This is a topic I wanted to post for a long time now and Kanye’s latest antics finally got me to get off my lazy ass.
There is a lot of good art (in a broad sense) that is unfortunately created by terrible human beings. The list is very long and gets longer all the time.
Some examples I had in mind:
Comedians: Bill Cosby, Louis CK
musicians: R Kelly, Michael Jackson, Eric Clapton, Kid Rock
actors: Kevin Spacey, Sean Connery, Jon Voight
directors: Roman Polanski, Clint Eastwood
There are varying degrees of misconduct represented here.
I have never seen a Bill Cosby stand up special and it’s impossible to imagine watching one now and enjoying it. The same is true is for the Cosby show which I watched a lot when I was younger but I feel there is already a difference because Cosby isn’t front and center all the time.
On the other hand I can sing along to Beat It without thinking about the children Jackson probably molested. Kevin Spacey in Seven is maybe easier to accept than in the Usual Suspects.
Stepping away further a Polanski movie can be watched without ever having to think about him at all.
I haven’t really figured this out but to me among other things I believe it makes a difference how closely a piece of art is associated with a person, eg. an asshole drummer is less of a problem than an asshole lead singer.
Eastwood, Voight, Clapton, and Mr. Rock all just have politics you don’t like. Who cares? Half the people in the world don’t have politics that you agree with, and they all make a bunch of stuff. You won’t like 90% of the politics of people at my paper mill, or probably any paper mill, at least in the US. You won’t like 90% of trucker’s politics and they deliver all your stuff. You’re going to not like a masterpiece work of art like Unforgiven just because Clint is a Republican? Where does it end?
Not to mention that this sort of ideological litmus test for enjoying or appreciating art is thoroughly illiberal. Just let the art speak for itself and you can find value in it or not.
Louis is saying that Eastwood’s art is worthwhile but he wants to dismiss it because of Clint’s political views. Paraphrasing his OP, Louis doesn’t want to consume Eastwood’s art because Eastwood is a terrible person because of his political views.
Caravaggio was a fantastic painter but murdered someone
Phil Spector produced some magnificent music but killed someone and threatened others with a gun
Picasso and Hitchcock abused women
Gaugin was a pedo
Eric Gill sexually abused his daughters and his dog
Wagner was a rabid anti-Semite
But if their art doesn’t reflect any of this (some of Wagner’s did imo), so what?
I saw a documentary a while back and it briefly showed a collection nazi artworks that are locked away by this German museum in a vault not for display. There was one large oil painting of Hitler giving a rousing speech to a small crowd in a beer hall or something. It was beautifully done, I remember thinking it was a shame it was locked away. Just paint over Hitler, make it like Martin Luther or something. But I guess it’s not that easy.
I don’t really care about the personal beliefs or actions of the artist when it comes to deciding if I should enjoy their creations. Would be pretty hard to enjoy a lot of the stuff I do (especially music) if I did care.
My biggest example of this is old Chris Benoit matches. Watching someone who committed an unspeakably monstrous act (though in the throes of a mental illness) and enjoying their work is something that honestly confuses me, yet I still find myself doing from time to time.
I think Hemingway probably fits into this for me. I still really love his books but with the benefit of a 21st century perspective a lot of his schtick just comes across as desperate toxic masculinity stuff. Was he a Man’s Man or just a curmudgeonly drunk asshole? Is there a difference?
I mean, he’s obviously still funny. A master of his craft. And not to defend Mr. CK, but what should the consequences of what he did be? It’s fine that people don’t like him any more because of what he did. But I think it’s also fine that people still like him, right? What he did was distasteful, but it probably wasn’t even illegal. Like, what’s the statute of limitations on a gross thing? What should the consequences be? Up to the consumer of the art, right?
But then you’ve got people who want to pressure venues and outlets to never associate with or book Louis again. For me, that’s too much. They don’t want him to be able to share his vocation with the world ever again? Shit, we let actual rapists work after they serve their time. These guys want a Gross Thing Perpetrator to never work again, apparently in perpetuity? How about you guys just don’t watch his specials or go to his shows?
Got a weird vibe from the live audience watching his post-jerkoff scandal shows. Seemed like they were kinda cheering along with the sex jokes rather than realizing that they were jokes that were being made in a self-deprecating way at his own expense. Think he got a new audience that he didn’t expect.
Which is weird because Louis is actually a total lib.
Used to really like his comedy. Now not so much. Louie was especially pernicious because onstage he said all the right things about sexual abuse and toxic masculinity, I suppose it was all just an act. Complete snake of a man.
The guys whose politics and my enjoyment of his work has the biggest contrast. I’m like wow this guy writes amazing cosmic horror really reaching into the depths of grotesque dread and then thinking he was probably imagining his dread at seeing Italians walking down the street when he wrote it.
