Is It Right to Separate Art from Artist?

[allegro]

Get yourself a solid latex pillow. They are the SHIT. I have one and while I don't get migraines much, it totally fixed my fucked up shoulder from side sleeping. If that sounds like it might be beneficial to you, here are a couple of links:

Thanks, I agree, I love memory foam pillows, I have one, now. I’ve had I think at least three different kinds. MyPillow is basically shredded memory foam. But solid memory foam doesn’t always work for me, it’s a height thing. It’s embarrassing the money I’ve spent on pillows, including a BUCKWHEAT pillow. Lol, ugh. But, thanks much, I appreciate it.

[botley]

Is it fair to boycott him when he has been kind of honest about this all along?

Yep, it is. Hope that helps!

[halo eighteen]

I don't know how important it is that it's "easy for" someone to reject a shitty artist. I mean, for instance, I have no problem saying that The Lost Prophets made shitty music, I'd never heard of it before the controversy, and I think it's garbage. That opinion exists completely outside of how everybody obviously feels about the lead singer, who is clearly a monster.

I don't know what I'd feel if I actually liked their music... but their music doesn't feel like something IMPORTANT to me. Even if you liked it, it's pop bullshit. Nobody's going to go out on a limb to really defend the artistic merit there. Or maybe they will, but they'll be told to piss off resoundingly. Just like if someone tried to say "hey, some of Hitler's paintings are pretty good!"

You are aware that Ilan was in Lostprophets before joining NIN, no? Not that that immediately makes them any more or less artistically relevant or whatever.

[SchwarzerAbt]

Yep, it is. Hope that helps!

I guess your own view of what is acceptabe changes with time and experience. And if you come to the conclusion that it is not okay to listen to this artist any longer you should stop. It's not about fairness towards the artist in the first place but about your ability to enjoy a piece of art or not.

[botley]

^ Yes and that can change for ANY reason. Art isn't math, the answer isn't some unchanging constant.

[onthewall2983]

Think about an artist you do like whose behavior makes him/her/them ethically suspect and run the test on yourself.

Miles Davis, perhaps the most innovative musician of the 20th century. Also notoriously abusive towards some of the women in his life, cold towards most of his family and pretty much everyone besides the musicians he played with, a lot of whom bore witness to that behavior anyway. If such nasty behavior is done as natural as getting up and putting your pants on one leg at a time, that's where I check out. His drug problems, which became quite severe from the 50's to the 70's, explain a good deal of the chemistry behind the behavior. But also the fact that growing up his mother was quite abusive towards her children, provide deeper context. It doesn't excuse what he did, but if I can understand it I find it easier to forgive. And I still listen to his music quite a bit.

The one person I automatically cancelled in my mind right away was William Hurt, after reading about his abuse towards Marlee Matlin. I sold my Blu-ray of Broadcast News almost immediately, after reading that much of it took place during it's filming. It was a completely knee-jerk reaction but one I don't regret much.

[eversonpoe]

someone mentioned something earlier about multiple people being involved in a project, so i'll give a couple good examples for how i deal with things:

1) kevin spacey. i will never, ever watch a movie again in which kevin spacey is the star. but i will still watch a movie like Seven because he is such a small part of it (and especially because he plays such an abhorrent individual) that it allows me to still find him disgusting and awful.

2) roman polanski. i have only ever watched one of his films (the ninth gate) and it was before i knew anything about him. but because he is the director which essentially makes him the main creative force behind any film he makes, i can't abide him.

3) jesse lacey (of the band brand new). there are two Brand New albums ("the devil & god..." and "daisy") that both got me some of the worst moments of my life; provided emotional refuge from abuse and catharsis for moving on from it. while i had their next album on pre-order (which was their first album in 8 years), the news came out about jesse having groomed underage girls in preparation for being in their cities on tour. suddenly, the main songwriter in a band that had helped me through so much had turned out to be a sexual predator, and the music that had helped me overcome (among other things) my sexual assault was so tainted. i was listening to my phone on shuffle in my car a few days later and one of their songs came on. i found myself immediately heaving and had to pull over. i took all their stuff off my phone, out of my itunes library, and i sold their two records that i had. when the new album showed up a few weeks later, i immediately sold it without ever even listening to it. so, so glad i never got one of their lyrics tattooed on me (which i was strongly considering). a lot of people have brand new lyric tattoos.

so yeah, it's situational. it depends on how instrumental to a thing the offending party is.

[allegro]

The one person I automatically cancelled in my mind right away was William Hurt, after reading about his abuse towards Marlee Matlin. I sold my Blu-ray of Broadcast News almost immediately, after reading that much of it took place during it's filming. It was a completely knee-jerk reaction but one I don't regret much.

Omg I didn’t know this! That’s awful! I just Googled and read write-ups about her book, omg.

People knew about Miles Davis since forever. There are entire generations of men that were / are shitty to women and children, it’s like it’s passed down through generations like hair color, through all cultures and colors. We accept it as a “flaw” due to their own “history that they repeat.” Which is unacceptable. We need to fix this.

[GulDukat]

You think The Cosby Show will ever be on TV Land again? It's weird that such an iconic show that's been on reruns forever was just sort of erased from existence. I think once Cosby dies than there will be a reevaluation and that show will start popping up again.

[Magnetic]

I don't follow. Why would they start airing those shows again just because he's dead?
He's still a monster.

[allegro]

Yeah, Cosby's forever done.

"Roseanne." I hated that show, but - oddly enough - I *started* watching it after Roseanne WAS FIRED, and I like it, now. It's funnier, she brought that show WAY down.

If there was a way to cut out Bill Cosby from every scene of the Cosby show, then maybe it'd be possible to bring back the Cosby show in reruns, with everybody else except him.

[GulDukat]

I don't follow. Why would they start airing those shows again just because he's dead?
He's still a monster.

Agreed, he is a monster, but the topic is separating the art from the artist. So when is it "okay" to start airing the Cosby Show again? Or will it never be okay? It's a little different than renting a movie or downloading an album, because this involves a network actually airing the show.

[botley]

I think that show is completely unsuitable for public broadcast, but it should be studied academically as a perfect case of hiding grim realities behind false facades. This isn't something that people are suddenly discovering now that Cosby is in jail: that show was always about a de-fanged, White-centric idea of what a "good" Black family should look like. During its heyday, it was the most-highly rated show in apartheid South Africa. The Huxtables were cuddly one-dimensional characters, with clear-cut all-American morals and nothing challenging about their humour, and all of that made White people far more comfortable consuming their stories. Sure, you can argue that their presence on TV made the image of Black people more relatable to White South Africans. But... that's like saying, "it made them not want to drink poison every day". It's kind of chilling when you juxtapose that image with what we know now about Cosby himself and the erasure of Black experiences over the decades.

[piggy]

Thanks, I agree, I love memory foam pillows, I have one, now. I’ve had I think at least three different kinds. MyPillow is basically shredded memory foam. But solid memory foam doesn’t always work for me, it’s a height thing. It’s embarrassing the money I’ve spent on pillows, including a BUCKWHEAT pillow. Lol, ugh. But, thanks much, I appreciate it.

Latex is totally different from memory foam. Go to a Bed, Bath & Beyond if you can and check one out for yourself. They are AMAZING, trust me.

[allegro]

Latex is totally different from memory foam. Go to a Bed, Bath & Beyond if you can and check one out for yourself. They are AMAZING, trust me.

Hmmmmm ... interesting. I’ll have to see in-person. Do they make you hot?

[piggy]

Hmmmmm ... interesting. I’ll have to see in-person. Do they make you hot?

Nope. Mine feels great. That's why there are little holes all the way through the pillow. It lets the air/heat circulate.

[Jinsai]

Pop music matters, at least at the moment. And who knows for how long. In the Elizabethan era, Shakespeare wrote some silly little plays—a lot like a lot of silly little plays of the era and, to many, they were very much considered lowbrow popular fodder.

And this pop bullshit matters outside of commerce—outside of choosing whom we fund—because we pay attention to it. Attention matters. I can't imagine it's more ethical to divorce the artist from his/her/their work in cases where the art is not terribly popular. Where would one draw the line?

I was just being personally derisive towards their music. After the scandal broke out, I checked out their music and said "well, there's objectively no artistic loss here." There's lots of "pop music" that covers the gamut and is valuable in a variety of ways. The Lost Prophets, I dunno, I guess it's just my subjective opinion, but that shit was even worse than Creed

[SchwarzerAbt]

You are aware that Ilan was in Lostprophets before joining NIN, no? Not that that immediately makes them any more or less artistically relevant or whatever.

I remember that lostprophets posted a statement on their page how much they felt betrayed and let down by Ilan's departure using mostly NIN song titles as words. Then of course saying they're just kidding and are proud of Ilan scoring this gig with a legendary band and wishing him all the best for the future.

Those were fun times to be a fan of both bands, way before this mess really took off!

[eversonpoe]

oh, another really good (and current!) example:

JK Rowling. she has been gradually outing herself as a transphobe over time, and it recently came to a head. she's a flat-out piece of shit who thinks trans women are sub-human, and degrades and demoralizes us but pretends she's "just kidding" or "trying to help". she's turning out to be almost as bad as graham linehan (whose shows i absolutely ADORE but he is one of the worst proponents of anti-trans propaganda on twitter). i have a deathly hallows tattoo. i love harry potter (for all its flaws). i'll probably still watch the movies, but i will never read the books again. ever. fuck her and fuck her attitudes. using her platform to reach MILLIONS of people and spread lies and hate is a truly despicable thing to do.

[tricil]

oh, another really good (and current!) example:

JK Rowling. she has been gradually outing herself as a transphobe over time, and it recently came to a head. she's a flat-out piece of shit who thinks trans women are sub-human, and degrades and demoralizes us but pretends she's "just kidding" or "trying to help". she's turning out to be almost as bad as graham linehan (whose shows i absolutely ADORE but he is one of the worst proponents of anti-trans propaganda on twitter). i have a deathly hallows tattoo. i love harry potter (for all its flaws). i'll probably still watch the movies, but i will never read the books again. ever. fuck her and fuck her attitudes. using her platform to reach MILLIONS of people and spread lies and hate is a truly despicable thing to do.

So what’re you gonna cover the tattoo up with?

[eversonpoe]

So what’re you gonna cover the tattoo up with?

i'm not sure what i'm going to do about it, honestly. i still like the idea it represents (power without balance cannot be wielded responsibly, and very few can handle power even when it is balanced), so i don't know if i feel the need to cover it up.

[tricil]

i'm not sure what i'm going to do about it, honestly. i still like the idea it represents (power without balance cannot be wielded responsibly, and very few can handle power even when it is balanced), so i don't know if i feel the need to cover it up.

It’s so weird to me that she literally can’t accept transfiguration in real life.

[GulDukat]

I think that show is completely unsuitable for public broadcast, but it should be studied academically as a perfect case of hiding grim realities behind false facades. This isn't something that people are suddenly discovering now that Cosby is in jail: that show was always about a de-fanged, White-centric idea of what a "good" Black family should look like. During its heyday, it was the most-highly rated show in apartheid South Africa. The Huxtables were cuddly one-dimensional characters, with clear-cut American morals and nothing challenging about their humour, and all of that made White people far more comfortable consuming their stories. Sure, you can argue that their presence on TV made the image of Black people more relatable to White South Africans. But... that's like saying, "it made them not want to drink poison every day". It's kind of chilling when you juxtapose that image with what we know now about Cosby himself and the erasure of Black experiences over the decades.

I hear what you are saying, I was never a huge fan of the Cosby show and understand your criticisms. That said, that show meant a lot to a lot of people in the Black community (whom as a White person I certainly can't speak for), and I don't know if that show should be permanently swept under the rug. I just don't know how clear cut it is, in terms of how (and if) the show can continued to be enjoyed and recognized as a groundbreaking show. Here is a good article about the subject.

[eversonpoe]

It’s so weird to me that she literally can’t accept transfiguration in real life.

[GulDukat]

Yeah, Cosby's forever done.

"Roseanne." I hated that show, but - oddly enough - I *started* watching it after Roseanne WAS FIRED, and I like it, now. It's funnier, she brought that show WAY down.

If there was a way to cut out Bill Cosby from every scene of the Cosby show, then maybe it'd be possible to bring back the Cosby show in reruns, with everybody else except him.

So it would come back as The Show?

[Sesquipedalism]

Regarding Marilyn Manson it is a little different, as sex and violence have always been lyrical themes of his. And at least starting with GAoG it was also about how evil he is. So is it that surprising he actually does evil things in real live? Is it fair to boycott him when he has been kind of honest about this all along? Are we kind of complicit with him because we liked his music, even though it was always there in his lyrics? Or is it foolish to go into a relationship with this man, even after he put out videos like 'saint' and not expect to get hurt? I don't know... It's still inexcusable to rape someone. But as long as that is only speculation it is unfair to dismiss one artists work completely.

First, I'm with @botley here. Yeah, it's right to stand against something even if they've been candid about it and you'd been duped. Forthright honesty doesn't equal exculpation; previous muteness doesn't demand future silence.

Second, as someone who was a fan from '94, I feel like there was a seismic shift in Manson that occurred when he either forgot or willfully abandoned the notion that that his show was an ironic statement on the inherent flaws in a society that worships sex and violence. "I am your shit; you should be ashamed of what you have eaten" was originally an indictment. We were supposed to see the things he was "celebrating" as abominable. There's a reason he used to focus so much on things like his skin being an "eyesore mirror sketch pad" and "you are what you should fear." There was a point to getting people to chant "We hate love, we love hate." And the point of all of that was to show us back to us and have us be queasy.

It was deliberate. And that's why it was clever art.

Whenever the sea change happened—I'm sure one can argue when and why—it seemed like his celebration of our society's misguided ideals became less ironic, more sincere. The video for "Running to the Edge of the World." "Pistol Whipped." "Kill4Me." I no longer see ironic detachment here and, if he's still "got it," so to speak, if he's still doing what he's always done and showing us back to ourselves in order that we be disgusted, well, then I would offer him some advice from Kurt Vonnegut.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we should be careful about what we pretend to be."

There was always a high likelihood of fans not understanding the disconnect between what Manson pretended to be and what he was subtextually saying. I would argue that knowledge of it was built into the operation and is the primary reason for the "We hate love, we love hate" refrain and the song "I Don't Like the Drugs." But, as I've said, even if I am not qualified to declaim his present mental state—and I'm not, really—I am certainly qualified to observe his reception and comment back that he's no longer being widely received in accord with his original mission statement. Perhaps this means he's failing to achieve original goals or perhaps that means his goals have shifted. Either way, just because a fan bought in, he/she/they are not required to keep buying in or remain silent.

[eversonpoe]

So it would come back as The Show?

as @allegro said, it shouldn't come back. it's irredeemable.

and as @botley said, it's the "good black family" stereotype. black folks and families come in all sorts, and their "goodness" shouldn't be dictated by white culture. i'd much rather someone make a new show.

[Sesquipedalism]

The one person I automatically cancelled in my mind right away was William Hurt, after reading about his abuse towards Marlee Matlin. I sold my Blu-ray of Broadcast News almost immediately, after reading that much of it took place during it's filming. It was a completely knee-jerk reaction but one I don't regret much.

Well, that's horrifying. I didn't know any of that. And now I also want to dropkick Joy Behar. "Sex with him was spectacular." Fuck you.

[Sesquipedalism]

Agreed, he is a monster, but the topic is separating the art from the artist. So when is it "okay" to start airing the Cosby Show again? Or will it never be okay? It's a little different than renting a movie or downloading an album, because this involves a network actually airing the show.

Part of me feels like The Cosby Show is a little like a Hitler painting. Stay with me now.

Both artists are, ahem, extremely problematic and, in the case of Cosby, virtually always visually present as a reminder. In both cases, I think the ask on the audience is too much—look at this art and ignore everything else you might know or be thinking. It's probably not going to happen. So, it's less a case of "should we" or "is it right to," and more a case of "it's probably not possible to."

Maybe when Cosby, his accusers, and their children are all long dead. But honestly, you really think the antics of Cliff Huxtable will be of much value in 2100?

I think that show is completely unsuitable for public broadcast, but it should be studied academically as a perfect case of hiding grim realities behind false facades. This isn't something that people are suddenly discovering now that Cosby is in jail: that show was always about a de-fanged, White-centric idea of what a "good" Black family should look like. During its heyday, it was the most-highly rated show in apartheid South Africa. The Huxtables were cuddly one-dimensional characters, with clear-cut American morals and nothing challenging about their humour, and all of that made White people far more comfortable consuming their stories. Sure, you can argue that their presence on TV made the image of Black people more relatable to White South Africans. But... that's like saying, "it made them not want to drink poison every day". It's kind of chilling when you juxtapose that image with what we know now about Cosby himself and the erasure of Black experiences over the decades.

Yes! Yes! Yes!

I have nothing to contribute here, but clicking "Like" didn't satisfy me.

[allegro]

I hear what you are saying, I was never a huge fan of the Cosby show and understand your criticisms. That said, that show meant a lot to a lot of people in the Black community (whom as I White person I certainly can't speak for), and I don't know if that show should be permanently swept under the rug. I just don't know how clear cut it is, in terms of how (and if) the show can continued to be enjoyed and recognized as a groundbreaking show. Here is a good article about the subject.

Nah, it seemed to mean a lot more to white people. There are a lot of black people who thought Cosby was just a sanctimonious asshole, bitching about black boys’ pants being too low or African American Vernacular English and code-switching as being totally unacceptable. Meanwhile, Cosby was drugging and raping women

as @allegro said, it shouldn't come back. it's irredeemable.

and as @botley said, it's the "good black family" stereotype. black folks and families come in all sorts, and their "goodness" shouldn't be dictated by white culture. i'd much rather someone make a new show.

Fixed.