Separating Art From The Artist
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 июл 2024
- Art is the pinnacle of human expression and imagination, but it can also bring about destruction. Complications also arise when the art is desirable, but the artist is deplorable.
Can we separate art from the artist? Can we derive valuable ideas from immoral thinkers? Should we read ideas we disagree with? These are a few of the questions I explore in today's video by referencing figures such as Martin Heidegger, Salvador Dalí, Karl Marx, and others.
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!
Timecodes:
0:00 - The Value of Art
0:23 - Good Ideas From Bad People
1:34 - Art From Artist
3:26 - Misinterpretations & Misunderstanding
5:31 - Don't Censor or Avoid Art
6:51 - Wrap Up
My Instagram: / brockcovington
My Substack: brockcovington.substack.com
#philosophy #culture 
Развлечения
My primary concern regarding the notion of appreciating art while dissociating it from the artist's personal beliefs and actions stems from the recognition that art has evolved into a means of financially supporting artists and enhancing their income and reputation. This, in turn, amplifies their influence and impact on society.
That’s a complicating factor for sure. I’d say we have to examine that on a case by case basis. For example, if you buy a Heideggerian book, none of the profits go towards anti-semitism. I see your point especially with modern day artists
Your vid’s are really good. I was just thinking about this the other day, specifically I should read or own books of Machiavelli or Nietzsche. You gave a solid answer, that it’s good to see opposing ideas to solidify the good ideas. To separate the art from the artist.
Both Machiavelli and Nietzsche are great reads! Glad you found the video enlightening 🙌🏼
Hey there! I have only recently started watching your videos on philosophy. They are quite helpful and informative. However, I have a few things to say about this one.
How do you determine in the first place what a "good idea" is? Is it the dominant idea of the time that automatically gets considered a good idea and the one opposing it gets labeled a "pernicious idea"?
How do you determine that the revolutions you are talking about were murderous? Should not one read up on the history of these events before forming an opinion on them? How about utilizing Pascal's approach, and employing it to the study of history and reading from the other point of view?
Lastly, I'm afraid reading 40 pages of the Communist Manifesto only comes across as a cop-out and is not going to help you in crafting better arguments against Marxism. Capital is the text for that.
Appreciate your feedback! I would say an idea is validated or supported by the objective consequences. For example, the revolutions I referenced were absolutely murderous. Millions lost their lives in the gulags and under Soviet Russia as well as in communist Cuba and China.
Lastly, I’d agree that one should read all volumes of The Capital for a full interpretation of Marx. I was just offering an example of what it looks like to engage with other ideas
@@TheActiveMind1 Okay, so would you say that the objective consequences are contained in the history of the time period of those revolutions? But no historian is unbiased. There are plenty of historians (J. Archy Getty, Michael Parenti to name a few) who provide reasons for those alleged murders other than moral or ideological ones that are commonly held to be true. For example, before any such murders had taken place, Soviet Russia was invaded by a coalition of 14 other countries in the midst of the Russian Civil War including countries like the US, Britain, France and Japan. Vietnam fought for 30 years before it won first against France, then against the US. Cuba survived the Bay of Pigs invasion against it (and has endured the US embargo since) by the US. Similar cases for North Korea and China. The US has never found itself in such a situation. A logical question here would be, why were these countries invaded or sanctioned by the US?
On the contrary, an argument can be made for liberal democracies being murderous. And this is much more visible from the global south which has suffered colonization, famines (there were several in British India alone which killed off millions), slavery, invasions and sanctions at the hands of those espousing liberalism, all of which have had a murderous effect on their civilian populations. Or are these not objective consequences of it? So we circle back to - how do we determine what constitutes a good idea. In fact, a good idea implies some sort of a moral judgement instead of an accurate interpretation of reality, so perhaps determining the goodness of any idea may not be what we might be after.
Oh yes, absolutely. Even the first volume of Capital would be enough for the average reader who is interested. I'm sure you meant that but the example of reading the Communist Manifesto can be pretty misleading in this case as it's more of a pamphlet than a full fledged book and people might miss your point. I really liked your idea of this video, but I feel it could have been presented without taking political positions. Nevertheless, keep up the good work!
I’d recommend reading The Rebel by Albert Camus. It’s important to define a standard of values to base morality on. Nevertheless, I appreciate your input but this discussion would require more room than a comment section can provide
@@TheActiveMind1 Thanks for the recommendation! I'll add it to my TBR list. And I would highly recommend Michael Parenti's "Blackshirts and Reds" which challenges the orthodoxy surrounding socialist revolutions. It is especially geared towards an American audience. Yes, this discussion cannot be completed in the RUclips comments section. Thank you for your responses though.
@@TheActiveMind1 camus is the french writer who was for colonisation😂 and who déshumanisé his "evry colonized caractere".
But im with you on one point: we need to read evrything specially what we consider against our views.
You need to learn about the context of the book was written so you can get the "idea" which is very vague word to describe anything.
You have no sympathy for "communism" just by reading a manifesto??
You take your idea from very weird point of view ... lets say very north american approch.
I still listen to Michael Jackson… although he was found not guilty, his image is certainly tainted.
He’s a great example, surprised I forgot about referencing him
@@TheActiveMind1: yep. Michael Jackson, Kanye West, R. Kelly, and Marilyn Manson are all good examples of what you talk about in this vlog (with varying degrees of perceived innocence from either sexual predation, or anti-semitism, from one musician to the next, that is). To quote Frank Zappa: "Music was better when ugly people were allowed to make it." As a musician, don't even get me started as to how utterly VAPID the music industry's overall ethics are these days, LOL...although I more or less support people's right to watch/consume pornography, it seems to me that ultimately, the fusion between the music industry, and the pornographic industry, is inevitable, if it hasn't already happened. "May you live in interesting times."