Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you know an artist is not a good person, can you still enjoy their work?
I can. Just like I can dislike the work of an artist who is a great person. The two are not intertwined for me.
ITA, totally irrelevant to me. The work is its own object and it is what it is, whoever the creator was and whatever they intended. I can see the concern with financially supporting a reprehensible person, but otherwise it is a non-issue for me.
Anonymous wrote:If you know an artist is not a good person, can you still enjoy their work?
I can. Just like I can dislike the work of an artist who is a great person. The two are not intertwined for me.
Anonymous wrote: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.
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.
Anonymous wrote:I agree with 8:11. DH and I talked about this a ton last year, because I really loved Ender's Game (written by a man who is virulently homophobic - not part of our family's values at all) and DH did not want to see the movie (because of the author's public statements about gay people). I used the examples of Michael Jackson, Woody Allen and Roman Polanski to point out his hypocrisy of being unable to enjoy a thing because of the actions of its creator.
He hasn't wavered in his love of MJ, but he also agrees that MJ was a profoundly disturbed individual. He finds him more to be pitied than hated, though. He still loves the work of Roman Polanski and has a whole schpiel about the psychological trauma that Polanski has suffered (child Holocaust survivor, wife and unborn child brutally murdered) and the degree to which trauma can beget trauma. I'm not sure I totally agree with his position, but I agree that the things Polanski has suffered certainly are terrible and I feel sad for him about them.
After the article written by Dylan Farrow, he decided that while he loved Woody Allen's work and it would always have a special place in his heart, he couldn't in good conscience continue to support it going forward. I was impressed, as previously his position had been more along the lines of "No one knows what happened and the parents' relationship was all fucked up and anyway, he makes amazing movies."
Anonymous wrote:There are predatory movie directors, politicians (both stripes), musicians, jerk movie stars..... do you dis everything that involves a person you don't like?
Anonymous wrote: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.