Does an Artist's Personal Life Prevent Your Enjoyment of the Material?

[Timothy Hunter]

Would you avoid consuming material from an artist if they did something you deem heinous in their personal life?

For instance, Frank Miller's comments on Islam and Occupy Wallstreet or Chuck Dixon collaborating people to self professed Alt Righter Vox Day have led people to shun their comics.

[Kirby101]

Yes. I try not to let the artist or writers personal life and beliefs stop me from enjoying their work. But sometimes it is just too much to overcome.

[numberthirty]

Case By Case...

Take that Moore instance you cited as "Personal Life..."

I could not disagree more. It's a straight up artistic choice. He could be out there with a house full of foster kids and a fat sack of his hard earned cash going to Habitat For Humanity each week, and the way that sexual assault plays into his work would still be an obvious issue.

[mathew101281]

I'm beginning to believe everyone has some skeletons in their closet. Social media is making it harder and harder to conceal those skeletons. This is doubly true for creative people who are pretty much required to be on social media nowadays. The longer people talk the more likely it is that their skeletons are going to come out. This isn't like the old days were everything a creative said was filtered through several layers of PR representation. Sometimes I feel that social media removing those filters was a bad thing as far as civility goes. But then I question whether a skeleton hidden in the shadows is worse than one crawling around in broad daylight.

[Timothy Hunter]

Case By Case...

Take that Moore instance you cited as "Personal Life..."

I could not disagree more. It's a straight up artistic choice. He could be out there with a house full of foster kids and a fat sack of his hard earned cash going to Habitat For Humanity each week, and the way that sexual assault plays into his work would still be an obvious issue.

Yeah... I screwed up. That example didn't work. I'm going to replace my mentioning of Alan Moore with someone else.

[Celgress]

Case by case basis for me.

One of my favorite pro wrestlers was Chris Benoit but I can no longer enjoy his body of work because of how his life ended, despite there being possible mitigating circumstances (medically documented brain damage). I just can't move passed him killing his wife and son.

[Mister Mets]

It is a case by case thing. I don't mind political differences, but abhorrent behavior can limit enjoyment of the material, especially if it has some kind of implications on the work.

For example, the subtext of some of a Brian Wood story about how some people have to make sacrifices for the greater good reads a little differently after the sexual harassment allegations.

https://www.comicsbeat.com/brian-woo...al-misconduct/

[Riv86672]

It’s a case by case thing for me.

Sometimes, finding out something negative about someone will actually make me want to revisit their work, just to see.
Like, when the news broke about Gerard Jones and his arrest for child pornography, something started eating at the back of my mind. I went back and re-read his PRIME series, and there was an ongoing plot there of the main character (in his adult body) repeatedly approaching a fellow 13 year old classmate, and how the young girl was confused by this.
Then I remembered that I’d found that plot kinda weird on first reading it, and maybe now I knew why it had been there in the first place.

[Kusanagi]

Case by Case

Some things are so egregious that it damages how I look at anything they've done (Bill Cosby), other things like a simple difference in politics which I can overlook completely, still other things while not criminal are so blatant or bat **** crazy that while I may enjoy their work I really cringe when I hear anything about their views.

[MyriVerse]

Case by case. There are lots of things celebs do that you're likely to object to, but the art is separate. Sort of.

It's more likely to affect future endeavours than past ones. For instance, I still enjoy The Cosby Show, but I definitely wouldn't enjoy anything the man does in the future. I wasn't a big fan of Frank Miller before, but I just might spit on the next comic I see from the man.

But I've thrown out any Orson Scott Card books I ever had. Ptooey. Don't miss 'em. Sort of want to purge my brain of them.

[kjn]

I think it's truer to say that my knowledge about the artist can influence my enjoyment of their art, and that can go in both directions. There are lots of factors that go into how and when I decide to peruse a specific form of media, and the artist themselves is most certainly one of them, but by no means the only one.

There are also differences in the magnitude of the reaction. On a very high end you're getting rid of the books (whatever) of an artist, and actively warning other people about them. On a lower end you're "just" deciding to not buy any more of their stuff.

Also, remember that you can read a story for different types of enjoyment, and the knowledge of a specific creator might impact different pieces of their oeuvre in different ways. Even more so if they are an arist that constantly reinvent themselves or their stances.

[Celgress]

Case by Case

Some things are so egregious that it damages how I look at anything they've done (Bill Cosby), other things like a simple difference in politics which I can overlook completely, still other things while not criminal are so blatant or bat **** crazy that while I may enjoy their work I really cringe when I hear anything about their views.

Billy Cosby is another tough one for me. I loved to rewatch the Cosby Show until, well, you know. I haven't been able to enjoy the series since (believe me I've tried more than once) which is a shame considering the other excellent talent involved (both in front of and behind the camera).

[godisawesome]

As others have said, it’s a case by case basis.

I will say that the older a work of art is, the more willing I am to place some “Values Dissonance” on it, even if the writer is still working now. Dixon, for instance, is someone’s who’s work in the 90’s I still love, even if I tend to look a bit side-eye at his current production.

[Gray Lensman]

Case by case. There are lots of things celebs do that you're likely to object to, but the art is separate. Sort of.

It's more likely to affect future endeavours than past ones. For instance, I still enjoy The Cosby Show, but I definitely wouldn't enjoy anything the man does in the future. I wasn't a big fan of Frank Miller before, but I just might spit on the next comic I see from the man.

But I've thrown out any Orson Scott Card books I ever had. Ptooey. Don't miss 'em. Sort of want to purge my brain of them.

It's also different when you realize the guy is going to use any money he gets from his stuff to support causes you can't stand as opposed to learning something bad (even terrible) about someone who is dead.

[Panfoot]

Case by case basis, though I find it a lot easier for bigger projects like video games, movies, and tv shows. James Woods may be a grade A POS now but I'm not going to get rid of my criterion copy of Videodrome because I'm not gonna let him taint the work of everyone else who contributed to that movie. It gets a lot harder for authors and musicians since their work tends to be more singular. The only examples I can think of personally was that despite it getting good reviews, I wrote off the video game Shadow Complex because it was written by Orson Scott Card and I just didn't want to give that guy any amount of money no matter how minuscule. Dunno if I would be able to re-read the Harry Potter books now though after all the Rowling stuff, would be hard to not try and read into the story even if there is nothing there.