Love the art, hate the artist?

[Rose White]

Idk if this is the right place to post this—was thinking about “Relationships”, but anyway. I’m curious. When you find out that a famous person abused their kids or their family or did some other thing like that, do you remove their music, movies, books, etc from your collection? I know it’s nuanced because some are not proven and some are complicated by historical times and other reasons. But I’m just curious because I think that our personal histories play a part in these kinds of decisions.

For example, I was just reading about a jazz artist I like— Stan Kenton—whose daughter wrote a book about how he raped her as a girl and then eventually as she became an adult she had a consensual sexual relationship with him and how it affected every aspect of her life—surprisingly she became a famous author and health advocate in her own right (I say surprisingly because I’m used to reading that someone with such a history becomes an addict and commits suicide.). Anyway, I deleted his albums from my library upon finding that out—just gave me an icky feeling and I didn’t want that seeping into what I consider relaxing music. I understand that musicians aren’t perfect demigods, and I’m not saying they have to be, but for me that was a line— I felt better not having his “energy” around.

But, one of my favorite books is “The Mists of Avalon” and the author’s kids both were sexually abused by their dad, her husband, and she covered it up. (He eventually went to prison for it, her covering it up was revealed in the trial). I like the book so much but I do feel conflict. I think eventually I will disavow it, my intuition says.

Anyway, curious about your own opinion on this.

 

[In the weeds]

I've done the same. Just recently actually. When I found out two separate singers that I love the songs by, were involved in minor abuse activity I deleted all their songs from my playlist. I really do miss the songs but I just can't listen to them anymore. They make me feel icky.

 

[Dark.Green.Feathers]

Depends, all my music is either MP3s or CDs that I own, so I don’t worry about anyone getting money from me listening to the music or subscribing to a service or whatever. And most of my stuff is also second hand or downloaded myself. If the music has nothing to do with what they did, most of the time I just keep listening. I don’t get invested in the individual people behind music because they’re strangers to me, so it sucks but I don’t necessarily feel they’re irreversibly imbued into the music.

If songs have a different feel in light of that then I might stop listening to them. Sometimes it does leave a bad taste or feels disingenuous or deceptive, especially especially if it’s trauma-related. Some music is about trauma because of my personal interpretation of it but some is made with the themes baked in, and *that* I may not be comfortable listening to anymore if the artist turns out to be an abuser of some kind.

But honestly it’s case by case for me. I always think about the potential of it happening with my favourite band(s). I don’t really have a hard and fast formula but most of the time? I keep listening, sometimes I just fall away but certain songs still resonate a lot so I’ll go back to those. There are one or two artists though who I don’t want anything to do with their stuff, or won’t explore their music past the one or two songs I already like. Some people the art is rotten with them but it takes something coming out for the full picture to be seen.

Some genres I like it's rare for a name, face, or bank to be attached to the music, so I don’t even think about it, if I like it enough for it to be on my ipod then my listens on there aren’t going to do anything for their business or ego if they turn out to be a scumbag.


Some artists havent been done for anything but the content of some of their tracks to me is reprehensible, so I don’t get into them or listen to their other stuff even if most of it’s fine.

 

[Friday]

I make a concerted effort NOT to learn about any artist that I like their work. For very good reason.

 

[Movingforward10]

It's challenging as so many people are abusers....

Michal Jackson. I say the Jackson Five are things I listen to but anything when he was an adult, I don't. I can't quite believe (but yes I can) that he is constantly still played on the radio.

I don't watch Woody Allen films.
But I still watch Weinstein films.

I watched Steve Tyler recently, then looked him up and realised that was another one off the list.

It's hard to be so principles about it because it's everywhere. People vote these people in to run countries for example ...


But, I do try.

 

[Sideways]

I don’t go looking for info. Like, I don’t check up who directed a film before I see it, just like I wouldn’t look up the background of players on a sports team before going to watch them play (although, I find it incredibly difficult to come most forms of football, because…not a great track record there!).

And, it’s not really a principle thing for me. It probably would be, if I could get that far!

Fact is, I can’t listen to Michael Jackson without feeling sick. Used to love his work, particularly his Quincy Jones years. Can still appreciate the musical genius of some of it. But if I hear it, I feel physically nauseous, typically within moments.

I can’t hear a Rolf Harris song without feeling sick.

If the Weinstein logo pops up at the start of a film, I feel sick.

There’s a load of them for me. And it extends well beyond art. Currently, knowing that something was bought on Temu is enough to turn my stomach and need physical space from that object! But I’m also the annoying person in the office that doesn’t cope well with pork sausages everywhere at the staff bbq & so finds reasons to be elsewhere that day, and goes to lengths to buy work shoes from companies that have good track records for tracking their labour chain.

I’ve reached a point where if it makes me feel ill, that’s enough for me. With things that trigger that sort of physical response for me - it’s not about the principle of the thing, I just don’t want to be there anymore, and I walk away, switch off, give myself physical space from whatever that thing is.

I suspect that at some point in the future, that physiological reaction will abate. At which point, I’ll probs need to start considering my principles on the matter!

But currently? Yes, I’m clearly a bit more hypersensitive to it than a lot of the folks around me, and that’s okay. The choices that other people make, because it doesn’t bother them, is totally okay with me, and I try not to give them grief about my issue.

It’s certainly true that if we’re only allowed to remember and celebrate humans who were never evil or abusive, the history books would be pretty empty, and most art and sport wouldn’t be a thing. Humans are deeply flawed, even while they have their moments of genius.

Giving myself space in those moments is about finding opportunities to practice small acts of kindness to myself when I notice myself feeling distressed by something. More than anything else, that’s the principle that I currently operate on with this sort of issue.

 

[PlainJane]

I make a concerted effort NOT to learn about any artist that I like their work. For very good reason.

Same here. Never meet your heros type thing

 

[parrotthepolly]

Idk I think I can ignore it depending on the media. The only person I can think of is Dr Suess and don't remember the controversy but both the children's books and his art was iconic and surreal.

The creation is seperate to the creator in my opinion, like I was born from two people but they don't have control over me past a certain point.

 

[user27357]

woody allen. funny as hell, but he was not a guy I would want to know.

 

[Calmdown]

It really depends. It is an emotional decision not a rational one. These cases also show how common it is to hurt kids.
When I was younger I read Alice Miller. She was seen as a super-mother, a protector of children. Much later her son wrote a book about his relationship to her, he had an awful childhood. I guess most people would not have expected this.
You can't trust anybody who puts himself into the spotlight, there might be exceptions but they are very few. So I guess on a moral standpoint I would say you have no obligation to hate the art of a crappy person but there is also no point in ignoring or rationalizing it if it bothers you.

 

[Ecdysis]

Michal Jackson... I can't quite believe (but yes I can) that he is constantly still played on the radio.

Fact is, I can’t listen to Michael Jackson without feeling sick.

Yup, same here. I switch radio stations the second a song of his comes on.

Also refuse to listen to anything by whatshisarseface "Diddy" anymore if it comes on the radio.

Refuse to watch Roman Polanski films, can't enjoy Woody Allen ones either.

I think the more we find out, the longer the list will get...

ETA: Glad others feel the same way... It infuriates me that the radio stations still play that shit as if it's irrelevant and sometimes wonder if it's just me that's bothered by it and turns it off...

 

[Friday]

I think the more we find out, the longer the list will get...

Like let’s just cross Ghandi & Mother Theresa off, to start. (If you don’t know their heinous horrible disgusting shit? Don’t google).

We had a thing, in my country, where artists lost their citizenship for their politics, during MacCarthy. Germany had something similar, a few decades earlier, with Hitler.

A few thousand years ago artists were NOT allowed to sign or indicate the origin of their art in certain empires (pop culture says because slaves made it, archeologists know slaves signed plenty, it was only GREAT & BELOVED art that was not allowed an origin story, or humanising, because artists are human; and most humans suck, so the more profound a piece? The more it touched people? The less it was allowed to be identified with an individual).