Can You Separate Art From The Artist?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 ноя 2017
- Can You Separate Art From The Artist? Should you boycott films, books, or art from problematic creators? Should you stop watching films from Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Roman Polanski, or Johnny Depp? Let's discuss...
tw: brief mention of domestic abuse, rape, racism, murder
__HELP ME MAKE VIDEOS__
/ rowanellis
_SOCIAL MEDIA_
Website/Blog: www.rowanellis.com
Tumblr: / www
Twitter: @heyrowanellis
Instagram: rowans_room
__HIRE ME__
www.rowanellis.com/book-me/
I deliver engaging and inspiring workshops and talks at events, businesses, and universities across the world (see below for more details).
If you would like to speak about the possibility of me running a workshop or speaking at an event please get in touch via email: rowanellisyoutube@outlook.com.
__WORKSHOPS__
I facilitate tailor made workshops, designed to give participants a variety of discussion opportunities, interactive elements, and a final longer task individually or as part of a group.
The goal of my workshops is that participants come out of the them with actionable points to be put into practice afterwards, rather than feeling as if they had simply talked through the same old topics on that subject.
__TALKS & PANELS__
Talks, presentations, panels and Q&As allow for an in depth look at a topic or issue. I can deliver solo talks on a specific topic and/or moderate or sit on group panels. I have previously spoken on topics including:
- Building Inclusive Communities
- Using RUclips for social good and charitable efforts
- LGBTQ+ Representation on TV/Film
- LGBTQ+ History
- Pop culture and Feminism
- Writing Strong Female Characters
- Women on RUclips
- How to use RUclips/social media as a tool in your career.
- & many more.
Help us caption & translate this video!
amara.org/v/cUX2/ 
Развлечения
I turn off all of Chris Brown's music when it comes on my spotify or radio etc. I refuse to support people that are doing things that I consider morally bankrupt. Sometimes it sucks. Sometimes it means you have to cut out art you really love because you feel unable to support the artist morally. In cases where it involves hundreds of people, it gets very blurry, like the House of Cards/Spacey thing. Hundreds of people have lost their jobs there. In Kesha's case I support her in *spite* of her producer, but I understand that supporting her means supporting him, but I don't think abandoning her is the answer. I think you're right - the answer is supporting change long-term.
shouldn't you not have spotify in the first place because of them giving the artists no money at all for their music? and taking that thought further isn't all of that an interwined chain... can you do everything right or where to prioritize exactly?
I did the exact same thing with Chris Brown, except it's so hard because people keep supporting his music and playing it. I'm appalled tbh. Also, a Chris Brown documentary trailer played right before Wonder Woman in theaters. What kind of message is that supposed to send? The main demographic for Wonder Woman I'm assuming was women. I was so angry that a man known for his domestic abuse against his girlfriend was getting his trailer to play before a movie known to empower women.
"no money at all" that is just not true.
How about we get annoyed at his Step Father for abusing him and his mother, or his mother for subjecting herself and her son to that abuse. How many of you know that he wet the bed very late into this youth. I can only imagine what sexual abuse he suffered from since there is a correlation btwn it and bed wetting.
People are not born abusive it's a cycle and it's society who allows these cycles to continue.
Why are people still hating on Chris Brown? He did his time for what he did, it was an isolated incident, and I am pretty sure the dude has been dragged for long enough. Its not like its a R. Kelly situation. Yall are just looking to hate on people for nothing.
You've got the nicest blue hair dye job I've ever seen :)
I love this!! I think another factor for me is how much the Bad Thing could affect the art - i.e. If a male novelist who abused women writes a book with female characters, his attitude towards women very likely appears in the book, whereas if he's a producer on like a nature documentary the fact of the abuse might not feel as present. With that, I'll often do like a soft-boycott, especially if it's something I used to love. Like I'm not going to condemn Buffy as a show bc I adore it and it has been super important to me BUT I'm also not going to rewatch it for a good long time bc if I did I know I would go looking for the ways Joss Whedon's whole scandal affected the show - it's that sense of wanting to hold on to the experience you had of something before you found out about the artist
I’m like that with Age of Ultron. I very much LOVE the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but I’m not going to rewatch AoU for a long tine because of some of the questionable decisions Whedon made in thst movie
What did Joss Whedon do
@@sakurarevue123
Well, there goes my favourite show :(
That's the thing I tend to think....while art itself is worthwhile, I think there is so much art out there that isn't seen because of the way our access and influence is set up that I can skip the things that are tied with problematic people and go directly support those I agree with/want to promote. It's part of the reason I'm active on Patreon as a patron to those artists I truly like.
emotionally, i can't separate the two. the beatles were my favorite band since i was a kid, i had a bunch of merch, a blog dedicated to them and most of their albums on record. since learning about john lennon's abusive behavior, i stopped listening to the songs that sounded too misogynistic but, as time went by, no love song by the beatles made sense to me anymore. i dont think it would unethical of me to listen to them, but now that i know the context of abuse behind these supposedly beautiful balads, they just sound cynical to me
But what about 3 other people who worked on those albums what about the producer
same with me. i used to be a fan of panic at the disco but after all the accusations with brendon came out, i feel uncomfortable listening to it, despite the fact i still really like it.
@@chloe-qs7ue They’re accusations. The defendant is innocent until proven guilty
@@ozziecomedian1786 Only legally. We are not getting the law involved, we are just choosing not to listen to music.
@@ozziecomedian1786 In that case, personal judgement and critical thought should be used. After all, OJ was "innocent" too.
I just realized something, what about the people involved in the product (movie, book, whatever)? It's not their fault what one person has done, but they are still disregarded for something this one person has done. It's a tricky situation for everyone involved. The culprit definitely deserves to be punished but in what way, so others won't be held accountable as well?
I love this topic.
I have very mixed views. On the one hand, I don't support/buy/listen to Chris Browns music, as he directly profits largely from that. However, I would be more inclined to buy and watch Baby Driver, even though Spacey is in it. The reason is the amount of people who worked on that film and whose livelihood that was, it about the size of a small town. So many people. More than a song. One feels more wrong than the other.
Also weird area, Kevin Spacey is such a driving force of House of Cards, but I no longer want to watch it or look at him in such an amount. I find the separation of art/artist hard here. Bizarre. I need to read more on this.
Or it's because he's black and we are all brought up with subconscious beliefs that black is innately bad and white is right. Proven by the doll test experiment.
By your excuse it would be okay to listen to his music because the writers, producers, record label workers, and subsequent tour crew would benefit from it.
Ansel Elgort is also in Baby Driver and he had a big scandal. At this point just buy the disc from resellers 😂
You're a good one.
I love how you address this question from various perspectives and angles
Fantastic video! Really well thought out and balanced, and you've articulated a lot of things I've been thinking about for a while. Thank you!
THANK U SOOO MUCH i picked this topic for my argumentative essay and I was conflicted on how to write my paper this made it soooo mcuh clear for me to write!
I think the question shouldn't be 'Can we saperate art and author?', but 'Should we?'
I think the issue seems way more like a moral one than a theoretical one if you ask like that
Or a psychological one. Why read or watch material that upsets us, because we just found out its creator hurt people?
My instinctive answer is no because of how interconnected everything feels in life. It feels personal because humans are so centered on emotions in response. It's such a nuanced question! If I sing a song beautifully in a church, but the beliefs of the song are against my own and very problematic, should I even sing the music? It is worth critically thinking from the opposite side in order to better understand it? Are there better ways? You've got me thinkin, Rowan.
I find myself thinking about what changes I seek to make and support, and the degrees of nuance in the factors of why I choose to support things. Many people can create one piece of art. It feels often like I am never the sole author of my victories. Maybe when one person involved in the creation of the thing messes up, we see that one thing as forever tainted. One rotten apple can ruin the entire image of the entire tree. Things look good from afar. It's only when we dig and look deeper that we really discover just how many problematic things occur right under our noses.
Your focus on context reminded me too on how over time the terrible things people have done can become more forgiven. It's easy for terrible acts to become what seems like a permanent label for the person that did it. We immediately see the part as the whole. People can change values, attitudes, and commitment to integrity. But how often does that really happen? How can we better regulate the structures we've created to lessen these awful power dynamics, and support those that serve and model the industry well?
+
It's a tricky issue, some of the greatest works of art, whether it be paintings, statues, books, music, movies, etc., have been produced by people who have committed despicable acts or are just bad people in general. I try to separate great art from the horrible people who made them as much as I can, but sometimes it can be pretty difficult. The same thing can apply to other businesses like Chick-fil-a where they make a pretty decent chicken sandwich but have donated to anti-gay organizations (though I believe they've stopped doing that now). Knowing that the money I spent on this great album or movie might support the wicked vices of the people who created them makes it hard for me to continue supporting their craft, no matter how good they are at what they do.
Yes and no. I would say for me it depends on what the artist did as well. There are some problematic people whose media I still consume but they haven’t actually hurt anyone. On the flip side, there are some old school RUclipsrs I used to LOVE and I just can’t consume anything they created anymore because they sexually assaulted multiple people. It’s a hard question, honestly. Actually sitting back and trying to think about what the right answer is seems difficult because I don’t know if there is a right answer.
I felt into depression after this video because I don't have answers to those questions.
I fully agree, that art and the artist are linked. But rather, than isolating ourself from the art because its author is problematic.. how about rather using the art we like to try to understand someone, who we might disagree with. That's one of the functions of art, to open mind. By purposefuly rejecting the art, we might otherwise like, we are creating a bubble around us, close our mind and possibly even become bigoted ourselves. Art is not a product of some company with problematic practises made for gain for us to boycott.
Very well put. *claps*
All expression, is in a way "art" as long as there's meaning to be given or found. From a unique brush-stroke to a well-presented joke, or someone mentioning a pebble they saw on twitter.
To censor any of it is sad in my opinion.
Bigotry is not caused by boycotting problematic artists. It's what makes them problematic. What you are worried about is tyrannical governments book-burning, jailing and killing innocent artists, for anti-government or ethnic content or identities.
@@darlalathan6143 Darla, every time someone lets their bigotry stop them from enjoying a product just because the person who made it has different beliefs, they're growing their own bigotry.
@@wilddog73 "Bigotry" means hating and harming people of different religions, countries, skin tones, sexes, etc. You are confusing it with "fanaticism" or "fundamentalism," which mean people getting so religious or political, that they commit terrorist acts and human rights violations or abuse their families. Not reading bigoted people's books, movies, music, etc., because you are one of the people they hate, does not make you hate the artist's people. I don't read or watch "Harry Potter" anymore, because J.K. Rowling is a TERF, but I don't hate cis/het Englishwomen. Bill Cosby's date rapes may turn me off "I Spy," "Fat Albert" and "The Cosby Show," but I still like other Black people. I boycotted grapes and South Africa in college, but never blew up anything or beheaded anyone in a RUclips video!
@@wilddog73 What's so sad about a world without ethnic slurs and stereotypes in media, made only by harmless artists?
The perception that you talk about is SO REAL because I love Buffy the Vampire Slayer and when I watched it I didn’t know anything about Joss Whedon and his many flaws including his adultery and misogyny under the guise of feminism, but after I learned about that it was like the whole show was ruined for me. I have the dvd set and I was watching it the second time when I kept noticing these horrible tiny details that just made sense knowing Joss Whedon’s history and ideals, and just seeing the way he perceived women show through dialogue and action was so jarring that it made the experience of watching it kind of nauseating. It really makes me sad to be honest because Buffy was a huge part of my life and I still love it, but watching it just makes me notice how very flawed it is at times. That being said I still think Joss Whedon did a good job overall in the creation of the show and its storyline, so does his outside actions and ideals devalidate that achievement??? It’s a really difficult question that I grapple a lot with
Really interesting stuff - and an interesting comments! I appreciate the nuance that you highlight and that I believe we need to embrace... especially regarding opinions that were once common place now seen as horrendous in society - that we don't just throw stones at them but accept some of our current beliefs will be up for the same shredding in the future - and therefore encourages 'today' a gentler and more nuanced approach... I love black and white but I believe so many of these kind of things sit so weirdly in shifting grey sands it requires more of a brain-engagement and thoughtfullness than we'd normally feel like giving our energy too...
I think the message of the art can be important too. Is the art promoting the problematic values? Is it promoting my values? Would the world be a better place with or without this art?
It could be argued that the world would always be worse of with a piece of art missing.
Because if a piece of art is missing so are the values it represents, and with that arguments that could be had about those values.
H.P Lovecraft is a perfect example of an artist who's work you support is no longer contributing to modern day oppression. It's easy to read between the lines of "A Shadow over Insmouth" and see the racist connotations that were common in his day. But given how most of his works are public domain and that he's been dead for quite a long time now? His art can be appreciated without needing to worry about contributing to cultural stigma.
I think the big question is; "Who is directly effected by this work?". If I bought a T-shirt by Kid Rock supporting Trump, which goes to the Trump campaign, that is both financially and culturally normalizing bigotry. However, despite Dave Mustain (lead singer and guitarist of Megadeth) being very anti-Obama, it seems to mostly be blowing hot air.
It's never a simple decision to make and there are always grey areas. But I do think that we can and should boycott any art that directly contributes to institutionalized cultural oppression.
As a person of color, HP Lovecraft was the very reason why i searches for a video such as this.
Disliking Lovecraft is your personal right. However, publicly deriding him on youtube videos (to gain views, likes and subscribes) while using his ideas to make a living by writing stories is another level of hypocrisy. Making money by deriding a dead person is something inhumane. And this thing has been done by a lot of degenerate self-righteous Western armchair experts on youtube.
This is the reason why I adore Junji Ito. He doesn't speak about stigma or norms. He only talk about arts. When media interviewed Junji Ito, they asked him about arts, not about what he thinks of Lovecraft as a person.
@@JexMugen That's valid! I'm white, so I'm not going to tell you what to do. You have every right to avoid his work due to the subtext.
@@TheNightmareRider political opinion doesn’t necessarily make some one a bad person.
@@roberthasudungan1546 Lovecraft wasn't a racist, he was a misanthrope that despised everything human.
Yay I missed your videos. Great topic. You have given me something to ponder.
I feel like it depends on how bad it is. If I just disagree with them on one thing that isn't a huge moral issue on me then yes, however I've cut off series I adored because the artist did something I feel goes against my morals I can't.
really interesting! thanks for the point of view!
Thankyou for putting out this video. It's a very real thing I've had to face among friends recently.
I personally separate the art from the artist. Why? There's so much art in the world that's been produced by people that have done morally wrong things in their life. Most recently Kanye's antics come to mind. I didn't stop listening to his music because of it. If I were, I feel like I'd have to stop listening so much other music that comes from people who have done things considered morally wrong. I would have to stop listening to John Lennon, and therefore the Beatles. I would stop listening to Tupac Shakur. I would stop listening to Michael Jackson. At the end of the day, we all pick and choose to be honest.
What did Micheal do wrong that was confirmed to be morally corrupt? Just curious
You're still supporting them tho. Streaming and buying their products means you're directly helping and supporting them. You can listen to music in a way that doesn't benefit them like downloading their music offline etc.
I agree. At the end of the day, it's just not worth stressing yourself out over something you're supposed to enjoy. Besides, I feel like as long as it's something they made in the past, I'm not doing any real harm.
@@VoltageMarvel he was a pedophile
@Vero Martinez literally no proof to it. Sorry my man 🤷🏾♂️
I've briefly thought about this question before, but having a video where you spell it out more is great. I think the context is the most important question to me- and I'm very interested in this idea that we can possibly still consume media without allowing the artist to make a profit. I've been struggling with this in the Wonder Woman film because of the lead. I also didn't realize that Kesha's attacker is still profiting from her music. Holy cow. Anyway, thanks for this- very glad I subscribed (:
This monday, I took House of Cards off my "to watch" list.
Then I rewatched Star Trek Discovery and listened to Rent a few times.
What a trooper eh, you should join the Green Beret's and become a sniper working behind enemy lines
Still love some old Kevin Spacey movies though. Happy he isn't cast anymore, but don't want to throw those movies out.
I definitely think taking into account the larger social structures that play into the idea of separating the art from the artist is super important, and I'm glad you made that the point of the video. Oftentimes that's not discussed in those types of videos, and it frustrates me, because it's always the elephant in the room. In terms of boycotts, I've gotten pretty strong-I didn't see The Ghost in the Shell remake because of the whitewashing, and I definitely didn't go see Stonewall. What makes me hopeful is that with both of those films, the backlash was so strong it affected the films' success. I'm hoping as we all get more vocal and more aware, there will be more consequences for people's actions when it comes to art. And for your point about Kesha-I'm definitely going to buy her new album since it's all about her escaping the horrific abuse she endured, and I want to support her financially as much as I can.
Another problem that plays into this is people being given more solo credit than is really accurate.
A good example is Joss Whedon being given full credit for Buffy the Vampire Slayer when in reality the stuff that made the show what it was was the work of a full team of writers and a slew of different directors (as well as the composers, editors, actors, etc).
It's not really fair or appropriate to call it exclusively His work in the first place.
Some of it is obviously because he created the character and ran the show (though the original movie was awful) but a lot of it is because he was the White Guy In Charge.
I think this happens a lot where credit for something get's unduly shoved onto the (usually) white male figurehead.
Like Nicole Perlman getting second billing as writer of Guardians of the Galaxy after James Gunn despite her having basically written the entire thing himself and Gunn just making some minor changes.
But those people were paid for their work.. He created the franchise therefore he deserves the main credit for it as its his intellectual property and was created under his production company
There are so many great artist out there to support and love. I don't find myself 'missing out'by boycotting a particular artists work. I do agree to take it a step further and seek out perhaps lesser known artists so that their work can shine and true change that is good for everyone can come to light.
I thought that I knew my answer... I don’t.
Wonderfully thought provoking as usual. Great Art Transcends the person/s who made it. For Masterpieces it's that simple. For everything else, it depends on how much a person's Art, Craft, Trade or Profession is informed by their ideology or personality.
Very good video. Its lunge tog pulled all the thoughts out of my head and organized them
Got to watch this on my break from writing an essay on Ender's Game for class. Just.....*sigh*
PsychoBabble2168 I was going to read all Orson Scott Card books, but then I read all he thinks about LGBTQ+ people and I couldn't, as a lesbian I feel I'd be supporting him and boycotting me.
Same happened to me with Brandon Sanderson with his "it's ok to be gay, but you should try to ignore and control your impulses, I like women but I wouldn't cheat on my wife" I loved his books and I stopped reading them in the middle of two of his series that I really like, but I can't support someone who is basically saying that I shouldn't be me.
Cam M. Giusti Damnit I hadn't heard about that with Brandon Sanderson! Noooooo not him too! I'm so disappointed
Ardin Rye yup I got really disappointed I really liked his books. Spent a lot of time trying to decide if I can separate author form art. Since then I'm just trying to not read much information of any author until I finish their books, not a good strategy, but I'm already scared of what I'll find out
Yeah, I can't say I wasn't immediately pulled out of it when the """buggers""" are the enemy. Like, really??? Are you kidding me? I may've been able to separate an author's hate from the text if the author's hate wasn't ALREADY IN THE TEXT, albeit in innuendo.
Also, high five; I'm a gay trans guy.
Once again, someone makes a video similar to one I've made but articulates things much more clearly. I basically think that whether or not you choose to consume a piece of art that involves a problematic person or problematic elements needs to be taken on a case by case basis. While any call to action in others should be made only after careful consideration of all the evidence, whether or not you choose to consume something is a personal choice.
This is a really interesting video, thank you :)
After passing on it all those years, I decided to give Harry Potter a try when they played the movies in sequence on weekends a couple years ago. But her politics and other weird behaviour on Twitter kind of turned me off from it again. That's a case where I just couldn't separate the artist, sadly.
In terms of perception I think it also depends wheter the artist is an author (like a writer or a painter) or it's someone who executes an author's idea (like a dancer or an actor). Also, i think when art is mediocre you can definetly link it to its author but when we're taking about ART, i feel it detatches itself from the author and becomes something much bigger than that.
calculate how much the artist gains from you watching/listening to/buying their stuff, then donate that money, with a multiplier to a charity that works against what the artist did. The multiplier is based on how bad it was. Easy.
Just need an excel spreadsheet and we done!
But seriously, yes, I always cringe when an R Kelly song comes up on my winamp playlist :-/ and I don't have a good, general, answer either.
What about an artist who was sentenced for a crime they committed, completed their sentence, has believably denounced their former self and now is "clean"? Is their old work okay to watch? Their new? Both?
Interesting video! You're a very eloquent speaker
Great way to start a complex and morally grey conversation.I judge it off profit and whether a person is alive to see the reaction to unacceptable behaviour.I can't complain to Victor Hugo about how horrifying , racist and stereotypical the twist that a Romani character was a white person stolen as a baby is or affect him by not buying his books but I can chose to not contribute to a rapist's retiring fund by pirating a film they directed if I actually want to watch the film at all.
This was a great video that is a topic thats been on my mind of late. I think its something important that not many talk about but my feelings are that I hate having to say I like a fictional property yet clarifying I don’t approve of X creator or actors actions irl. Because I feel like Ive been saying this for many years. Creators, actors, writers, and more should be held to a high standard of morality.
Btw at one part of the video you say how a work gets “tainted” by the problematic creators / person involved. Can you analyze or tackle the same effect but done by fandoms and problematic fans? I love stories and I love fandoms, theres been problematic fans always in fandoms, though most of the time I dont let that bother me. But then sometimes theres people that are mean or rude who like certain properties I like or hold it to a pedestal too high and it in ways “ruins” or makes me not enjoy said properties anymore. Its not something talked about beyond “fandoms are bad”.
Can you do a video on how you can determine if someone's character in a book is misogynistic or something bc the character is, or becuase the author is? I remember reading Nineteen Eighty Four a few years back, and even after researching Orwell a bit, it's still hard for me to determine if the characters misogyny is a result of the character or the author
Ignited Canvas Just out of curiosity, who did you think was misogynistic? I haven't read it in a while so this intrigues me
I assume Winston Smith
Shameless self-promo, I know, but I just recently filmed a video about the nasty side of George Orwell aka his homophobia, racism and sexism. You might be interested in that.^^
books by leynes I just watched it, it was wonderful. I'm pondering, though, how much of his attitude was formed by the culture of his time and was socially acceptable and rewarded back then but cringeworthy and repulsive to us now. I'm not saying this excuses his statements and the fact that he's a very complicated author to enjoy, but I still think the distinction between a person's attitudes and the time they lived in is an interesting topic of conversation. Thanks again for the video, it was awesome! 😊
Do you have a link to this video? I always lose interest in a thing when I find out the creator is problematic, case in point: Charles Bukowski.
In most cases I try to avoid people who have done awful things. But the case about Kevin Spacey threw me off.. I love House of Cards, and i am unsure how to feel about his actions. Should he be punished for something he did 30 years ago? Should we start to investigate if he had done anything like that since? Should we boycott House of Cards? I honestly don't know how to feel about this.
N.A
something else to consider is the flood of production assistants on House of Cards coming forward about being sexually harassed and in some cases assaulted by Spacey while the show was in production
N.A It was not just a one-time thing. Crew members from the show said he was a predator on set and made things tense.
Yeah, he's had another dozen or so come out since that first one.
N.A IMO, boycott is problematic, since you would also hurt the revenue of the intire cast/crew. Also, some of them (potentially) being victims themselves. I would prefer legal action, or something aimed specifically/only at Spacey.
I’ve been feeling really strongly about this. My favourite franchise of all times is Harry Potter & I’m - with that base - very excited about the upcoming fantastic beast films but the casting of Johnny depp (who is accused and proven to have assaulted his then wife) really upset me. Not only does Depp play my favourite character but he also (in my opinion) shouldn’t be casted in major movies anymore due to his assault accusations. But I’m absolutely torn between me loving everything to ever come out of the magical world of Potter & me not wanting to support Depp’s career further. Does anyone have a good solution for me?
Sophie Marx Same dilemma here. And there are also people in the film I really want to support (Eddie Redmayne for example.)
If it helps, my understanding is he was cast before any of that came out.
Sophie Marx You could try to weigh the impact of your action (seeing/not seeing the movie), considering all the people involved. Personally, since a movie is a big project, and Depp isn't the main focus, I lean heavily towards watching it.
Also, you could try to off-set your action of support (in case you decide to support movies) by a specific action aimed at Depp's wrongdoing - like donating to a relevant charity, or advocating against Depp's or similar actions.
I have the same problem with Johnny Depp but more with Pirates of the Caribbean. It used to be my fave movie series, but I struggle with deciding to watch the new movie bc I just don't want to support *him*
Oddly enough, it doesn't bother me to watch the older movies that I already have because boycotting them won't do anything, but I would feel shitty to buy the newer ones (or anything he's in, really). So the movies themself haven't really been tainted for me... And there are other people working on the film who'd also be hurt if everybody was boycotting, but yet I can't bring myself to support it. Aaaaaah!
If you find a solution, tell me, because I need one too :D
How about warching the movie you’re excited for and also vocalizing your opinions on the problematic casting?
It’s not the same issue, but this is the approach I take with buying shoes/makeup because I try and always buy them vegan. But when a product is ethically problematic, I might still ultimately decide to buy it. I’ll pair that action with email/call to the company telling them why it’s important to me that they move away from abusing animals to make their products.
**sigh** These sorts of topics I find very depressing and far more... complicated than I would like them to be. I don't believe there is any real ethical consumption of media, or anything really. Unless you make everything needed for that thing with your own two hands, someone, somewhere is being hurt and exploited. The computers we use are manufactured in places where child labor and slave wages occur with however many other human rights violations, and this is true to most consumable goods. It happens in the tech world, agriculture, textile, everywhere. So even if everyone involved with a movie or tv show with 1,000% squeaky clean and totally ethical... who made that camera they're using? Ya know? But even still, with certain unethical practices, not with individuals, but with whole studios make you question if you can support anything produced by that studio. Which with how mega-corporations are in America, it's damn near impossible to get away from them. The Hobbit movies for example. Warner Bros went into New Zeland and basically destroyed the film industry there with negotiations to dismantle the filmmakers, actors, and screenwriters unions making all of those people contractors under New Zeland law to take away their collective bargaining power, Warner Bros actively made that happen. Now... not only can you not watch the Hobbit movies, you can't watch anything from Warner Bros. No Looney Toons, no DC, no Hana Barbar. Now it goes deeper than that. They own HBO, so no Game of Thrones. And CNN, so you can't watch that news channel or read their news stories. They also own Cartoon Network, TBS, TNT and other channels. But they also now own a 10% stake in Hulu, they own Crunchyroll, and AT&T. I just listed 10 very big, very pervasive properties Warner Bros owns that in some cases, you can't get away from. And even if you tried, we can all absolutely find just as sinister skeletons in the closests of the other major media conglomerates. Of which there are only -6-. Warner Bros, Disney, Viacom, CBS, GE, and News Corp. Unless we decided we wanted to block ourselves off from everything... what can we do?
NOW!! That's not to say that boycotting certain artists, producers, directors is a bad thing. I'm not suggesting that because you can't fight for everything, you can't fight for anything. All I'm saying is this is where my mind goes and how deep the rabbit hole is in terms of my introspection of modern media and the ethical dilemma I often find myself struggling with.
Pragmatically, I only boycott art I can easily trace to an artist. Corporations are too hard, because they have thousands of people in them and make all our products. You can only boycott a company or product if you can substitute an ethical alternative.
I'm interested in how you brought up whether we should judge art and artists created in different time periods in the same way we would treat artists today because they grew up in a different society. This is because I used to be quite involved in the anime community (I kind of still am, to be honest) and every so often a similar conversation would pop up. not about whether we should judge historical media in the same way but whether we as westerners had the right or experience to criticize anime for things like sexism and homophobia. Often this would just be used as a shield to deflect criticism of anyone's favourite thing but sometimes it was a valid complaint as well. I often am less stringent about the moral standard I expect of works created by people who have lived in less progressive cultures and I suppose I wonder if thats bad or not?
you inspire the crap out of me
i used to enjoy certain music, and i thought well i can still listen to the album i already have and not buy merch and whatever, and i can enjoy the songs even if i dont like the artist. but i couldnt. i would listen to the music and just be disgusted. so no, cant separate art from artist.
Im usually someone who lives and dies on principle but this is the hardest thing for me to differentiate because of that gray area
I've always been of the opinion that they are inseparable and have not found it too difficult to go out of my way to avoid work by awful people. With learning recently learning about Kevin Spacey and Johnny Depp, they're more people to avoid the works of which I won't struggle with. Although I wish there was almost a masterlist of artists across industries to avoid and not support as there must be many I don't know about. But in Harvey Weinstein's case.... I'm stuck. He's produced so many films that avoiding them is difficult and whilst I'm happy to avoid many of them.. I realised that he is listed as an executive producer for Carol. And as someone who only recently realised that they are a lesbian, that movie has been so important to me and is my favourite movie. Do I never watch it again and blacklist that film too? Do I count it as an exception to my rule? Do I count vile producers as not a sufficient enough reason to stop me watching a movie? Is there a way in which representation of yourself or the importance of the message in a movie outweighs the immoral opinions and behaviours of those who created it? I don't know what to do but don't want to be supporting someone so abhorrent. Would love someone's opinion on this dilemma. xx
I would agree that we shouldn’t support problematic artists financially, at least, but I’m deeply torn about whether we should avoid the works of problematic people entirely. My intuition is that great art and philosophy should be critically experienced regardless, even something as ideologically monstrous as triumph of the will. Of course, I wouldn’t hold it against anyone for not feeling comfortable watching such things, but I think whether it’s problematic to do so generally is arguable. I think you could argue that my love of art is influencing me to hold an ultimately reactionary disposition, placing the value of beauty above political principles. This is probably an inherent tension for most politically conscious aesthetes.
WE ALL SINNED
I personally believe that every piece of art ever created will undulate into different forms depending on the context surrounding it. If a piece of art is meant to carry a sweet innocent feeling such as a Dr. Seuss story it will get a spice of sourness that distorts or even weakens the piece when an creator is found to have something contrary. However if a piece is already intended to challenge and evoke a sour, bitter or uncanny feeling such as a Lovecraft novel it may be unaffected or possibly even amplify the feelings evoked from the piece if the creator were outed for doing something morally outrageous. Pieces that have been created by authors proven to act so contradictory to the message within will distort into evoking something almost completely sarcastic like Charles Manson's songs of peace and love. Separating art from artist most often will not even be an issue since by that point their pieces have transformed into something most laymans wouldn't be interested in checking out in the first place past a brief morbid curiosity.
Thia is such a difficult subject, but I wait until convictions before boycotting, if and when I do. For example, I threw out / deleted all my Lostprophets music and haven't listened to them since all the Ian Watkins stuff and I don't want to. I think even if I played some of their songs that I used to like now, I wouldn't enjoy them anyway. However, I know that false accusations do happen, and so I wait. I think it depends on what the accusation/conviction is about too.
I love your hair.
Not very constructive but yeah...
Colourful
Yeah, I've been thinking about this in regards to Baby Driver. That was really a fantastic work for Ansel Elgort...not so much Spacey even though he was obviously a main character.
You can separate the lemon from the tree or you can leave it attached. The choice is yours.
No I don't think you can. That person will always be associated with that piece of art. So you are supporting them. I'm going to see murder on the orient because it looks a really good film and has some of my favourite people in it. But feel uncomfortable as Johnny Depp is in it and me buying a cinema ticket is paying him. Side note Kevin Spacey has really pissed me off
Cammie Halliday I was a big fan of Kevin Spacey but he is a scumbag for what he did.
I feel the same about Murder on the Orient Express.
I really wanna support Leslie Odom Jr and some other actors in that film, but ugh Johnny Depp...
I'm being petty but it kind of bugged me that the trailer made it look like the Johnny Depp show instead of highlighting the rest of the ensemble cast.
EDIT:There is a trailer that highlights the rest of the cast and general feel of the film but that's not the one I see on British tv
If it’s any consolation, I’m 99.99999% sure Depp’s character is the one who gets murdered (I know nothing of the source material but that’s what I’ve read)
The likelihood of coming across a piece of art/media that isn't tainted by a problematic person having some involvement/influence over it is unlikely. Enjoy what you enjoy.
I feel that art is an imprint of the soul. Which is why we as a society are very interested in characters, celebrities, and stories. But when it comes to the artist who has offended me, I feel this says something more about me than the artist and the art. Why can't I enjoy a piece of music from an artist? Because some have opinions that deeply offend me and I realize that my offense has nothing to do with the expression at a given point and time. Objectively art has nothing to do the present moment. They represent an expression in time and space. Like a time capsule, you go back to a certain expression of life. I realize sometimes I project myself in art because they connect with me and they are like entities that speak your language. But when we see artists revealed to be awful people today or worse, when they at the time expressing, than the illusion is broken. Now we are confronted that we see the conflict in their expressions of art. Our minds taint the art because we are in disbelief. We feel fooled when we realize that we are fooling ourselves to connect them. I know people say you should not support their works but that's not why I listen, watch or consume art. I do it because I'm connected on a deep level. Where I felt that someone out there feels the same way as I do. We've all felt alone, angry, sad and happy in moments in life. And here comes an artist expressing the same thing that you are and you can't help to attach yourself to the artist. But learn to look at it in a different way that allows me to enjoy art without attaching the artist. The truth is that art doesn't belong to the artist. Just as much as a creator doesn't have control of their creation. It exists like a living thing and I come to realize to appreciate art for what it is and not where it comes from.
Literally such a dilemma, I was halfway through House Of Cards when this whole Kevin Spacey issue came about, and while it is awful all that has happened, there is part of me wanting to watch more because the show is much bigger then just his character but I also just feel guilty doing so, honestly I just don't know.
I feel like we watch in service of the lessons of the story, despite how problematic the real people creating it are in life. It's interesting. What matters more to us? The art's creation or the person that created it?
If you've just started watching Cards, Spacey's character just keeps getting more evil. If anything, the things Spacey has done, including terrorizing staff at Cards, just adds to the character of Frank Underwood. I've been watching in part because I was looking forward to F.U.'s downfall. Also, House of Cards was made by so many people and wasn't all just Spacey. I don't feel like if I watch it, I'd be condoning his actions or saying I don't care about the people he's hurt. Anita Sarkeesian always says that it's possible and sometimes even necessary to be critical of the things we enjoy. I think it's possible to watch Cards and still support the people Spacey has victimized.
I think that when it comes to buying art, or buying anything at all, it is just conscious consumerism - if we're talking math, anything that's being sold becomes a product, a cold number, losing its intangible value (what we pay for when we pay for art other than the materials used), so technically it's no different to a bag of milk or a dress or a car or a screwdriver which you pay your money for. Like, viewing it on a different kind of level becomes pointless at that point, it's just money and products being exchanged. So - I don't know enough about anyone for anyone to take this personally - I think it'd be very hypocritical of someone to, for example, actively boycott the newest woody allen movie and then go buy a sweatshop-made h&m sweater and think they're better than most for sticking to some kind of a moral code of honour. I believe art can be separated from the artist in the same way a child's wrongdoings can be separated from a parent - sometimes, and it's hardly ever simple and easy to decide, but when everything's a product in a capitalist society, it might just be more important to take a step back and look at things that are a little more worthwhile than a cult of The celebrity. yknow
i would really feel uncomfortable if an artist hates what i believe or think . i wouldn't be able to talk to that person .
I've been asking myself ths question for so many years, even more now, and my answer is always no, I can't do it, I can't even pirate a movie by Woody Allen even if he won't get any money. I can't do it (interesting video) plus yes the art can totally be tainted and so bad after I find out that they may have done something like Kevin Spacey. edit: I don't go out of my way to boycott them I just don't watch the stuff those people make.
This is a really interesting question. What i keep coming back to in my mind is the idea that boycotting is not really an action. You're choosing to not do something which is basically no choice at all. I think the best way to respond to something you think is wrong is with action. I would be interested to know if you have any resources or ideas about how to support art vs artist causes that could help change an industry, rather than condemn a person. Even a petition seems better than just boycotting because at least then there is a record of a group of people who are saying they are not going to see this movie/buy this book/etc for a specific and important reason. Not just because they weren't interested or the budget for advertising was too small or something like that. I don't know.... just some thoughts. You're making me think!
What about something where Netfilx donates money to a charity for everytime someone watches House of Cards? And didn't Mila Kunis just say in an interview that every month she donates to planned parenthood in Mike Pence's name? We can make a donation to the appropriate charity in an offender's name for every media of theirs we still consume. I like your idea of taking positive action instead a passive boycott.
DavidB75311 I like that idea. You put it so well by saying positive action instead of a passive boycott.
I think boycotting can be effective if it's done by a collective group, like with the most recent Fantastic Beasts film, which bombed in theaters it's opening week compared to every other film in the Harry Potter franchise. I also agree that pairing a boycott with positive actions (such as donating to a related cause and consuming media by people working to change the system for the better) is a really good thing to do.
I've been struggling with these ideas for many years now, because on a personal level I can't bring myself to support people who do things that are reprehensible to me (abusing women or children in any way, who are racist or homophobic, etc). Since most of the time I was just one person boycotting the works of one person or another in my own home, I wanted to find ways to make more of an impact, so this is something I've thought about a lot. It's such a tricky subject, and something that has gotten even more complicated in the last few years. I'm still trying to find solutions and am so glad people are talking about this!
Yes you can separate them, off the top of my head I can think of several notorious bastards who were great artists - Caravaggio for instance - proper bad boy / swashbuckler and killed a man, but still a great painter.
This is a very easy question.
No. Supporting their work is to support them.
Honestly to me personally it depends on the situation, the person, etc.
Some people I can and a lot I can’t,
Excellent point about actively supporting artists who create a positive change!!! (instead of just boycotting problematic ones)
I think the lesson that we should learn from this is that the artists are humans and not perfect real world good humans on a high pedestal. The other lesson learned should be if great talented celebs can have a dark side in their private lives that we also as humans must be equally seriously as most careful how we live in our everyday private lives as much as we do in our public lives.
really good and thought-provoking video. so i'm definitely someone who boycotts movies because of ...certain actors. and for me it's mainly about just feeling kinda ...eh when i see them, you know? but i would love to take more active measures however i'm usually not sure where to start or how to do it specifically.
Despite enjoying and supporting the message behind Ender's Game, I can not read more of Orson Scott Card because I've sence learned how homophobic he was. I can not, in good conscience, give money toward something by someone so hateful - even if I am sure that his central character is in fact gay himself.
This protest can get complicated though, in everyday life, when one doesn't feel safe enough to speak out against certain behaviors or language. Remember that those who may seem hypocritical for protesting in their consumer lives but staying silent in personal discourse, may feel unsafe, indeed in bodily danger, in defending their views or personhood.
Don't jump to tear your fellows down. Instead ask them why there is this inconsistency in their behavior, and be gentle about it, not accusatory. The answers may surprise you.
I'm glad people are finally taking the way the consume art seriously. They have a right to know where their money is going to. These power structures not only affect art but are relevant in our everyday lives.
Ben_jamin Which is good, however I'm one of those people who can separate both art and artists and still enjoy stuff from people who i dislike.
Mainly because even if it's tainted in a way that art can help some people to see things from a perspective or inspire others
This makes me think of Orson Scott Card. I really like his books, but then I discovered that he went to anti-gay rights. I mean, I already got his books for Christmas, so I can't undo that, but it still makes me really annoyed that such a good author is doing things like that. It's also weird, because he's friends with another author who I really like who I know isn't anti-gay, because he had a character in a book series who had to dads.
It depends how bad what they did was and if the artist is still alive or not cos if they are dead they can't profit off it
So much blurriness and there are no answers in my head. all I know if that when a problematic musician makes a damn good song then I don't pay for it. I listen to it through... other means.
I’m struggling with this with Bryan Singer right now because I love the xmen movies (xmen,X2,and DOFP...)
I aint a court. I aint a judge. I can not buy something because of it I feel kinda meh doing it, but I wont do anything like an intentional boycott until judge decides the allegation was true. And also...as you said...there is a whole crew of people on most projects. People who dont deserve to take the hit for one person. I definitely dont make a huge deal of art made by dead artists. I mean...what will I accomplish by that? I can acknowledge their past, but boycott of that is definitely silly. But its good to try and read between the lines with those...sometimes spoils the art without my effort.
With allegations having just been made about John Lasseter, I came here straight away. This was very insightful, very helpful and very much devoid of dogma and self-righteousness (not that you usually are, I simply mean that in these areas, a lot of people can be), so thanks very much for this.
Principle is why I don't listen to Chris Brown's music even if I do like some of it, I no longer even listen to the music that I had previously bought. That being said i think the past is a very case by case basis, like should we not read a famous work that was written 150 years ago just because the writer was a racist, i personally would because i understand that at the time that was a common sentiment but there is also an argument for not reading it.
There are artists I will not support. Including some who are dead. As a consumer it is both my choice and right to boycott artists of bad character. In my life I have suffered for doing the right thing and if some must suffer loss of income and status because they were involved in the wrong art project I honestly believe long term is overall good to boycott art from bad people.
One of my favorite books of all time is Ender's Game, even though Orson Scott Card is a homophobic piece of garbage, who would actively shit on me for being who I am. The one time I refused to support one of his works was when he was hired by DC to write a story for Superman. Superman is an icon, who stands up for everyone; Men, Women, White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, European, Straight, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, ect. and Orson Scott Card clearly doesn't understand that.
The issue is, even if an artist is dead and not getting profit, their work is still being bought and thought about, when that person's work still reflects them. They have made irreversibly bad decisions that they believe to be okay. No matter what the artist has made, even if it has nothing to do with them, psychologically, it has everything to do with them. Their ideas (in the art) aren't necessarily corrupt, but their intention--for their work to be consumed and thought about--is still being fulfilled. Honestly, even though I believe this, it's so hard to not consume media made by people who are corrupted, and we find out so many of the artists we continually support have done horrible things.
At first I wanted to watch "The Crimes of Grindelwald" in the movie theater. However, after I knew about the JK Rowling issue where she and the rest of the producers as well as the director (David Yates) where "happy" to have Johnny Depp in the sequel after knowing about his abuse towards Amber Heard, I was very disappointed. I also read some tweets about the whole situation and I realized JK blocked people (on Twitter) who were criticizing her and the producers because of their decision and at the time when Amber released the pictures where Depp's physical abuse was visible, JK (a person who is a leftist and a feminist) liked tweets that said Amber was a liar. A lot of fans where disgusted and said Colin Farrell already did a great job portraying Grindelwald (even my mom who generally hates Colin's performances said he did a great job). Harry Potter is about a boy who suffered (verbal, emotional and sometimes physical) abuse and hiring an abuser is a terrible idea. They could've hired somebody else for the sequel. He was on camera for a few minutes anyways (in the first film). Like, they could've done the same that was done in Iron Man 2 (another blockbuster) where they changed Terrence Howard to Don Cheadle. Hell, they hired another actor to portray Dumbledore because the actor from the first two films died. I'm going to watch this film pirated so nobody benefits from my view.
This comment aged like milk.
I try to avoid problematic artists whenever I can.
For example, since I learned about the many problematic sides of Jennifer Lawrence ("Oh Mystique can't be bisexual, she had a thing with a guy! I mean she's quite old so she would've had time for a lesbian phase...", or the time she told the super funny story of how she scratched her butt on some sacred rocks on Hawaii and almost killed a camera guy when she accidentally pushed the rock away, or the time she joked about Jesse Eisenberg's mental illness in front of him...), I haven't watched a movie with her in it except for the newer X-Men movies.
Of course, the worse the things are that people have done, the higher my appreciation for the movie or show must be for me to still watch it.
No you can't. I tried but I honestly can't see anything f.e. Kevin Spacy was in and not feel terrible about it afterwards. And you know, knowing I can never see a movie I used to love again actually isn't that bad considering I can feel better about myself for not selling out my principles. I'm honestly happier now, knowing I can say no to a thing I like because enjoying it would result in betraying what I stand for on a fundamental level.
I know he was never convicted, but after woody Allen’s daughter wrote that letter about him abusing her, I couldn’t stomach him.
A lot of his films include creepy story lines with very young girls.
I find him utterly repugnant, now. I couldn’t enjoy his films or even bare to watch him ok screen. His art is ruined, imo.
Agreed. And I feel in his case, it's impossible to separate the art from the artist, when (like you said) his films often include creepy storylines about older men and young girls and gave done throughout his entire career. He's been hiding his perversion in plain sight for decades and trying to normalize his sickness through his films. Though I know he's made movies that are touted as brilliant or classics or "must watch" films, I will never, ever support him and don't care if I "miss out". Even if he wouldn't profit from me watching, I still won't because it would make me feel sick. I stand with his daughter. I will never knowingly support people who abuse children.
What if an evil person invented a way to save millions of lives, should we still use his methods? Or is the argument purely just for entertainment?
I mean I’ll keep listening to music even if the person did something bad because I still like the music
I tend to separate death of the author as a concept. Not as a protection for the author, but to mean that the work now belongs to the audience.
So profit and the living memory of the sin goes heavily into the decision. I choose not to consume media Kevin Spacey had a hand. He was previously my favorite actor. However I do read the works of Christopher Marlowe ( a known (anti- Semite) and the Marquis de Sade (an accused rapist). The only difference is that their works hold historical value.
P. S. Thank you for your fantastic videos lately! I’ve learned a great deal!
On point
this is a really complicated issue. On one side its hard to support artists that did some bad things, but on the other hand if we will dump the art of every artist that did bad things we wil bearly have any art at all. In the end it all comes down to your belifes.
i agree!
when I REALLY love the art, I totally forget about the artist.
Yes and we only hear of the artists because of what happened
Also those people who are boycotting don't realise they are hypocrites because they also did wrong like you and me
I stopped listening to Justin Timberlake’s music after I figured out what he did to Britney Spears and Janet Jackson. Sometimes it’s just impossible to separate art from the artist from an emotional standpoint.
Honestly? It's not always easy, but sometimes it's just something you have to do, or else you'll drive yourself crazy.
I can. I wish more people could.
A useful thing artist did.
Id they are long dead, it’s okay to do whatever you want with their property.
If they are alive and you disagree with them, completely ignore them and act like they don’t exist, or do like Gongora and Quevedo and engage in an epic battle of belittling the other trough art.
Where does this lead though? If a producer does something reprehensible or a publishing company or someone/something else that is tangentially related to the art does something is it ok to still support the art? You could also ask this of not artistic things like clothes, if I know that ZARA uses near slave labor in manufacturing their clothes, is it ok to buy them?
I did another video on purchasing from companies that use slave labour a few months ago now. It's definitely something people are thinking about more and more now.