Leave a comment

bart_calendar November 30 2013, 11:24:46 UTC
Good art is good art no matter what kind of slimeball created it ( ... )

Reply

naath November 30 2013, 11:39:13 UTC
I agree that the Art doesn't cease to be Good Art if the creator did horrible things.

There are two things on the other side:

*sometimes if I know about the creator being horrible I can't put that out of my mind when interacting with the art, and the art makes me think of the horrible things, and then it's not pleasant to interact with. Sometimes the horribleness is portrayed in the art, which makes that association much clearer and more horrible and less pleasant.

*if the creator is still alive then chances are good that if I pay money to buy copies of their art (books, CDs, cinema tickets; not so sure about entry to museums) that they will get some of that money; and maybe I don't want to give them money.

Reply

bart_calendar November 30 2013, 11:42:24 UTC
When I re-read the Alice books, I actually force my mind to ignore the obvious molestation hints, because the story is do good if you just shut off that part of your mind.

Reply

andrewducker November 30 2013, 11:51:55 UTC
Out of curiosity I was just listening to a couple of tracks by lostprophets, to see what their music was like.

And then had a conversation like this:
Andy: What do you think of this song? (Rooftops)
Julie: It's alright - is it Green Day?
Andy: Nope, Lostprophets.
Julie: *Choking noises*

Turns out she'd been tempted to do something likewise, but had felt very odd about it, and was surprised at me suddenly exposing her to it with no warning :->

Reply

bart_calendar November 30 2013, 11:55:32 UTC
I checked out some of their stuff earlier this week and was not particularly impressed. But taste is taste.

Reply

andrewducker November 30 2013, 11:58:23 UTC
I thought that Rooftops was ok, but the other few I tried did nothing for me.

Reply

strawberryfrog November 30 2013, 12:18:18 UTC
HMV decided yesterday to stop selling Lostprophets' music.
They don't care about the lost profits.

Reply

bart_calendar November 30 2013, 12:38:46 UTC
That's what the story is about.

But, it's really a PR stunt. They were selling very few copies of their music anyway - and still sell Gary Gliter albums.

Reply

brixtonbrood November 30 2013, 16:46:06 UTC
The money makes a huge difference. I'm more than happy to pay for art created by Wagner or Eric Gill - Orson Scott Card or Gary Glitter, not so much.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up