Can you separate the artist from their work?
The problem with winter when the sun doesn't show itself (rare but it's been dull and rainy for quite a few days) is that my study gets very cold and my heater struggles to make an impact. We don't have central heating, this is New Zealand, land of the 'she'll be right and central heating is for wimps' but we do have a wonderful log burner which
( Read more... )
If I had artwork by Harris - well I do, I have Two Little Boys on my mp3 actually - I'd feel sad not only because of the song (which is still sad in its own right, I think) but because my memories and thoughts of it are now changed.
If I had a Woody Allen dvd - well I wouldn't, because I've never liked his films, don't "get" them, and you can tell me he's as brilliant as you like and I'd still think Really? Why?, so to me he's just another man who's done awful things.
But what about all the things we own/like/appreciate where we don't know about the artist's/writer's/musician's wrongdoing? Does that make owning it better or worse? The law says ignorance is no excuse - can we take that into the morals of owning art where you don't know someone's background?
And what about the bargain-priced t-shirt we know was made in a sweatshop by a 10 year old, or the trainers made by a company that we know poisons children by dumping their toxic waste in open pits outside the town where they live (of course that's not likely to be a "western" country) - are the people who're now angsting about Harris paintings also going through their wardrobes and consciences? I bet they're not...
You know, I think there just may be an even bigger picture...
Reply
I must point out that Woody Allen has been accused but not charged with abuse and that the situation is very, very muddy and no where near as clean cut as it first appears, but I so agree with you about his films.
You know, I think there just may be an even bigger picture...
You are SO, so right, and we've got children and adults dying in Syria, Iraq and the Gaza strip due to the actions of their leaders, but this was an ethics issue I chose to present and ask for my course. I wanted something relevant and 'in the present'. My other one was on whether cannabis should be legalised the day before 'Legal highs' were made illegal here.
Reply
And sorry, I worded myself badly/unclearly (shock! unexpected!) - what I was clumsily wondering, as an argument for your ethics question, was whether we can claim one reasoning artist's behaviour vs their art, when we claim a totally different reasoning to justify our own poor behaviour over made-objects. If we judge a t-shirt on its merits (it's cheap, it fits and I like it) and don't worry about a disagreeable background, then why do we judge art differently? Or vice-versa, if we feel we have to throw away Harris' art because it turns out he's done something terrible, then shouldn't we be going through our wardrobes/cupboards/etc. etc.? I'm not answering either way, just wondering... *g*
(And yeah, I realise the WA case is muddy, I just grabbed it from someone else's comment above - so lazy of me... *g*)
Reply
Pfft. :-)
Reply
Leave a comment