How do you separate the artist from the work?

[babyblob]

So with all the talk the last few months about the actors, directors, and writers we have enjoyed being jerks, trans phobic and saying controversial things on twitter.

My question is how are you able to separate the artists from the work? Are you able to and still enjoy things? Or are you not able to and it ruined things for you?

For me I could care less about the artist. Half the time I dont know who they are. Like in the case of The Mado I had no idea who Carano was even though I enjoy the show and knew who the character was.

In the case of Jk I love Harry Potter. I really enjoy the books, and love the movies. So I am not going to stop watching/reading. And when I do enjoy Potter I dont give Jk two thoughts because I am focused on the characters.

It is like that with movies and shows as well. I focus on the character that I am watching and not who plays them. Heck I still watch Bill Cosby stand up because it makes me laugh my butt off.

How about you. What are your alls views on how you handle artist/art situations?

[AndrewCrossett]

I'm not fully able to separate an artist from his/her work. I can still enjoy the work, but not as much as before. It's always tainted.

[regnak]

Don’t get so wrapped up in the creators in the first place. Of my favorite shows the only one I can tell you who is behind it is Get Smart. And I haven’t collected Mel Brooks other stuff because of that. I don’t know if Buck Henry did anything else and I don’t care.

[inisideguy]

So with all the talk the last few months about the actors, directors, and writers we have enjoyed being jerks, trans phobic and saying controversial things on twitter.

My question is how are you able to separate the artists from the work? Are you able to and still enjoy things? Or are you not able to and it ruined things for you?

For me I could care less about the artist. Half the time I dont know who they are. Like in the case of The Mado I had no idea who Carano was even though I enjoy the show and knew who the character was.


In the case of Jk I love Harry Potter. I really enjoy the books, and love the movies. So I am not going to stop watching/reading. And when I do enjoy Potter I dont give Jk two thoughts because I am focused on the characters.

It is like that with movies and shows as well. I focus on the character that I am watching and not who plays them. Heck I still watch Bill Cosby stand up because it makes me laugh my butt off.

How about you. What are your alls views on how you handle artist/art situations?

I think you can appreciate the work but not the person. History is filled with bad people doing amazing things. In many cases you can look at a piece of art or hear music and not know anything about the person and like it. That person could have been the worst person in the world, you don't know, not unless you actually sat down and did research on it afterwards.

[Kirby101]

Don’t get so wrapped up in the creators in the first place. Of my favorite shows the only one I can tell you who is behind it is Get Smart. And I haven’t collected Mel Brooks other stuff because of that. I don’t know if Buck Henry did anything else and I don’t care.

You haven't seen Brooks other stuff? Like some of the funniest movies ever made? And Buck Henry? The Graduate and Catch 22 among other great stuff.

[Bunch of Coconuts]

If I enjoy a thing, and someone says “so and so made it”, I say “oh neat”.

If I dive deeper into a particular situation and realize that “so and so” was a douche (in any number of ways), I like to go back on their works and look for the subtle clues that might have indicated the true nature of the creator. Sometimes my enjoyment is sullied a bit, but not usually.

[Vakanai]

My question is how are you able to separate the artists from the work?

Simple - why shouldn't I? Why should I care? I'm not condoning anything, I'm barely supporting them and I'm also supporting all the other normal people who made the work, so...why should I give a ****? I just want to be entertained. Other peoples' irl morality has no baring on mine.

[Powerboy]

I just saw a youtube of Dick Cavett interviewing Bill Cosby back in the '70s and Cosby was very insightful. I agreed with everything he said. I could almost forget the other stuff Cosby was doing that we didn't know about then.

As AndrewCrossett just said, I cannot completely separate the artist from the work. I can still enjoy the work, even love it, but just a little less than before because you cannot unknow what you know.

When it's relatively trivial stuff, it's easier. The worse it is, the harder to ignore.

Going with what Vakanai said, when it's movies or television shows, it's the work of many people so dislike for one is balanced by the creative efforts of many others.

[EmeraldGladiator]

Love the work for the work, the artist isn't a character in the work, George Martin isn't in House Stark (meaning his personal life has no impact on my love of GoT). Freddie Mercury's personal life in no way influenced my love of Queen's music. My 2nd most favorite run on my favorite DC franchise is Gerard Jones' run on Green Lantern back when I was loving the books when they came out, I never wondered what kind of guy is Gerard Jones? So to find out later that he has made some very questionable life choices in his personal life, it doesn't change my love for his work on Green Lantern, it just means I will probably never see his Green Lantern or Mosaic collected by DC which sucks. My favorite in ring pro wrestler is Chris Benoit but it is hard to have conversations about his in ring artistry because of the horrific way his life ended. I loved Buffy the Vampire Slayer, great show on all the DVD's, I only thought of Joss in terms of the sheer gratitude of him casting some of my all time favorite female tv actresses, Charisma Carpenter and Bianca Lawson. As a director was he a lecherous like Hitchcock or just a control freak prick? I have no idea but it rarely enters into my enjoyment of Buffy. I have an extensive music collection I spend zero time thinking about their person lives really it is all about the music.

[The Gold Stream]

i dont usually pay attention to the credits

[WebLurker]

I think it's all case by case, esp. depending on what the person did that's "not okay" and if they're still going to profit off my continued investment. I also find it easier to feel okay with remaining engaged if it was one person among a larger team vs. something where it's pretty much one creator doing everything.

[AndrewCrossett]

As AndrewCrossett just said, I cannot completely separate the artist from the work. I can still enjoy the work, even love it, but just a little less than before because you cannot unknow what you know.

When it's relatively trivial stuff, it's easier. The worse it is, the harder to ignore.

And it's worse with something like Buffy, because the character was so personal to him and was his mouthpiece. He once said Buffy was his "avatar." So it's hard to look back on that character and know that she was being given life by someone who was pulling crap like this behind the scenes. Like, was it all just expert deception? I know many other writers, and SMG helped to shape the character... but he was the one that gave birth to her and guided all the significant twists and turns in her story.

[Will Evans]

Don’t get so wrapped up in the creators in the first place. Of my favorite shows the only one I can tell you who is behind it is Get Smart. And I haven’t collected Mel Brooks other stuff because of that. I don’t know if Buck Henry did anything else and I don’t care.

Wait...what happened?

[Kieran_Frost]

My question is how are you able to separate the artists from the work? Are you able to and still enjoy things? Or are you not able to and it ruined things for you?

For me I find almost no correlation between artist and art. Good art stands on it's own feet, with no need for any backstory, history or 'grounding'. Good art is good art; and can be enjoyed again and again and again, regardless of the man or woman (or they) who created it. And truthfully MOST artists from pre-1950 (by modern standards) were all homophobic, misogynistic, racists, transphobic bigots... by MODERN standards (I personally like viewing people's opinions through the lens of the time period, but that's another discussion for another). And any artists from pre-1800 we don't REALLY ever know the truth; so giving them a 'pass' seems unfair/disproportionate in terms of reassessing history of who we can (and cannot admire).

If an artist is doing things or say things you don't agree with, block them, don't seek out their work unless you have a specific reason. If you love the work, keep enjoying the work, doesn't mean there is an correlation between art and artist. A racist can still write an incredibly compelling and lovable black character, a homophobe can still create a beautiful gay love story. What someone writes, or paints, or performs isn't necessarily connected to their views on a subject matter. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

[Kirby101]

I just saw a youtube of Dick Cavett interviewing Bill Cosby back in the '70s and Cosby was very insightful. I agreed with everything he said. I could almost forget the other stuff Cosby was doing that we didn't know about then.
.

Cosby is an interesting case. I will say on the outset, his being a loathsome rapist is irredeemable. But in other aspects of his life he did much good. He was active in Civil Rights and Education. He earned a true PhD, not an honorary one. He gave millions to black universities. And he was one of the funniest comedians I ever heard. None of that makes up for what he did. Just shows that there truly can be two sides to a person's life. Can I listen to him or watch him now. Well, no, I can't.