Can We Seperate The Art From The Artist?

[jolldan]

Smooth FM bans Michael Jackson songs amid fresh abuse allegations

An Australian radio network has pulled Michael Jackson’s music from its airwaves amid fresh allegations that the late singer sexually abused children.

The Nova Entertainment Company, which counts easy-listening station Smooth FM among its stable, became the first Australian company to take action after the accusations were aired in a British-made documentary, Leaving Neverland, on Sunday.

It joins at least three radio stations in Canada, one in the Netherlands, as well as New Zealand’s public broadcaster RNZ and its major commercial rivals Mediaworks and NZME.


I haven't seen the documentary myself but made me think in this current climate of high profile celebs being arrested/charged with like Kevin Spacey, R. Kelly and now renewed claims against Michael Jackson can we separate the art from the artist and still enjoy the content they made? Or does it sour anything that artist ever did?

 

[Schlosser85]

Yes.

I’m not going to stop enjoying Baby Driver just because Kevin Spacey is in it.

The Pianist is not invalidated as a tremendous Holocaust drama because Roman Polanski directed it.

Bryan Singer didn’t stop me from enjoying Bohemian Rhapsody and if he was directing Dark Phoenix that wouldn’t stop me from seeing it.

I totally reject the idea of punishing the thousands of people who work on a movie or saying their work shouldn’t be recognized or Rami Malek shouldn’t be awarded just because Bryan Singer is a creep (I’m not saying Malek was or wasn’t Oscar-worthy, that’s a whole other discussion, just that Singer shouldn’t have any bearing on it).

And frankly a lot of the time when someone ostentatiously announces they’re boycotting anything by so and so it comes off like virtue signaling.

 

[Donner]

I agree with Schloss. I think for anything to change, it would have to be the people who work with Singer and Polanski to say that they won't anymore. They would have to take a stand and essentially run the two of them out of Hollywood.

For Jackson, obviously it's different because he's dead, but I think the estate needs to pay for therapy or something for his victims. Some stories may be suspect, but I truly believe that Jackson did inappropriate things to children and that they have suffered because of it.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Jackson's father has a huge amount to answer for, his behaviour to MJ, influenced his own actions in his adult life, not exonerating Jackson by any means, but saying generational abuse (of any kind) without resolution, be it therapy, counselling, discussion of impact, will permeate and only grow within the individual.

 

[Robbie008]

Michael may be innocent. As a psychologist, I believe he may have suffered from a condition called Arrested Psychological Development, which is brought on by trauma he may have experienced throughout his childhood, for example, the pressure of being famous at a very young age, and the mental & physical abuse he suffered from his father.

If michael did indeed have Arrested Psychological Development, he may have been 'stuck' in an emotional level of development, and may not have mentally matured past adolescence.

If this was the case, it would explain his childlike behaviour in later adult
life, and because of this behaviour, he may have been taken advantage of by people around him for monetary gain. He was an easy target, and still is.

WHAT ABOUT MICHAEL'S MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS? SHOULD THEY BE MADE PUBLIC?? They may explain and answer many of our questions, about the way he lived.

 

[Mandon Knight]

I never can no, and that's coming from a Smiths fan. For me, once you've f-ed up, that's it.

 

[moviedoors]

It ends up being a case by case thing for me. New works by someone like Bryan Singer feels gross. Why is he still working? If he had a new movie coming out next week, **** that, **** him, and **** whoever hired him.

But pre-existing work? That's trickier. I just recently watched Polanski's Macbeth from 1973 and it is a terrific piece of work. The Naked Gun remains hysterical despite the presence of a murderer.

But then on the other hand, I have no desire to rewatch any of Victor Salva's work. Despite how gigantic a fan I was of it I don't think I will ever revisit Bill Cosby's standup. And it's not hard to decide not to ever rewatch Last Tango in Paris because in that case the abuse literally happened on camera and is in the movie.

Mileage will vary and we shouldn't be *******s about it if someone doesn't exactly share our standards. If someone wants to watch Annie Hall and another doesn't want to go there, that's all fine. Neither person in that scenario should be rolling their eyes at the other.

 

[Spider-Fan]

I also think this is up for every person to decide, and I don't have a perfect mathematical answer to give anyone. Like the above user said, I will never watch much Bill Cosby stuff ever again. He has been soured for me forever. But, other things like Harry Potter or Buffy/The Avengers films Whedon did I still can and will watch regularly.

It really depends on a lot of things for me. How serious was the offense? How important was this product to shaping who I am today? Etc. This will be different for every person. Now, I don't think like Joss Whedon should be getting new work or anything. Different issue for me.

I also agree one should not look down on someone else because they keep watching Harry Potter movies or something.

 

[Donner]

I would feel better if the person didn't make any money off of the product. Like Marilyn Manson should not get a penny for any record sales. Joss Whedon shouldn't get any royalties from Buffy. It would be nice if the artist gets completely cut off from the art. Then people could consume the content without guilt.

 

[DarkKnight88]

I think if the artist is the face of the art that gets to be too hard. I don't think people can watch The Cosby Show and ever separate Bill Cosby from it. He's literally the face of the show. We're supposed to be laughing with him. With a filmmaker or producer or writer, because you're not visually confronted with them, it's a little bit easier to digest. Watching something like Annie Hall can be harder than say watching Chinatown for that very reason.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

It's difficult. I won't lie.

Alot of movies and songs have simply disappeared from my playlist because the talent/creators have been exposed as scumbags.

But there's a limit. While I purged Big Pun music from my life because he was a wife beater and child abuser I cannot do the same for Infinity War or Endgame despite Josh Brolin's domestic abuse allegations.

I simply have too much time and energy invested into MCU. The franchise is something I've dreamed and obsessed about for most of my life.

So I guess you can say I cherry pick my outrage.

 

[writer0327]

I think as much as possible, we have to celebrate the art and not the artist, and that's hard. There are a lot of pretty terrible people that have created some really amazing pieces of art that I enjoy. Some could be considered revolutionary in their work.

How do we balance it? Maybe say "Hey this dirtbag made a really good movie..."