Anonymous wrote:Rapist "photographer" Terry Richardson. Makes my stomach turn. All those young children.

I thought this was who the OP was going to refer to. I have read various accounts of models who have posed for him and the things that went on were so predatory and vile. Seems like finally some magazines/editors are starting to refuse to work with him.

Rapist "photographer" Terry Richardson. Makes my stomach turn. All those young children.

I work in media and have met lots of celebs. I can certainly still appreciate their work, but if I have worked with them enough to have really been affected by their a-hole tendencies I don't go out of my way to watch the movies/listen to the music etc. Sometimes I do like reading their (nonfiction) books though because you know enough about them to pick up on all the lies...guilty pleasure like reality tv.

My two favorite artists: Michael Jackson and Roman Polanski. I grappled for a long time on whether or not Michael Jackson was a pedophile. Spent countless hours reading books refuting the allegations, civil suits, footage, and testimony. I just assumed he was eccentric. I even cried after hearing he passed away. However, after Wade Robinson claimed that he molested him as a child, Michael's music became meaningless to me.

Some of Roman Polanski's films have left me spellbound. Then, I heard him once on an interview talking about the difference between a 13 y.o. beautiful, teenage girl and an adult woman's body. I thought I would hurl. He totally didn't feel there was anything wrong with having sex with a young teen. He called it sex, but the girl he raped called it rape. I tried to justify his character over the years by blaming the mother for not being there to chaperone. This is so complex, even allowed my mind to believe his love for preadolescent girls wasn't as strange as I judged. Oy. Felt sad about him as a kid who survived the Holocaust and his struggles afterwards. I tried to explore his personal goodness because I could certainly see it expressed through his films. Then I start thinking about how many unreported cases of teen rape he's been involved in. On top of it all, he doesn't seem remorseful. His movies don't mean quite as much to me any more, the magic is gone.

Genius has two faces and evil is one of them.

Anonymous wrote:I can separate the two aspects of that person. I think Americans in particular have this whole, weird moral pedestal we put celebrities on and turn on them when it's clear they're human. A brain built with that level of creativity is not going to excel in all areas. They're usually a little nuts and act accordingly. We do the same thing with sports stars.

They're all humans with flaws. I don't understand why everyone needs to think they're saintly.

For me some of it is economic. If it's an artist or athlete who is still alive, I don't need him or her to be saintly to acknowledge their talent or to appreciate their achievements. BUT, I cringe at contributing to their prosperity by buying their book, seeing their movie, etc.

I can separate the two aspects of that person. I think Americans in particular have this whole, weird moral pedestal we put celebrities on and turn on them when it's clear they're human. A brain built with that level of creativity is not going to excel in all areas. They're usually a little nuts and act accordingly. We do the same thing with sports stars.

They're all humans with flaws. I don't understand why everyone needs to think they're saintly.

I find it difficult. I can't enjoy Frank Lloyd Wright knowing how he treated his family.

Artists are often troubled in some way, and their therapy is producing art.
Do you think a perfectly sane, responsible and logistical pragmatist can create thought provoking art or writings? From where I stand, it's the more wacky ones that create something from the mess inside them. Some of the most talented fine artists and actors are/were seriously crazy.
Examples: Einstein, Martha Graham, Van Gogh, Emily Dickinson, Sophocles, Lord Byron. Two more: Dante and Nabokov - seriously, where did these guys come up with that stuff? Their writings are crazy! Because they were, too!

And I apologize if I offend anyone's sensibilities. I agree with 23:57 to a degree. You can be very involved as a parent, or take care of your art, but probably not both in one lifetime.

So my advice to the OP is try to separate your personal bias of the author from your relationship with your friend, but see the art for the art. Rather, see the author as a mutli-dimensional person who is working something out through his writing.

Used to love Woody Allen movies, then read the Vanity Fair article years ago and that definitely affected my reaction to his movies. What came off as funny neurotic started feeling creepy annoying neurotic.

There seems to be less tolerance now of artists. I think artists (painters, musicians, etc.) have frequently had unsavory private lives, but people used to be comfortable with separating personal and public lives. Now, we seem to have merged our personal and public lives, and artists get in trouble with fans for their political views, or worse (like Michael Jackson).

For me, I can sometimes "forget" what an artist has done in their private life, if their art is free of it. And sometimes I can't.

I was just thinking about this today. Michael Jackson came on the radio and it was a song I LOVE. But I feel bad enjoying his music knowing that he was a child molester. (and yes, I know he was never convicted, but I firmly believe he was a child predator)

Anonymous wrote:I went to school with the child of an author, and I know for a fact that the author was a terrible parent. Really terrible. Author's book is one of our book club choices, and I am, for some reason, hesitant to read it. I think I'll feel guilty if I enjoy it perhaps? I think it's different that just hearing that Oprah is really mean to waiters for example in that I have personal, real-life knowledge of this particular author. Thoughts?

What book?

For me it depends on how terrible the artist is and how much I like the art.

OP here: Thanks, that's a great way to look at it. I will give it a try.

You could think of it as a thought experiment. Read the book, try to be objective about whether you like it or not. See how your views compare with those of others in your book club. An interesting test of whether one can "force" themselves to be objective. I would be interested to hear how it goes!

I went to school with the child of an author, and I know for a fact that the author was a terrible parent. Really terrible. Author's book is one of our book club choices, and I am, for some reason, hesitant to read it. I think I'll feel guilty if I enjoy it perhaps? I think it's different that just hearing that Oprah is really mean to waiters for example in that I have personal, real-life knowledge of this particular author. Thoughts?