the History of art is full of artists who were cruel, exploitative, prejudiced or predatory. Picasso was a misogynist, the Renaissance painter Caravaggio was a notorious criminal and murderer. Lovecraft was a well-known racist. Alfred Hitchcock tried to ruin Tippi Hedren’s career as an actress because she refused his sexual advances.
Yet it seems that people are still willing to overlook these artists’ dark pasts in order to appreciate their work. When looking at more modern examples, however, we see that the general public seems to link the art and artist more together.
Formerly famous actor Kevin Spacy for example. Got accused of attempted sexual assault of a teenage boy, his role in the Ridley Scott film, All the Money in the World, was erased and reshot with a different actor. When the celebrated Torres Strait Island painter Dennis Nona went to jail for raping a 12-year-old girl, Australian art galleries responded by taking his works off their walls and putting them into storage. R Kelly’s concerts were cancelled and his RCA contract was not renewed because of his alleged sexual abuse of underage women.
Do you generally care about the artist behind the work you are consuming?
Should artists’ actions in their personal lives be considered when judging their work?
Do you think that by consuming someone’s art (whether that is buying film tickets to see their films or streaming their songs on Spotify) you are indirectly supporting an artist’s bad behavior?
Are there any artists who you don’t like on a personal level, but can appreciate their work?
Do you think we should seperate the art from the artist?
( I want to mention that even though all the artists I have mentioned are male there are also a lot of female artists with horrible pasts.Though it often gets forgotten about or doesn’t affect their career as much in comparison to the other names I have mentioned. cough man abuser Amber Heard, convicted murder Anne Perry , The anti-semtic Virginia Wolf cough. Women do tend to get more criticized for smaller things though like their appearance or attitude.
I would argue women get criticized for insignificant things like their appearance, even when women are deplorable people still don’t see them as a threat unless they can use them as an example of how assault victims are liars (thanks Amber).
It’s complicated, it depends on the person, some of it is just based on how I feel. The easiest examples are people who directly benefit from my consumption of the art. Love Craft died a long time ago and I think his work has transcended him as a person. JK Rowling (speaking of terrible people who happen to be women) on the other hand retains significant creative control over her work and continues to be its primary financial benefactor using that capital to actively further disenfranchise an already marginalized group. While I already own a significant amount of work from both authors I could purchase more Lovecraft collections guilt free knowing by doing so I’m not perpetuating or supporting a dead man’s bigotry while money in Joanne’s pocket means putting trans lives at risk. It’s easy when it comes to people like Kevin Spacey (who admitted to doing the things he was accused of btw) too, I also already own a significant amount of his movies and he doesn’t profit at all from me watching my DVD of Seven or The Usual Suspects - movies I love - but his work is ruined for me by his presence. I can’t look at him and not think of what he did. I can’t watch That 70s Show without thinking of Danny Masterson brutally assaulting women who were powerless in the face of Scientology, I can’t watch Frida after knowing what Harvey Weinstein put Selma Hayek through in the process of making it, I can’t enjoy the good Woody Allen movies without picturing what Dylan Farrow said happened in that attic, the list goes on. Its harder with people off camera. Its not the same with Lord of The Rings - also produced by Weinstein, or Rosemary’s Baby directed by Roman Polanski, I don’t have that visceral reaction, the offending artists never factored into my view of the movies because they weren’t in them, I don’t feel bad watching movies I already own and my dollar votes no on new movies from Polanski but he’s still making movies and living a good life having never faced justice for crimes against children and that doesn’t sit right with me either - maybe if everyone had decided to stop admiring his work years ago he would have at least faced social consequences if not the prison time abusers deserve so by watching his movies I’m playing into the same system that allows him to make and profit from new movies anyway. That’s just one example but yeah, complicated AF, I think about stuff like this a lot. Congratulation if you’ve made it this far.
Yeah, agreed I mainly used the word “smaller” for a lack of better wording.
Honestly there could be a whole thread based on the Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard case alone. Amber pretty much co-opted the #metoo movement inorder to taint an innocent man’s reputation. I mean hearing those audio clips online where she pretty much admits the fact she was the abuser all-along was awful.
Thought your opinion was very interesting and I pretty much agreed with all of it !
I think that, in some sense, it both really depends on what the person did and how long it’s been
For instance, Renaissance painters lives are not currently being influenced by any response to their work, however I think that separating art entirely from the artist isn’t a good idea
I think it’s a good thing to be aware and acknowledge the bad things certain artists have done. I used to like a band where the (not original) lead singer is now serving 12 years in prison for being in possession of child p*rn. I couldn’t really listen to any of the songs he sung on after that because even though he’s in prison, I don’t want to feed his bank even if it is the tiny amount you get from streaming also I don’t want to hear his voice.
I think that time does play a factor in alot if things, you can say “this author who lived a while ago was a terrible person” and acknowledge the bad stuff they did, but they’re dead. CS Lewis had some very very questionable views but Narnia has always been one of my favourite things.
These days however, if the artist in question does something genuinely bad and never apologises, calls everyone sensitive snowflakes and refuse to be held accountable, I can’t say I blame people for not wanting to spend their money or invest interest to them.
I think separating the art from the artist in JK Rowlings case is probably the best thing to do since all the movies are out, I bought all the books and the movies a while ago. I still find them enjoyable. JK Rowling on the other hand is not somebody I like to associate with it and she’s the author but I’m not gonna give her a penny more. This isn’t even an agree or disagree thing, she is transphobic she targets a marginalised group that already have high suicide rates and are literally murdered for existing, she once promoted a company that sold badges that pretty much said trans women aren’t women or that trans people shouldn’t exist, basically badges and merchandise that had horrible transphobic comments on. Anyway a paragraph is already more time than I’m willing to give her.
I do to a lot of books who have authors that I can’t stand except Harry potter as even if you tried you cannot separate the book from the artist as the book itself is toxic. And other artist who draw stuffs and are toxic I normally separate the art from them.
@Artists what about you? do you separate the art from the artist?
I have a weird perspective on this. So like with Lovecraft, I like his work and often use it as inspiration for my own writing. But yeah he was incredibly racist and a whole bunch of other inexcusable things. But it’s honestly interesting with that context in mind to go back and look at his work and how his racism and his views/fears influenced his writings. So in that sense I’m not separating the art from the artist, I’m doing the opposite to have a better look at the piece itself. But I don’t think this means that I support or condone what Lovecraft did.
