Separating Art From Artist

[Ghost]

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

"Oh, he's just a product of his time, you can't blame him for his beliefs" only ever applies to white people?

Not to split hairs, here, but I dont think this is an accurate absolute statement. Only is a pretty strong word.

If one could say that if a black man growing up in Compton in the early 90s and joining the Long Beach Crips was a product of his time, even if during that period they were brought up on murder charges...

They can still get carpet treatment at the Nickelodeon Kids Choice Awards...

So, OOOOONLY? I contest that. Usually? I like usually.

Its arguable (rumor has it he was kicked out of LBC), but I'm pretty sure his beliefs no longer include putting holes in the side of people's White Sox caps.

[Pandora]

@Tinuviel It actually doesn't happen whenever I enter the fray, my conversations outside of the Hogpit are usually pretty civil, but that doesn't mean I'm going to let you call my opinions stupid and put words in my mouth unchecked.

I shall leave you to your expert knowledge of censorship, it's not like anyone else could possibly be well-versed in it as well, of course.

[GreenFlashlight]

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

This is such a sad derail, and so typical of a conversation on MSB, where instead of debating the issue at hand, it's devolved yet again into a semantics quibbling match about an alternative reading of what someone wrote. If I'm saying 'THIS IS WHAT I SAID AND HOW I MEANT IT' why can't you take that at face value?

Because we either can't understand your point and need your help framing it in terms that allow us to see what you actually mean, or because we consider your statements to be so contradictory we feel forced to choose which one to believe you actually mean.

[Pandora]

@GreenFlashlight Your opinion is so noted.

[Kestrel]

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

I'm not going to divorce your empathy-seeking sentiments here from the fact that you practice Cancel Culture and would happily see authors that you politically disagree with censored if anyone could get away with it. You're either being facetious, disingenuous, or dishonest here, and I'm not for it. Unlike @Tinuviel, I don't find your opinions stupid, I find them disagreeable and yet alarmingly popular.

I'm being none of these things, and don't practice cancel culture, you're using hyperbole and/or preconceptions about me or people you think are like me to get across your point. I don't think convincing you of my intent would be a productive use of my time, so let's move on.

---

I agree with everything @mietze said. I think whitewashing (or biaswashing, to borrow a term) can take on many forms. There's a difference between simply celebrating a racist work of art "on its own merit" and studying it in the proper context.

I've never watched Birth of a Nation, but I wouldn't personally be opposed to it. I also once told someone (to the raise of an eyebrow) that I wanted to read Mein Kampf. The difference is I'd be doing this from the perspective of someone wanting to understand the roots of racism in our culture without absolving or worse, celebrating it. This is pretty different from disseminating problematic media, especially to minors, simply as a normal aspect of our culture to be enjoyed.

If you were to visit my home today, you'd find Karl Marx, Petyr Kropotkin, Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman all sitting together on the same bookshelf. Different context, I also have Sigmund Freud, and honestly fuck that guy. I do not in any way hold these authors each to the same regard, but I am certainly glad I read them all.

[surreality]

@GreenFlashlight said in Separating Art From Artist:

my original point was only that I think it's dishonest to try to divorce art from the person who created it; and I think attempting to do so is usually an admission of the problem they're trying to avoid, because if they didn't think it was a big deal, they wouldn't be deflecting.

Here's the thing. I think you're looking at this wrong.

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/nov/21/from-a-racist-square-to-rotting-beef-five-lesser-known-stories-about-modern-art

(CONTAINS PAINTED NAKED BITS.)

^ That is a good read on this subject.

All of the things described there are objectively bad fucking news in a wide variety of ways today, and some were problematic then, too.

Do I think "the artist’s misogyny, particularly his affair with 17-year-old Marie-Thérèse Walter, who became pregnant with his child in 1935" is more important to society and culture than Picasso's artwork? Without hesitation I say no, and again, I don't like his work at all, and have no qualms calling him a spectacular ass.

This is not deflection, or 'accepting that everything he creates is a self-portrait of his shittiest attitudes' and some of the other ways you've characterized it.

(Apologies if I'm slow on anything someone expects a reply about, I keep getting powerfloufed today by the snow weasel.)

[Ghost]

Miyamoto Musashi is believed to have killed hundreds of people and was never defeated in 60 duels. He eventually died peacefully but not before writing philosophical tenets to guide future generations.

Product of his times? Yea. He probably tested how many bodies a blade was worth and is probably responsible for a few hundred funerals.

He is revered by the Japanese and his sword is considered a national treasure.

Not a white guy. So, yeah, I still gotta contest that only.

[Pandora]

@Kestrel I'll keep it brief so no one gets confused: I don't care what you read. I don't care what anyone reads. This is part of why I detest Cancel Culture, because it presumes to dictate what people are 'exposed' to, as if people are incapable of consuming anything without internalizing and then celebrating it.

[surreality]

Also, this is definitely an American thing and I'm not sure how it goes elsewhere: in most if not all of the country, voting records are public. As in, if you voted for that guy that was OK with segregation in the 1950s? The person who was pro-death penalty? The one that was against the EPA? Yeah, anybody can find that out. Even if all the options on the ballot at the time were that guy because no one had a different view that decade.

[Tinuviel]

@surreality said in Separating Art From Artist:

As in, if you voted for that guy that was OK with segregation in the 1950s? The person who was pro-death penalty? The one that was against the EPA? Yeah, anybody can find that out.

Uh... what the fuck?

I was under the impression that a citizen's votes were secret.

ETA: The what the fuck was at the thing being presented, not the person presenting it.

[surreality]

@Tinuviel Sadly, a lot of those records are public. They're secret when you cast them in the little curtained booth, but once they're counted, welp...

[Tinuviel]

@surreality said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Tinuviel Sadly, a lot of those records are public. They're secret when you cast them in the little curtained booth, but once they're counted, welp...

That doesn't actually make any sense. How can it be secret when you vote, but suddenly not secret when they're tallied together?

[surreality]

@Tinuviel Just one example of how ridiculous it is: https://qz.com/1449789/votewithme-app-shows-if-friends-and-family-voted/

[Tinuviel]

@surreality said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Tinuviel Just one example of how ridiculous it is: https://qz.com/1449789/votewithme-app-shows-if-friends-and-family-voted/

Jesus Fucking Christ.

[Pandora]

Who you voted for is not public unless you tell someone. Whether or not you voted, and whether you lean Democrat or Republican, can be part of the public record.

[Tinuviel]

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

Who you voted for is not public unless you tell someone. Whether or not you voted, and whether you lean Democrat or Republican, can be part of the public record.

Is it leaning, or party registration? Apparently that's a bigger thing out there than I'm used to seeing.

[surreality]

@Tinuviel It's party registration, yep, any changes to such, etc.

ETA: It doesn't account for the flukes of 'crossed the lines this year', but those tend to be fairly rare. There's a REASON I registered as 'other/independent'.

[Ghost]

@Tinuviel said in Separating Art From Artist:

@Pandora said in Separating Art From Artist:

Who you voted for is not public unless you tell someone. Whether or not you voted, and whether you lean Democrat or Republican, can be part of the public record.

Is it leaning, or party registration? Apparently that's a bigger thing out there than I'm used to seeing.

Party affiliation and whether or not you voted can be part of public record. The general public does not have access to the details of your votes.

You can confirm that Steve Berberkinberk, a Republican, voted in 1950 and assume how they voted, but do not have access to the hard data for aggregation.

ETA: and THANK GOD for this because I don't need my friends who smoke weed finding out that I voted against it being legalized in my state.

[Tinuviel]

Choosing to officially affiliate with a particular party is mind-boggling to me. But then again so is 'deciding not to vote.'

[Pandora]

@Tinuviel Party registration, IIRC. Nothing about your actual ballot is public, that'd be madness. I read about some Republican politician whose campaign would send out a mailer with names and voting records of people who hadn't voted yet and a friendly 'reminder' that if you don't vote, your name and party affiliation will be added in the next one, and it'll be sent to all your neighbors. Savage.