-
• #2
We have this discussion regularly in the office. Does a work of art (for that is what music is) lose its acceptability because of the (often later) actions of its creator? For example, Gary Glitter, Michael Jackson and others, not to mention other artists (Arthur C. Clarke, Eric Gill).
-
• #3
The Rolling Stones.
-
• #4
This thread will end up here:
-
• #5
Michael Jackson is a good example of an artist who’s artistic achievements are so well loved and so embedded that people have largely ignored any bad behaviour from the him completely.
John Peel, although not an artist as such, has also largely avoided the negative kudos points his alleged predatory behaviour might otherwise have earned him.
-
• #6
I think alleged is key. If either of them were convicted it might be a different story.
-
• #7
I'm sure listening figures for Lost Prophets haven't done so well.
-
• #8
I guess you’re right, although I feel like Cosby was dropped pretty quickly. He certainly wasn’t a beloved comedian and musician right up until the verdict
-
• #9
Horrible people sometimes make great art... That's it...
-
• #10
Yeah, of course they do. This isn’t about if they do or not, it’s about how we feel about it.
-
• #11
I'm totally okay with it... Many successful artists are entitled, insufferable pricks... Bound to happen...
-
• #12
I guess what I’m interested in is the ground beyond ‘I still like the Smiths even though Morissey is a total aunt’, though. Like, sure, but what if he turned out to be a paedophile and a murderer?
Surely that must make some sort of a difference. It’s a little harder to reconcile.
-
• #13
Morrissey is a total aunt.
-
• #14
Love Phil Spector productions, love Gary Glitter when he was in his pomp, love Michael Jackson right up to Bad...
-
• #15
Eric Gill
I was rather surprised during the Radio 1 DJs phase of Operation Yewtree, that there was never a big story about the BBC's logo and Broadcasting House carvings being done by a paedophile and zoophile.
-
• #16
I made the mistake of reading his autobiography a few months ago. Jheeeze, what a whingey aunt. And he feels the need to finish the occasional paragraph with a prominent line from his songs.
-
• #17
The writing was on the wall, literally almost.
-
• #18
How we feel about it is irrelevant in my opinion. The capitulation to identity politics and moral idealism has led to a situation where work is increasingly understood as an extension of its maker, to be judged according to the virtuousness of his or her intent. It's puritanical, boring and prevents us from confronting the always complex and often ugly reality of being a person in the world. I really believe you have to be able to separate art from the artist. I would say most of the 'art' I like, be it music, literature, architecture, whatever... has come from people who are at best slightly bizarre personalities and at worst outright cunts. Unfortunately people are fragile and they make bad decisions in life. It's simplistic and, frankly, thick to suggest that Person A is good and Person B is bad. We are all imperfect, but the unambiguous beauty of things we are able to produce outside of ourselves is something to strive for and gives us purpose beyond our silly selves.
An interesting case currently is Louis CK, who wanked off inappropriately in front of several women some years ago. As I understand it he sought consent but it's not clear if they felt saying no was really an option. It was really creepy and people, the wankees especially I imagine, are rightly disgusted by his actions. He's been lumped in with the Cosbys and Weinsteins, probably unfairly but inevitably given the timing. He's apologised and taken some time off but I think he recently performed at a comedy club, presumably dipping his toe back in the water with a view to making a return. So how do we feel about that? I personally find Louis CK really funny and an inspiring person (not including the wanking), but it will have affected my view of him even though he talks depraved stuff all the time. If I pay to go and see Louis CK, am I complicit in his inappropriate wanking off? Should he be banned from performing again?
-
• #19
I guess, in terms of Louis CK as an example, how you tell him his actions are inappropriate?
I would say you don't go and see him. Do you feel he has paid his penance and understands the problem, won't do it again? Then go see him.
Society acts to tell people what is and isn't appropriate, but we are society, right, so that's our actions. If you're OK with it, be OK with it. -
• #20
I suppose that highlights a slight difference in someone like Louis CK and my original example. If CK does a gig and no one shows up, he's being sent a clear message. If i decide to flick straight past Beausoleil's record and put on 'Hey' by the Glitter Band (because fuck Gary - they were better without him anyway), he's not going to give any hoots whatsoever. I've got no influence there, so it's purely down to how his actions affect my enjoyment of his artistic output. There's probably also an element of me being concerned with how others would view me enjoying murderer or rapist music. If i was lying about not liking Gary Glitter just now and actually played his records regularly, I still might think twice about doing so in the car, volume up, windows down.
-
• #21
aye, you've got to use the influence you have i guess.
-
• #22
John Peel, although not an artist as such, has also largely avoided the negative kudos points his alleged predatory behaviour might otherwise have earned him.
My mother worked in PR. She told me about him chasing her round his office saying “no sex no deal”.
-
• #23
dipping his toe
A reformed character
-
• #24
Many successful artists are entitled, insufferable pricks...
The fucktones breakup was hard on all of us
-
• #25
.
This is a bit of an odd one, but I noticed in the news that Bobby Beausoleil has been denied parole again (18th time). As a Manson follower, torturer and murderer it’s fair enough.
He’s also a musician who’s responsible for some pretty sublime stuff. Which puts the listener in a curious position - how much should the acts of the musician influence the enjoyment of their music (or other art)? I feel slightly uncomfortable putting on his Lucifer Rising score, but should I? Or should I not even own it? I’ve not listened to the mad and funky ‘Salvation Army Band’ LP since finding out Bill Cosby was a rapist.
Just wanted to hear peoples thoughts and other examples of ‘problem music’.