Why should we seperate the art from the artist?

If the artist never took time to seperate themselves from wicked stances?

This includes authors, painters, singers..etc

More importantly, what does separating the art from the artist mean to you?

I think there are instances where this belief creates an opportunity to still push their stances by being offered a platform and attention.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Jackaloftheazuresand · 31-35, M

It means that if the art doesn't commit the same crimes then it is wrong to judge it as if it does. Stephen King is an excellent example of this for me. It was still an entertaining story despite whatever King's perceived necessity in talking about children the way he did was. And that man absolutely uses his fame to spread his ideas and people defend him purely because of his fame as well but whatever kind of monster King is he deserves credit for the great things he does do because they are. To stifle them is to give evil power over good. People who won't separate them also find themselves susceptible to what I mentioned, they will rush to his side simply because he's their favorite author rather than judging him as a man. The counterintuitive thing is that it's the very fact that people can't disconnect that makes such figures continue to receive attention, not because they do separate them.

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Miram · 31-35, F

@Jackaloftheazuresand

To be frank, I think his work is trash. But my views about him and his works specifically are not really important.

This conclusion;

The counterintuitive thing is that it's the very fact that people can't disconnect that makes such figures continue to receive attention, not because they do separate them.

This holds merits from a utilitarian perspective. Focusing on not giving someone attention is also a form of attention. And the negativity does make people regroup and find each other. I understand this if we don't look at people as attached to their works. By dismissing good works for a reason or another, we might be allowing space for bad ones. Might though is a keyword. We might also be offering better people and works more chances to shine.

Maybe both can be a form of enablement, depending on the case; whether we seperate or we don't. Also depending on what we mean by separating. You mean absence of emotional association including admiration towards a person when admiring their works. Some people mean absence of action.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 31-35, M

@Miram I don't think anyone calculates their impact when they choose one or the other. It seems like it always comes down to what they feel. The world would certainly benefit from being a lot colder but they won't ever care about what they left in their wake for that either. It's always about skipping to the end.

Miram · 31-35, F

@Jackaloftheazuresand What do you mean by skipping to the end?

Jackaloftheazuresand · 31-35, M

@Miram That the end justified the means

Miram · 31-35, F

@Jackaloftheazuresand Maybe you're right. Most people will not question their own thinking patterns and how they influence the world. Sometimes I do spot countless of instances where behavior is simply an imitation and a desire to belong.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 31-35, M

@Miram You know I just see it as the inherent selfishness of being alive. Nobody knows or could account for everything so they do whatever, deriving value from themselves as if they did. Why does this universe have to be a spiral?

Miram · 31-35, F

@Jackaloftheazuresand One can argue that there is both, selfishness and selfless in being alive. I think your own ability to see and acknowdge we can't know everything needed in order to form absolutely fair judgements is your mind taking a step to mitigate the selfishness. We can, instead, derive value in trying to make better options even if we don't succeed.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 31-35, M

@Miram That's the spiral. It's in everything but it's not. I've "chosen" there to be no value but no matter how much I cut away it's still there... for no reason. I have gone mad and yet it all sounds so rational

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@Jackaloftheazuresand I agree. I'm honestly unfamiliar with Stephen King and the children thing what you're talking about, I'm afraid I don't really know. But I do know that as a writer, one does need to be able to write about things that may be the opposite of them in order to write something. Because how else would one do it any other way? You really can't. You can be a writer still but not the type of plot based writer anyways, especially horror.