Ask Lemmy

Why would you, though? I've always been baffled by this idea. Art is a method of conveying something, and in that sense, I don't see any reason not to see that similarly to the artist just describing it, sans what's intransferable and, possibly, some beauty. If someone speaks of yearning for the world peace, it's important context whenever they are warmonger of pacifist. Attempting to interpret any art without including the artist in it is, in my opinion, the same as if you conveniently covered parts of the artwork you didn't like. And that's just about the interpretation, I can't imagine myself actually trying to enjoy any Tarantino movies knowing he's a zionist. Or, for that matter, enjoying reading Rowling. I can attempt interpreting their works via the lens of them being pieces of shit, and that can be interesting, but that's exact opposite of separating the artist from the art. I can't see myself enjoying anything made by someone who's clearly evil, and all of that is excluding the obvious argument of supporting them by paying for or recommending their art to others, just assuming you pirated the thing.

Yes, you can separate the art from the artist. No, you cannot separate the act of paying for art from the artist while they still live.

I think as long as you aren't monetarily supporting them (pirate that shit) or spreading their name and fame (don't tell your friends and family who the artist is if they ask) then ya sure go ahead and listen to their music and enjoy it.

We can. Thankfully though, art is plentiful and we don't have to.

I wonder how many people in these comments love an artist that someone else finds objectionable / harmful because they just don't personally empathize with the people their fav has marginalized.

I have known amazing humans that are bad artists. Out of respect for the person, I have complimented their efforts at art. There are many great artists that are horrible humans. I have begrudgingly complimented their art.

There is room for both.

Yes. But also no. It's complicated. There are also no absolutes in correctness on your approach with the art. It's personal.

It’s okay to like problematic things - especially if done with awareness and examination. Whether or not to contribute financially to people whose views you disagree with is much more of a case-by-case thing

if you like Harry Potter or Kanye West, you are a baby idiot

yes

the entire argument that art is corrupted by the action of the artist is dependent on the idea of guilt by association.

A lot of us don't believe in guilt by association. I am not responsible for the actions or views of other people, nor do I endorse them by my interaction with them or their works.

My dad was racist af. I knew him for 27 years and cared for him for ten of those years. Am I a therefore a racist? No. Only insane people would make that argument. And yes, there is a lot of collective insanity going on in the world. In the 2000s if you asked this question most people would laugh at it, but social media has warped people into believing that if you ever read Harry Potter you are a transphobe by the 'associative transphobe property' or something equally absurd, or if you watch the new upcoming HBO Harry Potter, you are going to become a transphobe. It's a completely stupid POV and not any different than thinking that if you watch a movie by a Muslim director you are now Muslim. The background assumption also lurking int his guilt, is that there is a state of 'purity'. If I denounce and never consume another HP product... I am somehow 'purging' myself of any possible transphobia!

It's not any different with crime. If my dad killed someone, I am not in anyway responsible for that action. Yet, people are stupid and will start assuming that I am also a murderer or be more likely to murder someone. They will then make up arguments to justify this suspicion, it's genetic, or I 'should have known' and stopped it and I am therefore responsible... blah blah. It's especially toxic when you combine these things with the arrogance of hindsight and the exaggerated interpretations of events and words... like we were magically supposed to know in 1997 what JK Rowlings personal views were based on some random passage of her first book or something.

It's tribal ape-brain nonsense that falls apart when you remotely begin to approach the idea with any skepticism or scrutiny.

It's also equally as stupid as thinking if I read Mein Kampf or do primary source research for a paper on Nazi Germany... I'm a Nazi or I will somehow be 'tainted' by Nazi ideals. Essentailly it's rooted in a fear response, fear of becoming the 'bad thing' or fear that others will think you are 'bad' if you enjoy the 'bad person's work'. It's also even stupider when you realize a lot of these associations are completely false. For example Nietzche is considered a 'Nazi' by a lot of people, despite the objective historical record showing us he was not, but because his sister was and she edited his works after his death to curry favor with the regime. I had professors in college who woudln't teach him because they were afraid of being labeled a Nazi because of this 'his associations with Nazism'. Fast forward 20+ years and nobody ever talks about him in association with Nazism because that myth has been largely busted.

But again, it's all about people's emotional reactions and moral panic and their inability to understand that people's actions and beliefs are entirely their own and your enjoyment of anything or consumption of it is not an endorsement. I can watch Pulp Fiction and not want to do drugs or rape gimps... but very dumb people think that I can't do this and if I watch Pulp Fiction I must want to rape gimps or something. Or probably go as stupidly far to assume that I somehow will inherit Tarantino's foot fetish if I like his movies...

People who think like this are the equivalent of those who think Haitian immigrants were eating cats and dogs because Trump said so and he never lies! It's a baseless accusation that is entirely rooted in fear and ignorance and a need to perpetuate that fear and ignorance to solidify the in-group identity. It's a form of witch-hunting, people desperate to show they aren't the witch by casting blame on others who the witches in an effort to distance themselves from accusation.

I think it's okay to like Harry Potter but one should approach it with the awareness that Rowling's prejudices had an impact on the work and try not to let it influence your views. For example, recognize that the pro-slavery stuff with the house elves is kind of fucked up.

I really want to watch the upcoming TV series. I was going to until a few days ago. I think it looks like a really good adaptation of the books. I hope I get to see it eventually. But I've recently decided I don't want to watch it in a way that supports Rowling given the recent laws in the Untied States targeting transgender people. I don't want to contribute to the hate and misinformation against transgender people. There's also the fact that the studio will soon be controlled by Paramount and I don't want to support them either.

Still, I don't expect the show itself to be transphobic and I think it is therefore fine to watch the show if it doesn't support Rowling. I might watch if it gets uploaded to YouTube or Rowling dies (not wishing her dead, just saying then I would be able to watch the series guiltlessly)

Yes and it's easy

Step 1: Steal the Art. Ensure that the artist does not materially/financially gain in any way from your enjoyment of their work.

Step 2: Talk Shit. Every time someone asks about the art/artist in question is an opportunity to explain in detail exactly why that artist sucks and how to steal their art. Ensure that they do not gain in any other way from your enjoyment of their work. Destroy their reputation so that others do not support them financially.

Yes.

Liking this painting does not make you a Nazi.

To a certain degree, I'm a big fan of Hip Hop and Reggae and both genres are inescapably homophobic and misogynistic but I can look past most of the less than savoury parts, there's also a lot of glorifying violence in a lot of the music (though once you dig past a lot of the gangsta stuff it's much less common) but it doesn't bother me.

I can't listen to Afrika Bambaataa anymore though since the child sexual assault cases came to light, same goes for a lot of acts.

I also can't support anyone who is actively oppressing others like Jim Rowling or Graham Linehan despite how much I may have previously enjoyed their work.

It depends what you want to do with the art. But an easy answer for me is: the author dies when the author dies. Buy things after they die. Before that: pirate, second hand (I'd reccomend second hand everything though, within limits).

That's not typically how I want my art though. Knowing what informed the art is interesting to see where it's supported Vs contradicted in the piece.

Two examples: knowing jk Rowling is bigot then reading HP, well how did we not see it sooner? The series becomes a lot more sinister knowing who wrote it.

In contrast Ender's game, how is that series written by that man?! It's about love and the limits of love. It's about life and the limits of life. Reading the series knowing the person who wrote it is baffling.

In general, knowing the contexts of the piece is interesting to me. Like Saturn Devouring His Son, it was painted directly on the wall of Goya's house... Why, who paints that directly on the wall of their house?! Wait, Black PaintingS? There's more?! Not knowing the story of the Black paintings, it's just an interesting interpretation of a greko-roman myth. But, what hat did Goya see in his past to see that? What did he see in the present to need to materialize it in his dining room? What did he fear for the future?! Fuck.

Ok then: why does one have to be a loud asshole to be an artist?

If it’s about Separating the artist from the art:

There are plenty of non asshole artists. Celebrate them.

Now take that concept and apply this to the rest of your life.

Stop overlooking the good that decent people are doing around you. They deserve your energy. Not just the loudest, most toxic attention grabbing assholes.

Only assholes blindly support assholes. So you can also stop being an asshole who only supports assholes at any time. Now even. Now is a good time.

No.

And you shouldn't.

Art, "true" art, is not merely some product. It's a personal expression of the artist. An artist cannot separate themselves from the art they create; it's always based on their experiences, their outlook, their opinions, their own ways of expressing emotions, or reacting to events however fictional.

Yes, a writer can create characters with opinions or behaviours that aren't their own, but things that are personal to the artist will always be the benchmark. You do that automatically. There's no other way to make a character unless they're a plank of wood with a face on it.

I myself am an artist and I have many original characters.

No. At best you can try to shunt it to the side in your mind, but it's still going to be there. Worming away what's left of your conscience.

You can, when you pirate their stuff so they don't get money.

If you are into reading maybe Art Worlds by Howard S. Becker provides some interessting perspective for you. He sees art as a system, not as the accomplishment of a single person, the artist. It is a scientific studie but really close to every they language and filled with a lot of examples

in my opinion, no. an artist's worldview informs their art, so things like racism/misogyny/ableism etc etc seep into the works they create. consuming media like that uncritically can be harmful by reinforcing biases, conscious or unconscious.

there's also the more direct harm that can be done by financially supporting certain artists. jk rowling, for example, is funnelling any wealth she gets from the harry potter franchise into funding anti-trans organisations.

in my experience, people who want to separate art from the artist just want to continue uncritically consuming everything, without feeling guilt over the harm they could be doing by "voting with their dollar".

No.

Speaking as an artist and a writer myself, I put my entire heart and soul into my work, especially the characters I make and the setting I put out. My work is inseparable from my mind.

You can say that the quality of the work is good, that they're skillful in their craft. That's a very different thing from saying that its content, its heart and soul, is something that stirs you. That the story resonates with you, makes you want to embrace the artist's ideals and understand their view.

Do not separate art from artists. Describing their skill and making excuses for their broken moral compass are two VERY different things.

If I found out that I had fans who were Nazis, and they were making the excuse that they're "separating the art from the artist", I'd start including even more blatantly anti-Nazi plotlines to make sure they know that they CAN'T.

Yes, you can. Well, I should say it’s possible. Maybe not for everyone, but some people can do it. For example, I still appreciate and read Ender’s Game, even though Orson Scott Card is a homophobic prick—I just won’t buy a new copy of it, so I know I’m not giving him money.

If the artist is constantly in the news reminding me what a POS they are IRL, then no, I can't enjoy their works because that's always in my mind. Otherwise, if they just fuck off into obscurity, then I can enjoy the works independently for what they are.

Yeah, no problem. I just acquire the media in ways that don't benefit them. Second-hand books, movies, CDs. Perhaps from the seven seas. Turns out Nicki Minaj is a nut. Well, I already owned some of her CDs. She isn't going to know or care if I snap it in half, or pop it in and listen to Bees in the Trap. So, I might as well if I want to. Same thing with Kevin Spacey, L Ron Hubbard, etc.