So I'm gonna sit my ass down and talk about fail.
Ok. So. In recent times two of my very favorite creative-type people, Amanda Palmer and Neil Gaiman, have been dishing on the fail pretty fucking hardcore.
I covered Amanda Palmer here and here and kynn is covering the Neil thing better than I could here.
First off, since this cannot be stated enough:
IT IS NOT THAT FUCKING HARD TO ADMIT THAT YOU ARE WRONG AND SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP AFTER YOU SAY SORRY. FOR FUCK'S SAKE.
That said, I'm seeing a lot of sentiment on the blogosphere to the tune of 'Now I need to purge my collection of everything they've ever made.'
...and I don't really get that. I don't see how it accomplishes anything.
If you are unable to enjoy the previous nonfail works of a person who has become full of fail because they have become full of fail...I objectively understand that. But it's not a sentiment I can share.
I used to think that Amanda Palmer and Neil Gaiman were awesome. Because at that time they -were-. Also, the art form itself can have a meaning other than what the creator intended. Or different from the creator's CURRENT beliefs. And while it's useful to keep tabs on the creator because it can help you understand what's going on in the art....it's also legitimate to judge the art on its own merits and what YOU the consumer see and understand within it. Amanda Palmer and Neil Gaiman have created AMAZING things! And those things, which already exist, are not in and of themselves suddenly diminished because their creators have taken a level in UberFail.
I am reminded of a college professor who went on a half-hour tangent about how we, as college students, shouldn't be purchasing poster prints of artists of the French Enlightenment who were known to be horrifically antisemitic.....because? Yes, Degas and Monet WERE both hateful radicals who funded terrorism! But they're also dead. Really, really dead. And in no way are their terrorist actions or they themselves benefiting from my consumption of domestically-created poster-prints of their art, which is awesome under its own merits.
The point of boycott is to correct an unacceptable behavior on the part of a producer by refusing to be a consumer of that which is produced. Saying, with your dollars, that you do not support the actions of the creator. I can get behind that all day long.
Retroactive boycott of something that you've already consumed...doesn't do that. At all. So what's the point (except personal catharsis)?
I'm not going to stop thinking that 'Sing' and 'Oasis' are freaking awesome songs or that 'Neverwhere' and 'Good Omens' are incredible books because Amanda an Neil have suddenly taken a turn toward fail. I can lose respect for the artists and refuse to consume their work from this point forward without losing respect for their previous works or refusing to consume their work from before they failed. I understand that some people can't do that, and that's cool too - we all cope with our idols showing their asses in our own ways.
What bothers me is the sentiment I'm seeing in a lot of places of 'I'm having a CD and book bonfire AND YOU SHOULD TOO - If you don't, you are in some way expressing acquiescence to the current behavior of the artists'.
I'm calling bullshit on that.
So yeah. Long navel gazing is long. I really don't have much to say about the current fails that hasn't been said first and better by other people.
::sigh::
I covered Amanda Palmer here and here and kynn is covering the Neil thing better than I could here.
First off, since this cannot be stated enough:
IT IS NOT THAT FUCKING HARD TO ADMIT THAT YOU ARE WRONG AND SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP AFTER YOU SAY SORRY. FOR FUCK'S SAKE.
That said, I'm seeing a lot of sentiment on the blogosphere to the tune of 'Now I need to purge my collection of everything they've ever made.'
...and I don't really get that. I don't see how it accomplishes anything.
If you are unable to enjoy the previous nonfail works of a person who has become full of fail because they have become full of fail...I objectively understand that. But it's not a sentiment I can share.
I used to think that Amanda Palmer and Neil Gaiman were awesome. Because at that time they -were-. Also, the art form itself can have a meaning other than what the creator intended. Or different from the creator's CURRENT beliefs. And while it's useful to keep tabs on the creator because it can help you understand what's going on in the art....it's also legitimate to judge the art on its own merits and what YOU the consumer see and understand within it. Amanda Palmer and Neil Gaiman have created AMAZING things! And those things, which already exist, are not in and of themselves suddenly diminished because their creators have taken a level in UberFail.
I am reminded of a college professor who went on a half-hour tangent about how we, as college students, shouldn't be purchasing poster prints of artists of the French Enlightenment who were known to be horrifically antisemitic.....because? Yes, Degas and Monet WERE both hateful radicals who funded terrorism! But they're also dead. Really, really dead. And in no way are their terrorist actions or they themselves benefiting from my consumption of domestically-created poster-prints of their art, which is awesome under its own merits.
The point of boycott is to correct an unacceptable behavior on the part of a producer by refusing to be a consumer of that which is produced. Saying, with your dollars, that you do not support the actions of the creator. I can get behind that all day long.
Retroactive boycott of something that you've already consumed...doesn't do that. At all. So what's the point (except personal catharsis)?
I'm not going to stop thinking that 'Sing' and 'Oasis' are freaking awesome songs or that 'Neverwhere' and 'Good Omens' are incredible books because Amanda an Neil have suddenly taken a turn toward fail. I can lose respect for the artists and refuse to consume their work from this point forward without losing respect for their previous works or refusing to consume their work from before they failed. I understand that some people can't do that, and that's cool too - we all cope with our idols showing their asses in our own ways.
What bothers me is the sentiment I'm seeing in a lot of places of 'I'm having a CD and book bonfire AND YOU SHOULD TOO - If you don't, you are in some way expressing acquiescence to the current behavior of the artists'.
I'm calling bullshit on that.
So yeah. Long navel gazing is long. I really don't have much to say about the current fails that hasn't been said first and better by other people.
::sigh::