Thoughts & Things

Separating the Art from the Artist

Whenever an artist of any kind is known to be doing or having done something less than savoury, there are calls from the artist's fans to separate the art from the artist. Whether it be filmmakers, authors, musicians, visual artists, or so on, many people think we should focus on the art created rather than on whatever it is the artist has done wrong. I must admit, I can agree with this, but only in part. I don't think that separating the art from the artist can necessarily be a blanket thing that we can apply to every situation.

I don't think that the bad cancels out the good, or that the good cancels out the bad. I think to claim it does benefits no one. We have to take the good with the bad, and vice versa. It would be easy to ignore one or the other, but that simply isn't looking at the big picture. There are many situations where I think that many people would prefer to ignore one or the other, and I don't think that's right.

A person who does something questionable, or even undeniably awful, doesn't automatically have their beautiful art negated by that. Roman Polanski, for example, still makes wonderful films despite his undeniably awful background. I wouldn't propose we pretend those films are anything but good. However, some people believe that Polanski should be able to return to America without impunity despite his crimes simply because he has made good movies over the years, and I think that's foul. Beautiful art should never be a reason to allow a person to escape justice.

That said, sometimes it can be difficult to look at a person's past and still enjoy their art if their art ties too closely to their questionable behaviour. It is hard to accept Woody Allen's art, for example, knowing about his penchant for too young women when many of his films focus on a relationship between older men and younger women. Even in looking at the music industry instead, it can be hard to stomach R. Kelly's music as he sings about sex, but we know he has been involved with underage girls.

In other instances, however, the art doesn't necessarily reflect the kind of person the artist is. Going back a little further, Charlie Chaplin was involved with many teenage girls throughout his career, which is awful. Even knowing that though, it isn't something one would typically think about when watching any one of his films.

I think that when it comes to separating the art from the artist, it can depend specifically upon whether or not the art is reflective of the bad behaviour or crimes of the person who made it. I also truly believe that that art should never be a reason for the artist to escape justice if their wrongdoings are criminal.

(I have committed to blogging daily with Give It 100. This is Day Eighty-One. Eight days of leave taken total.)