

don't think morality in this context should go as far making one research endlessly every artist to which they are exposed

though it's a fine balance isn't it. You'd worry about someone getting big into Gary Glitter who just... didn't know.  You tell them.

"What you on about? I never heard of all that stuff!"

Ultimately it seems like a karmic act. If the purpose of art is to transcend and illuminate life then the creator doing something poisonous affecting it is usually about right.

Offline Zlen

  • Suspicious of systems. But getting lots.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 18,794
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #14 on: January 21, 2023, 11:01:37 am »
Eric Gill is actually a very interesting example. As a designer myself, I have witnessed numerous tidal waves of ‘cancel the Gill’ rise and fall - as one or another well known pixel pusher posts a Medium article about his ‘shocking’ discovery on one of the forefathers of modern typography.

Are you using Gill Sans? Do you know what he did? How can you? And on it goes until it doesn’t. And what pisses me off is when it goes over the line of actually delineating man and his work, condemning one, reconsidering the other in a new light - and throws everything together in the sin bin.

Because not one word in his magnificent ‘Essay on Typography’ is less true and valuable than it was when I first read it. Not one curve on his elegant typefaces is less timeless. What has changed is that the man behind it, who most never directly cared about, has turned out to be a shitstain. But his work still resonates, his impact is still out there, rippling through time.

You see, you can’t take away the mastery of his work. He bloody deserved it. You can choose to not promote it, consume it, pay for it - but don’t deny it’s there and the impact it has made.

I guess I’m not into blanket cancellations.


Offline AndyMuller

  • Has always wondered how to do it. Rice, Rice, Baby. Wants to have George Michael. Would batter A@A at karate.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,154
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #15 on: January 21, 2023, 12:31:43 pm »
It is hard to listen to Kanye West now after his terrible 2022.

Online ScouserAtHeart

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,367
  • Pissing Manc "fans" off since 1999.
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2023, 02:34:12 pm »
It is hard to listen to Kanye West now after his terrible 2022.

He was gonna be my answer actually.

Still listen to his old pre-2016 stuff
"Jürgen Klopp is bringing Liverpool's 'fuck you' back. And I can't wait."

Offline ianburns252

  • RAWK Economist not the MP spelling and Crosby background differentiate
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,316
  • Gentleman in the streets; freak in the spreadsheet
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2023, 12:03:38 pm »
There was an article years ago on The Guardian at the time that Ian Watkins sentencing went through debating the same point - the gist was the most great artists/musicians/film makers etc from pre-1930 probably have something in their history that would not be palatable today, and many more recently (John Lennon, Michael Jackson, Woody Allen and more, as noted above in the thread) are problematic.

I was discussing this with a friend recently actually as I think there was something on Netflix (might have been Dahmer?) and we were talking about where the proceeds of it would go, is is exploitation etc.

O J Simpson's book about how he would have carried out the murders was only published for example as the family were legally obliged to in order to get the monies owed from the civil suit.

Anyway, our view was that a lot of it comes down to what level of the artist was in the production - John Lennon, Woody Allen, Michael Jackson, all of their works were a true expression of self and much of their inner most workings are intertwined and so they feel more problematic than, say, a Joss Whedon (I know he was "just" a total misogynist rather than physically abusive) where him helping write Toy Story or his work in Marvel doesn't exactly scream autobiographical.

Same with Ignition - it is just a banger, not a ballad about R Kelly's heart and soul.

A tough one overall but I think there is a scale based on the level of their crime and the level of self referential nature in their art

Offline ToneLa

  • you know the rules but I make the game.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 9,754
  • I AM FURIOUS, RED (STILL)
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #18 on: January 22, 2023, 01:44:51 pm »
I think sufficiently accomplished art can to an extent excuse the artist.

Lennon to some may deserve to be shamed but Imagine is a favourite song for its own merits.

He's not a bad example actually. I think in a way he did improve with time.

We are human. Someone's act - whether good or bad - isn't the end of the tale.

At the end of it I suppose it comes down to whether you want to listen to Imagine or not

We focus on the negative a lot in this thread so here is a flipside:

how many artists, performers, bands etc. are beloved ONLY because they have not had their "sins" discovered?

I think we automatically link the person to the art. A very human association.

They're singing to ME. That's their soul coming out. They must have such beauty there!

It is natural to think better of someone because they have produced something of artistic splendour.

When I used to gig I would see this a bit. "You did great"! "You performed so well!" "I want to sleep with you!"

 Me: but did you vibe to the music?

Offline Kenny's Jacket

  • Kenny's Vegan Jacket Potato. Talks more sense than me.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,444
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2023, 01:47:45 pm »
Jeremy Clarkson is an excellent TV broadcaster/presenter
As I've said before, the Full English is just the base upon which the Scots/Welsh/NI have improved upon. Sorry but the Full English is the worst of the British breakfasts.

Online duvva 💅

  • lippa RAWK Diivva, broke Kenny's sky
  • Matchday Commentator
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 17,644
  • LFC Quiz Rivals Most Hated
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #20 on: January 22, 2023, 03:27:24 pm »
I suppose Ryan Adams is someone I haven’t listened to since his behaviour was highlighted by his ex wife and a number of others.

It doesn’t sound like he did anything illegal in the end but abused his position with these women. Fuckin Arsehole behaviour, but along way from a Weinstein etc. but i haven’t felt like listening to him since. Had tickets to see him at the Royal Albert Hall, which got cancelled in midst the furore, and loved so many of his albums, so I guess I couldn’t separate things as I felt it may seem like I condoned it.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2023, 09:39:16 pm by duvva 💅 »
"If you don't limit yourself with bad thoughts, you can fly" - Jurgen Klopp

Offline Black Bull Nova

  • emo
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,697
  • The cheesy side of town
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2023, 09:31:39 pm »
I suppose Ryan Adams is someone I haven’t listened to since his behaviour was highlighted by his ex wife and a number of others.

It doesn’t sound like it did anything illegal in the end but abused his position with these women. Fuckin Arsehole behaviour, but along way from a Weinstein etc. but i haven’t felt like listening to him since. Had tickets to see him at the Royal Albert Hall, which got cancelled in midst the furore, and loved so many of his albums, so I guess I couldn’t separate things as I felt it may seem like I condoned it.


+1 and he was great live (albeit he might have prematurely deafened me as well as himself)
aarf, aarf, aarf.

Offline Sheer Magnetism

  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 5,969
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #22 on: January 23, 2023, 12:08:45 am »
The notion that art should be interpreted through its own quality and meaning without subjecting its author to moral purity tests is so obvious I won't bother to make the argument for it, apart to observe you never see great artists judging each other. Apart from people who are on the Gary Glitter/Ian Watkins end of the spectrum, it's always critics who never had the talent to match their targets or mediocre figures who've never had anything interesting and enaging to say who are the first to pass judgment.

However, great art generally relies inherently on people who are mentally unafraid to push against conventions and existing boundaries, and that is why most genius artists have generally lived their lives in immoral ways. This used to be a given by the way, it's only in recent years people have begun looking at artists as moral arbiters of creativity and freedom, only to repel against that once they began looking at their actual lives.

That is part of why the era of the late 60's to the early 80's, when both societal moral standards and law enforcement monitoring were at their loosest, hosted both the best art of the last century and the highest proportion of serial killing and domestic terrorism (and, arguably, shagging underage people). It's comparatively easy to ask whether we can still venerate the art of people from the past we disagree with, far harder to ask whether we're willing to accept the trade off of accepting the conditions for great art while empowering the horrible people who create it.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2023, 12:16:08 am by Sheer Magnetism »

Offline GreatEx

  • pectations. might be a cunt but isn't a capitalist cunt. Blissfully ignorant.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,200
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #23 on: January 23, 2023, 04:45:41 am »
I have to wrestle with this question a lot because I'm hugely into black metal, which is rife with far-right and sometimes overtly white supremacist artists. I won't listen to anything that's explicitly racist or nazi-affiliated (easily done, nearly all bands at that end of the spectrum are terrible), and will pirate but not pay for music by racists who keep their shitty message out of the music. I'll admit that I am a little too generous with metaphor interpretation when the music kills. I tend to over-support black metal bands that stand against the fascist trend, more than the music deserves. At least I can comfort myself in the knowledge this genre has no traction in normal society and will never lead a movement of any import. :D

Offline BarryCrocker

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 16,998
  • We all Live in a Red and White Kop
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #24 on: January 23, 2023, 07:31:08 am »
Same building posted by two artists (same nationality). One worth about $500 the other more than likely $90k.

Which one would you pick?





Spoiler
The bottom one is by Adolf Hitler.

Would you still buy it knowing that?
[close]
And all the world is football shaped, It's just for me to kick in space. And I can see, hear, smell, touch, taste.

Offline GreatEx

  • pectations. might be a cunt but isn't a capitalist cunt. Blissfully ignorant.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,200
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #25 on: January 23, 2023, 09:17:14 am »
But Hitler's art is only notable for having been created by Hitler, otherwise it'd be forgotten for the mediocre postcard material that it is. If he'd painted The Starry Night, on the other hand, that would be a dilemma.

Online FlashingBlade

  • Organised a piss up in a brewery. Ended up in his pants with a KFC bucket. Future MP. Eats only Fish Heads and Tails. Can't spell 'DOMUM'. Now has no balls.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 8,776
  • From a Shankly Boy to a Klopp Man
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #26 on: January 23, 2023, 01:10:50 pm »
Hugo Boss a signed up member of the Nazi party....supplier of all your third Reich uniform needs.

Now a leading fashion brand.

Offline jackh

  • Has a blog but doesn't like to talk about it. Slightly obsessed with the colour orange for some weird reason......
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 10,700
    • @hartejack
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #27 on: January 23, 2023, 05:03:46 pm »
I suppose Ryan Adams is someone I haven’t listened to since his behaviour was highlighted by his ex wife and a number of others.

It doesn’t sound like he did anything illegal in the end but abused his position with these women. Fuckin Arsehole behaviour, but along way from a Weinstein etc. but i haven’t felt like listening to him since. Had tickets to see him at the Royal Albert Hall, which got cancelled in midst the furore, and loved so many of his albums, so I guess I couldn’t separate things as I felt it may seem like I condoned it.


+1 and he was great live (albeit he might have prematurely deafened me as well as himself)

Yep, same here. I'd say that Ryan Adams was probably my favourite artist for a long time from my mid/late teens through to 2018. My avatar on here used to be the logo that emerged around the time of Cold Roses. Haven't listened to a note since then, apart from when they were playing one of his songs in a bar a couple of years ago.

Agree that there are clearly a lot of different shades of grey (outside of criminal behaviour). I think I've found it particularly challenging to 'separate art from the artist' because I was so 'invested' and felt burned by it, and also because I saw (& like) many of those making accusation in support sets for Adams' own shows. I really like Phoebe Bridgers' work (having been introduced via a Ryan Adams tweet actually), as well as her work with BOCS and boygenius, and I don't feel like I could engage in good faith if I was also listening to Ryan Adams regularly or seeing him live or whatever.

He's actually got a UK tour this spring - it'll be interesting to see how that goes.

I do have moments where I feel sort of sorry for his situation, but then you think of the other people associated who deserve sympathy and it feels a bit misdirected.

Offline Lusty

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,282
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #28 on: January 23, 2023, 05:42:14 pm »
I don't think there's a simple answer.  Sometimes the art and the artist (and their crimes) are distinct enough that it doesn't really matter.  For example I think people playing Michael Jackson songs in this day and age are a bit weird, but I don't think his music necessarily reflects who he is and what he did.

On the other end though sometimes they are linked together and you can't escape it.  Someone mentioned Chris Benoit above, and I think it's hard to watch one of his matches without thinking about what all those flying headbutts are doing to his brain.  Likewise I used to be a big fan of Louis CK and it's hard to watch his old shows now knowing that he sincerely believes a lot of what he was saying and it's not a joke.  I think there's an episode of Louis where they confront someone who is doing the exact same thing he did and there's a whole speech where he defends himself.

I think there's another angle as well where for example hearing the music of someone like Michael Jackson might be triggering for someone who had been through that kind of abuse themself.  A lot of radio stations won't play his music for that reason.

Offline ljycb

  • RAWK's Bullen Oracle of Wisdom & Knowledge, the Collective Voice of our Moral Conscience
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,674
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #29 on: January 24, 2023, 01:01:10 am »
There are times when I struggle with separating the art from the artist, because a significant aspect of my own personal enjoyment of art comes from understanding the context in which the art was created by the person or people who created it. Having said that, a piece of art that moves me is a piece of art that moves me - so a good example of this would actually be "I Know It's Over" off The Queen Is Dead. That was a pivotal track on a pivotal album for me when I was growing up, and even though I have only revisited it a handful of times since Morrissey's head loss, and even though it would be impossible to ignore that it is all a little bit tinged now for me, I would be lying to myself if I tried to say right now that such a song (of which his lyrics and his vocal performance take up such a significant role) doesn't still move me deeply. Perhaps even more so at this different stage of my life with some different lived experiences behind me.

Offline Black Bull Nova

  • emo
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 12,697
  • The cheesy side of town
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2023, 01:19:44 am »
There are times when I struggle with separating the art from the artist, because a significant aspect of my own personal enjoyment of art comes from understanding the context in which the art was created by the person or people who created it. Having said that, a piece of art that moves me is a piece of art that moves me - so a good example of this would actually be "I Know It's Over" off The Queen Is Dead. That was a pivotal track on a pivotal album for me when I was growing up, and even though I have only revisited it a handful of times since Morrissey's head loss, and even though it would be impossible to ignore that it is all a little bit tinged now for me, I would be lying to myself if I tried to say right now that such a song (of which his lyrics and his vocal performance take up such a significant role) doesn't still move me deeply. Perhaps even more so at this different stage of my life with some different lived experiences behind me.


Yes, aside from what any artist does, we also grow and change ourselves. We are far more open to sorts of idealisation when we are younger because we know less and are more open to influence (it's part of developing for many, seeking those outside our family and peers). I think as we grow older we become aware of the faults of others and often become either more or less tolerant depending on our own experience and a growing awareness of our own values.


That's not saying that growing older makes you right, it doesn't, it's just more likely we become who we are, possibly even more fixed in our views on all sorts of things. Far less likely to tolerate things in the lives of others that we would not tolerate in our own lives.
aarf, aarf, aarf.

Offline ljycb

  • RAWK's Bullen Oracle of Wisdom & Knowledge, the Collective Voice of our Moral Conscience
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,674
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #31 on: January 24, 2023, 01:28:47 am »
Same with Ignition - it is just a banger, not a ballad about R Kelly's heart and soul.

It is a banger, but then R. Kelly is a good example of where I start with my red lines. A lot of his songs are sexual in nature - I personally get very grossed out at the thought of listening to him given his usual subject matter and his crimes. And it’s things like him producing the debut album of Aaliyah, who he also married when she was 15 and he was 27, and the name of the album being Age Ain't Nothing but a Number.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2023, 01:30:58 am by ljycb »

Online rob1966

  • YORKIE bar-munching, hedgehog-squashing (well-)articulated road-hog-litter-bug. Sleeping With The Enemy. Has felt the wind and shed his anger..... did you know I drive a Jag? Cucking funt!
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 46,257
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #32 on: January 24, 2023, 03:14:24 pm »
Hugo Boss a signed up member of the Nazi party....supplier of all your third Reich uniform needs.

Now a leading fashion brand.

As a kid I always loved the SS uniforms, they looked so much better than the British ones.
Jurgen, you made us laugh, you made us cry, you made Liverpool a bastion of invincibilty, now leave us on a high - YNWA

Online Ray K

  • Loves a shiny helmet. The new IndyKalia.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 35,622
  • Truthiness
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2023, 10:25:31 pm »
As an FYI to Corkboy, Adult Swim have announced that they've ended their association with Justin Roland, but that Rick & Morty will continue.
Not sure how that's going to work, but that's what they've announced.
"We have to change from doubters to believers"

Twitter: @rjkelly75

Offline stewil007

  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,232
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #34 on: January 25, 2023, 09:58:46 am »
As an FYI to Corkboy, Adult Swim have announced that they've ended their association with Justin Roland, but that Rick & Morty will continue.
Not sure how that's going to work, but that's what they've announced.

Considering he's the voice of Rick & Morty, you do wonder how it that will sound

Online Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,362
  • Is it getting better?
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #35 on: January 25, 2023, 10:20:02 am »
As an FYI to Corkboy, Adult Swim have announced that they've ended their association with Justin Roland, but that Rick & Morty will continue.
Not sure how that's going to work, but that's what they've announced.

He deleted his reddit account, too.

Online tubby

  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 25,140
  • Destroyed Cowboy
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #36 on: January 25, 2023, 10:32:11 am »
There's some mad alleged text exchanges surfacing now between Roiland and teens, really sus looking stuff.  Glad I never got into that show (literally couldn't deal with the constant dribbling).  But I will say that I thoroughly enjoyed that courtroom read he did.

Sit down, shock is better taken with bent knees.

Online Corkboy

  • Sworn enemy of Bottlegirl. The Boston Toilet Mangler. Grauniad of the Cidatel. Into kinky S&M with the Lash.
  • RAWK Scribe
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 32,362
  • Is it getting better?
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #37 on: January 25, 2023, 10:36:35 am »
The dribbling kinda petered out after the first few episodes.

Offline Nobby Reserve

  • Onanistic Charades Champion Of Roundabouts. Euphemistic Gerbil Starver.
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 11,984
  • Do you wanna build a snowman?
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #38 on: January 25, 2023, 12:00:43 pm »
The one thing I take from this thread is that I'm a hypocrite.

I do boycott a lot of 'art' (mostly music/films/tv as I'm not an art buff) because of the actions of the scumbag creator.

But I also turn a blind eye to some.

I think I'm pretty uniform on bocotting everything where the creator has been involved in child abuse/paedophilia. But then, I would happily listen to some early Michael Jackson songs like Beat It or Billy Jean without a second thought.

I can easily avoid others like R Kelly because I think his music is all shite.

I boycott a lot of musicians or TV/film/entertainment figures because they openly support the Tories or sometimes Brexit. Yet am happy to listen to Morrissey and I actually enjoy watching Clarkson.

But I'm selective. That makes me a bad person, I guess.
A Tory, a worker and an immigrant are sat round a table. There's a plate of 10 biscuits in the middle. The Tory takes 9 then turns to the worker and says "that immigrant is trying to steal your biscuit"

Offline AndyMuller

  • Has always wondered how to do it. Rice, Rice, Baby. Wants to have George Michael. Would batter A@A at karate.
  • RAWK Supporter
  • Legacy Fan
  • ******
  • Posts: 15,154
Re: Separating the Art from the Artist
« Reply #39 on: January 25, 2023, 03:40:19 pm »
There's some mad alleged text exchanges surfacing now between Roiland and teens, really sus looking stuff.  Glad I never got into that show (literally couldn't deal with the constant dribbling).  But I will say that I thoroughly enjoyed that courtroom read he did.



Should have never gave these nerds so much power, they don’t know how to talk to the opposite sex.