Languish.org

Roman Polanski. Eminem. Prince. Sean Penn.

All hold views and opinions, and/or engage in activities that many people may find questionable. At the same time, all are recognized artists in their field.

I wonder to what extent your judgement of the artist enters the picture when you appreciate his or her art?

Yes, but only if the aspect of the artist (e.g. his views or past behaviours) you disagree with feature in his art.

Most Swedish artists are Communists so if I couldn't look past that I would be locked out of some good stuff.

Insofar as an artist uses his celebrity as a political soap box I will use my power of the purse to not indirectly support the artist.

For me it largely depends on the type of art. I am less likely to be annoyed by a painter's or an actor's views than I am by someone who writes his own lines (whether lyrics or poems or novels). I guess this would fit with the second option, largely.

But I have also reacted quite strongly (i.e. boycott) if some artist I actually used to enjoy suddenly came out of woodwork with some horribly disagreeable views (this is the case of Prince).

I guess my reaction would also depend if we are talking about boycotting a "one man show" (a concert or a book, for example) or a cooperative enterprise in which that artist is just one of many (e.g. a movie).

Meh, I don't care for the "art" of those three examples anyway.

A real lighting-rod would be Wagner.

I make a point of only sending postcards painted by A. Hitler.

Quote from: The Brain on October 11, 2009, 02:15:17 PM
I make a point of only sending postcards painted by A. Hitler.

Awesome. I'd buy a box of 50.

Option 4 for me.  I also disagree with all artists.

What the hell did Prince do that was objectionable?

Oh wait, look who's posting.  I bet I can guess.

Quote from: Martinus on October 11, 2009, 01:49:35 PM
Roman Polanski. Eminem. Prince. Sean Penn.

All hold views and opinions, and/or engage in activities that many people may find questionable. At the same time, all are recognized artists in their field.

I wonder to what extent your judgement of the artist enters the picture when you appreciate his or her art?

I think Polanski as a person is much less honest and moral than, say, Oliver Stone, but I don't see his dishonesty in his films, so don't consider that his direction when I choose a film to watch.  Stone tries to pass off his lies as truth in the films, and so I won't watch them, by and large.

Ditto for the difference between, say, arch-conservative novelists like Mark Helprin and Ayn Rand (though the qualitative difference between their styles would make Helprin infinitely better in any case) or arch-liberal historians like Arthur Schlesinger and Michael Ignatieff.

Quote from: Tonitrus on October 11, 2009, 02:13:40 PM
Meh, I don't care for the "art" of those three examples anyway.

A real lighting-rod would be Wagner.

The Wipeout co-host? I approve.

Quote from: Tonitrus on October 11, 2009, 02:13:40 PM
Meh, I don't care for the "art" of those three examples anyway.

A real lighting-rod would be Wagner.

The first thought that went into my mind, is that Marty considers these people artists.  Jeez.  What a fucking philistine. 

Quote from: Martinus on October 11, 2009, 01:49:35 PM
Roman Polanski. Eminem. Prince. Sean Penn.

All hold views and opinions, and/or engage in activities that many people may find questionable. At the same time, all are recognized artists in their field.

I wonder to what extent your judgement of the artist enters the picture when you appreciate his or her art?

No, the art exists independently of the artist.  Example: Tom Cruise is a good actor (stfu, just accept it for the sake of argument), and I enjoy and will pay to see films with Tom Cruise in them if they seem otherwise cool, despite the fact that Tom Cruise is probably batshit insane.

Quote from: Neil on October 11, 2009, 02:20:05 PM
What the hell did Prince do that was objectionable?

Well, there was that time he dropped his name and went by some weird symbol.

Quote from: Neil on October 11, 2009, 02:20:05 PM
What the hell did Prince do that was objectionable?

Have you seen Purple Rain?  :rolleyes:

Quote from: Neil on October 11, 2009, 02:20:05 PM
What the hell did Prince do that was objectionable?

Oh wait, look who's posting.  I bet I can guess.

Yes, you already know the answer.

option two.

I'm am not a fan of New Criticism, as I believe Art has context, which it cannot be seperated from.

So when you see what a loser Nietzsche was, or what a political failure Machiavelli was, you pretty much have to reappraise their works.

Is philosophy considered art?

To put it in layman terms: when I see a movie, I don't give a damn about the personal background of the actors. 

Quote from: Monoriu on October 11, 2009, 08:04:06 PM
To put it in layman terms: when I see a movie, I don't give a damn about the personal background of the actors.

Actors are probably the worst example one can use (which explains why Ide focused on acting, even if he is wrong about Cruise's "ability" to act) - actors have little ability to interject their politics or beliefs into their roles.  They are paid to do what the director tells them to do.

Quote from: saskganesh on October 11, 2009, 06:18:47 PM
So when you see what a loser Nietzsche was, or what a political failure Machiavelli was, you pretty much have to reappraise their works.

Only if your initial appraisal depended, for some bizarre reason, on Nietzsche being a winner or Machiavelli getting that job.

Quote from: grumbler on October 11, 2009, 08:39:29 PM

Quote from: Monoriu on October 11, 2009, 08:04:06 PM
To put it in layman terms: when I see a movie, I don't give a damn about the personal background of the actors.

Actors are probably the worst example one can use (which explains why Ide focused on acting, even if he is wrong about Cruise's "ability" to act) - actors have little ability to interject their politics or beliefs into their roles.  They are paid to do what the director tells them to do.

I'll rephrase - when I see B5, I don't care about the personal background or beliefs of JMS  ;)

Quote from: Monoriu on October 11, 2009, 08:54:42 PM
I'll rephrase - when I see B5, I don't care about the personal background or beliefs of JMS  ;)

There's no need to, it's all woven into the script.  :P

Why is this necessarily a negative thing? Knowing about the author/artist, etc. can sometimes be illuminating.

I'm sure that knowing a certain author was gay, makes that person's works more valuable and attractive to you, Mart, no?

QuoteOn their 50th anniversary, a wife found the negligee she wore on her wedding night and put it on. 

She went to her husband, a retired Sailor, and asked, "Honey, do you remember this ?"

He looked up from his newspaper and said, "Yes Dear, I do. You wore that same negligee the night we were married."

She said, "Yes, that's right.  Do you remember what you said to me that night ?"

He nodded and said, "Yes dear, I said, 'Oh baby, I'm going to suck the life out of those tits and screw your brains out.'"

She giggled and said, "That's exactly what you said.  So now it's fifty years later, and I'm in the same negligee.  What do you have to say tonight ?"

He looked her up and down and said, "Mission accomplished!!"

Better when it says something like marine.  Sailor is a little too gay.

Quote from: grumbler on October 11, 2009, 08:39:29 PM

Quote from: Monoriu on October 11, 2009, 08:04:06 PM
To put it in layman terms: when I see a movie, I don't give a damn about the personal background of the actors.

Actors are probably the worst example one can use (which explains why Ide focused on acting, even if he is wrong about Cruise's "ability" to act) - actors have little ability to interject their politics or beliefs into their roles.  They are paid to do what the director tells them to do.

They can, however, sometimes have the pull in Hollywood to be largely responsible for a movie getting made at all.  See John Travolta and Battlefield Earth.  Well, actually, do yourself a favor and don't see Battlefield Earth.

In the case of performers, I really don't factor it in; there's the actor, and there's the caricature, and some of the real actors behind the contrived personae are damn near impossible to gauge (Eminem, Stephen Colbert, etc.).

'experiencing art'   :lol:

Can you think of a better single word to describe the acts of looking at a painting or sculpture, hearing music, watching a movie and reading a book?

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 12, 2009, 12:35:22 AM
Can you think of a better single word to describe the acts of looking at a painting or sculpture, hearing music, watching a movie and reading a book?

Not one that makes you seem like a total douchebag, no.

Quote from: DisturbedPervert on October 12, 2009, 12:52:20 AM

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 12, 2009, 12:35:22 AM
Can you think of a better single word to describe the acts of looking at a painting or sculpture, hearing music, watching a movie and reading a book?

Not one that makes you seem like a total douchebag, no.

:lol: Ok, so how about one that doesn't make you seem like a douchebag.

I had the same initial reaction- "experiencing art" sounds rather pretentious. But I couldn't think of a better way to put it.

No.  I do not care for Polanski, Kazan, Redgrave (Vanessa) or Penn, but their works stands apart from their personal actions.

Quote from: garbon on October 11, 2009, 09:08:01 PM
Why is this necessarily a negative thing? Knowing about the author/artist, etc. can sometimes be illuminating.

I'm sure that knowing a certain author was gay, makes that person's works more valuable and attractive to you, Mart, no?

Well, it's different. I meant this in a specifically negative context. Essentially does it spoil the experience for you. Your point is different than what I was getting it.

Quote from: saskganesh on October 11, 2009, 06:18:47 PM
option two.

I'm am not a fan of New Criticism, as I believe Art has context, which it cannot be seperated from.

So when you see what a loser Nietzsche was, or what a political failure Machiavelli was, you pretty much have to reappraise their works.

The problem with this example is that neither Nietzsche nor Machiavelli were artists. ;)

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 12, 2009, 01:06:15 AM
:lol: Ok, so how about one that doesn't make you seem like a douchebag.

I had the same initial reaction- "experiencing art" sounds rather pretentious. But I couldn't think of a better way to put it.

Enjoying art.  Consuming art.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 12, 2009, 02:03:14 AM

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 12, 2009, 01:06:15 AM
:lol: Ok, so how about one that doesn't make you seem like a douchebag.

I had the same initial reaction- "experiencing art" sounds rather pretentious. But I couldn't think of a better way to put it.

Enjoying art.  Consuming art.

Enjoying suggests the art in question is good. Consuming has a variety of semantic problems and sounds as pretentious as experiencing imo.

I voted somewhat, but... There is a lot of art I like that I don't know anything about the artists, and have little interest in finding out.

Some artists,however,  are more interesting as people (for good or bad, but interesting) and I think their personalities can sometimes color (for me or others)their work in ways they don't intend, or like themselves (Spike lee would be the best example of this... most critics hardly ever talk about whatever film, but talk about Spike)... Tarantino, Sean Penn, Polanski, Madonna... etc all to some degree hinder there own art by the force of their celebritiness.

I know absolutely nothing about say Rembrandt - I think his art is simply astounding (especially in person)... I feel the same about Van Gogh and I know a lot about his own story which is kind of a piece of art on it's own. Do I devalue or praise him more for his whacky life, or because I feel sympathy or empathy? maybe somewhat, not enough to sway me from my initial reaction of being mind blown whenever I see certain of his works.

Yes, but only if the aspect of the artist (e.g. his views or past behaviours) you disagree with feature in his art.

So wait... when did Prince start hating gays?  :huh:

Quote from: Caliga on October 12, 2009, 08:04:33 AM
So wait... when did Prince start hating gays?  :huh:

Some time 6 months ago or so. He gave some interview where he came out as this rabid Christian fundie.  :huh:

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 08:06:14 AM
Some time 6 months ago or so. He gave some interview where he came out as this rabid Christian fundie.  :huh:

Wait, he's not just some go-through-the-motions Catholic?

*checks* Argh, he's a Jehovah's Witness!? :bleeding:

Quote from: Caliga on October 12, 2009, 08:09:24 AM
*checks* Argh, he's a Jehovah's Witness!? :bleeding:

Hey, the Watchtower is a fun read on the can.

I haven't read it in years.  :(

They used to hand it out all the time at my old train station up in Boston, but I never see it down here.

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 08:06:14 AM

Quote from: Caliga on October 12, 2009, 08:04:33 AM
So wait... when did Prince start hating gays?  :huh:

Some time 6 months ago or so. He gave some interview where he came out as this rabid Christian fundie.  :huh:

Wow, you met Prince 6 months ago?  :w00t:

Quote from: DGuller on October 12, 2009, 09:30:44 AM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 08:06:14 AM

Quote from: Caliga on October 12, 2009, 08:04:33 AM
So wait... when did Prince start hating gays?  :huh:

Some time 6 months ago or so. He gave some interview where he came out as this rabid Christian fundie.  :huh:

Wow, you met Prince 6 months ago?  :w00t:

Not all people who hate gays do it because they met me.  <_<

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 01:31:29 AM

Quote from: saskganesh on October 11, 2009, 06:18:47 PM
option two.

I'm am not a fan of New Criticism, as I believe Art has context, which it cannot be seperated from.

So when you see what a loser Nietzsche was, or what a political failure Machiavelli was, you pretty much have to reappraise their works.

The problem with this example is that neither Nietzsche nor Machiavelli were artists. ;)

Machiavelli was; in addition to being a statesman and a political philosopher, Machiavelli wrote novels, plays and poems. 

Voted the second option. When they inject the bad parts of their personality/ideology into the art. Ex: Terry Goodkind.

I honestly try to know as little about the artist as possible so I can enjoy their art for what it is.  If they become so public with their craziness that even I know about it, despite my best interests, then yes I will do my best to avoid their art in the future.

I also do not need to know if, for example, an actor playing a big sports fan character is actualy a big sports fan.  It colors how I judge their performance so I really do not want to know anything about actors specifically.

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 08:06:14 AM

Quote from: Caliga on October 12, 2009, 08:04:33 AM
So wait... when did Prince start hating gays?  :huh:

Some time 6 months ago or so. He gave some interview where he came out as this rabid Christian fundie.  :huh:

He's been a JW (practicing and going to people's ho,mes with Watchtowers and everything) for several years now. it's not news in the least.

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 12, 2009, 11:49:12 AM
Voted the second option. When they inject the bad parts of their personality/ideology into the art. Ex: Terry Goodkind.

Orson Scott Card, John Ringo...

Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on October 12, 2009, 12:01:54 PM
He's been a JW (practicing and going to people's ho,mes with Watchtowers and everything) for several years now. it's not news in the least.

It is to someone like me who doesn't give a rat's ass about Prince.  :cool:

Quote from: ulmont on October 12, 2009, 12:21:41 PM
John Ringo...

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelastbestwest.com%2Fgraphics%2F2007%2FHats%2FRingo%2F225_ringo_230.jpg&hash=f9a9dbe48861a522e3d0ef01c16c90d356073066)

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 12, 2009, 11:49:12 AM
Voted the second option. When they inject the bad parts of their personality/ideology into the art. Ex: Terry Goodkind.

Your example has nothing to do with art. :huh:

Quote from: Neil on October 12, 2009, 02:08:26 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelastbestwest.com%2Fgraphics%2F2007%2FHats%2FRingo%2F225_ringo_230.jpg&hash=f9a9dbe48861a522e3d0ef01c16c90d356073066)

I didn't take you as the kind of person who would go to patriotresource.com, let alone steal their images.

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 09:42:02 AM
Not all people who hate gays do it because they met me.  <_<

Perhaps, but the generalization holds true on Languish, at least.

Quote from: garbon on October 12, 2009, 02:09:55 PM

Quote from: Neil on October 12, 2009, 02:08:26 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thelastbestwest.com%2Fgraphics%2F2007%2FHats%2FRingo%2F225_ringo_230.jpg&hash=f9a9dbe48861a522e3d0ef01c16c90d356073066)

I didn't take you as the kind of person who would go to patriotresource.com, let alone steal their images.

What makes you think he didn't google the image?

Quote from: Savonarola on October 12, 2009, 11:42:05 AM


Machiavelli was; in addition to being a statesman and a political philosopher, Machiavelli wrote novels, plays and poems.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that.  I did read his play the Mandrake Root.  Still I don't think his difficulty getting a job can really be considered in him writing a sex comedy.

Quote from: garbon on October 12, 2009, 02:09:10 PM

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 12, 2009, 11:49:12 AM
Voted the second option. When they inject the bad parts of their personality/ideology into the art. Ex: Terry Goodkind.

Your example has nothing to do with art. :huh:

True 'nuff.

Eh. I have a hard time not being; I thought Card's reading sucked after I found out he was fucking crazy, and I'm iffy buying anything by Stross now that I know he thought Palin was being set up by Wall Street to be Evita Peron for their dictatorship.

Quote from: Neil on October 12, 2009, 02:11:12 PM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 09:42:02 AM
Not all people who hate gays do it because they met me.  <_<

Perhaps, but the generalization holds true on Languish, at least.

Not really. In fact I can't think of any person on Languish who met me in person - save Berkut - who hates me. :P

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 04:57:17 PM

Quote from: Neil on October 12, 2009, 02:11:12 PM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 09:42:02 AM
Not all people who hate gays do it because they met me.  <_<

Perhaps, but the generalization holds true on Languish, at least.

Not really. In fact I can't think of any person on Languish who met me in person - save Berkut - who hates me. :P

Hate and scorn are not the same thing Mart :P

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 04:57:17 PM

Quote from: Neil on October 12, 2009, 02:11:12 PM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 09:42:02 AM
Not all people who hate gays do it because they met me.  <_<

Perhaps, but the generalization holds true on Languish, at least.

Not really. In fact I can't think of any person on Languish who met me in person - save Berkut - who hates me. :P

:zipped:

No.

I like classical music, but I am not interested in the opinion or actions of composers like Bach, Chopin, etc. They were probably anti-Semite, racist and homophoob. Does that change the quality of their music?

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 04:57:17 PM
Not really. In fact I can't think of any person on Languish who met me in person - save Berkut - who hates me. :P

You met Berkut in person?  :huh:

Quote from: Caliga on October 13, 2009, 07:16:06 AM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 04:57:17 PM
Not really. In fact I can't think of any person on Languish who met me in person - save Berkut - who hates me. :P

You met Berkut in person?  :huh:

He has. Berk went to London, they held a meeting.

Quote from: Barrister on October 13, 2009, 02:32:28 AM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 04:57:17 PM

Quote from: Neil on October 12, 2009, 02:11:12 PM

Quote from: Martinus on October 12, 2009, 09:42:02 AM
Not all people who hate gays do it because they met me.  <_<

Perhaps, but the generalization holds true on Languish, at least.

Not really. In fact I can't think of any person on Languish who met me in person - save Berkut - who hates me. :P

:zipped:

Ass. :P

Quote from: Jos Theelen on October 13, 2009, 03:43:11 AM
No.

I like classical music, but I am not interested in the opinion or actions of composers like Bach, Chopin, etc. They were probably anti-Semite, racist and homophoob. Does that change the quality of their music?

I think a lot depends on whether these are dead people from a different age, or people living today.

Quote from: Martinus on October 13, 2009, 09:17:41 AM
I think a lot depends on whether these are dead people from a different age, or people living today.

What about dead people from today?

Quote from: Martinus on October 13, 2009, 09:17:41 AM
I think a lot depends on whether these are dead people from a different age, or people living today.

Why should that be so?

Quote from: PDH on October 13, 2009, 09:40:27 AM

Quote from: Martinus on October 13, 2009, 09:17:41 AM
I think a lot depends on whether these are dead people from a different age, or people living today.

What about dead people from today?

Is this like Dorsey aging Miami Hurricane players?

Quote from: Faeelin on October 13, 2009, 10:16:50 AM

Quote from: Martinus on October 13, 2009, 09:17:41 AM
I think a lot depends on whether these are dead people from a different age, or people living today.

Why should that be so?

Do you really have to ask? At least two reasons I can think off the top of my head:

1. Different standards. Views considered offensive today may have been mainstream and widely held in the past. (E.g. accusing Homer of being sexist).

2. At least for me, a part of the motivation to boycott an artist whose views I find offensive is not to contribute to his financial welfare by buying his stuff. Of course this is absent when he is dead.

well luckily for you Marti living artists usually get very little of the money generated by their art. You'd be better off boycotting Sony or EMI.

Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on October 13, 2009, 12:07:32 PM
well luckily for you Marti living artists usually get very little of the money generated by their art. You'd be better off boycotting Sony or EMI.

Logic?

Quote from: The Brain on October 13, 2009, 12:12:18 PM

Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on October 13, 2009, 12:07:32 PM
well luckily for you Marti living artists usually get very little of the money generated by their art. You'd be better off boycotting Sony or EMI.

Logic?

well he's been talking about Artists. Unless you sell millions upon millions of records or books, or become The next Keith Haring you will see very little money in the mainstream world of any art form. The big conglomerates like Sony etc will make a hundred fold what you do off your work, and they control the ditriution and copyright, not you the creator.

If you sell out, you sell out. They own your ass.

Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on October 13, 2009, 12:18:53 PM

Quote from: The Brain on October 13, 2009, 12:12:18 PM

Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on October 13, 2009, 12:07:32 PM
well luckily for you Marti living artists usually get very little of the money generated by their art. You'd be better off boycotting Sony or EMI.

Logic?

well he's been talking about Artists. Unless you sell millions upon millions of records or books, or become The next Keith Haring you will see very little money in the mainstream world of any art form. The big conglomerates like Sony etc will make a hundred fold what you do off your work, and they control the ditriution and copyright, not you the creator.

If you sell out, you sell out. They own your ass.

They will pry my ass from my cold dead hands.

Yes. Yes they will. And they will enjoy as much as your live ass. (moreso, because you've stopped pretending to struggle)