Yeah. That’s the question I’m going to attempt to tackle today. Or at least prod around a bit with. I don’t know, it’s a big question that I hardly think I could offer all the perspectives and even less the answers to. But it’s a topic I have thought about for a while now but balked on more than one occasion due to the gravitas and moral complexity to it that I have finally decided that I wanted to give it bash and at least offer some thoughts on it.
The context of this question how we as a society but also as individuals should pose and relate to artist and their art when the artists have or are doing something objectionable. Examples from recent months of this could be the allegations against and ongoing legal preceding around R. Kelly, the controversies around Michael Jackson that has flared-up again in the wake of the recently release documentary “Leaving Neverland” or the hullabaloo around Morissey for publicly supporting the right-wing nationalist party “For Britain”.
When an artist perform an act that is either or both an offense in the sense of the law or in the sense of morals or ethical standards it naturally compromise the character of said artist. And by compromising the artist it naturally also spills over to the work of the artist. But to what degree? Or even does it always? And what does it mean for you whom are a consumer of the work’s of said artist?
…yeah, that’s a though cookie. So harking back to my initial question and tee off of this blog entry; where do we separate the art from the artist?