Skip to main content

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

Tue, Oct 17, 2017 12:47 PM

Live Face-Off Poll: Separating the Art from the Artist?

Roman Polanski, Bill Cosby, Stephen Collins, Woody Allen, Harvey Weinstein..., no matter how impactful these personalities were (some more than others) in their respective fields, suspicion, controversy, scandal and shame have caused their downfall or "at least" soiled a significant portion of their legacy, encouraging many people and some ex-fans to boycott any work they took part in.

This is a very difficult subject but it's interesting to know where you would stand for if it applied for someone you appreciate. Now, when an accusation, a scandal, a controversy or a creepy revelation (especially sexual abuses) destroys the image of a director, a producer or an actor you used to love. Will you still 'enjoy' his work? or do you boycott? 

In other words, do you separate the Art from the Artist?

https://www.imdb.com/list/ls025657965/

https://www.imdb.com/poll/0-r5fwLc74Q/

(this question applies to the situation where the artist is proven guilty, admits his faults and/or makes amends, since it's the "fans" we're asking, many are eager to give the benefit of the doubt until a definite answer is given)

Responses

Champion

 • 

4.3K Messages

 • 

88.6K Points

3 years ago

This is one I've thought about many times.

Do you feel like the same answer options apply if one killed someone rather than raping or harassing them?

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

There aren't many famous artists who are known for having killed someone, Verlaine shot at Rimbaud and he wrote some of the best poems of French language, but generally speaking, it's more about notorious killers who had artistic hobbies, so their death toll is more famous or infamous than their creative body of work.

That said, some people believe that rape is worse than killing, I'm not sure I agree, there's still a chance to reconstruct a soul. 

Champion

 • 

4.3K Messages

 • 

88.6K Points

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

Good call, while I was just checking the names, I thought of John Landis and Gig Young and then I found them. 

It's a tricky question but I believe it's all in the way the "killing" carries someone's moral responsibility rather than physical, an accident or a context of war are more attenuating circumstances than an irresponsible mistake or plain murder. Maybe I should  add a fourth option, I'll think about it.

It's very ironic that Robert Blake played Perry Smith, a killer with great painting abilities.

Champion

 • 

7.3K Messages

 • 

253.7K Points

3 years ago

Yes, I don't have a problem with seeing their work.

I'm not sure it works well to use specific names for each option.

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

It doesn't, you're right. I'll make than an image poll. Thanks :)

1 Message

 • 

82 Points

3 years ago

I would say we should separate "Art" from "Artist" and I kinda do it. I'm not really sure about "you still 'enjoy' his work" because I would definitely not boycott , because like movies or music, art is made more than 1 person, so ... i think boycott would be stupid thing to do, but in the same time I'm not sure does that would impact my viewing experience as I never really had that issue before, usually you watch something and only then this kinda things happens. 

And it maybe it will be not the most popular opinion but I think there is a lot of people who is maybe evil, bad, arrogant, etc and maybe even we hate them at one point but if they have talent to create something or they are just really good at something...what you gonna do about it? For example I think we all have heard about few actors who has done some bad or just arrogant stuff, but you know if someone like Christian Bale gets mad, you will enjoy his amazing performance at any time anyways (or Johny Depp). 

In the end i think if we speak not too deeply in any of these cases (like who did what, and who did not tell and so on). The artist should be punished , but the art...art doesn't really care who made it, it just can be beautiful in any case. 

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

3 years ago

I changed the list and the introduction (no names), here's the new version:

http://www.imdb.com/list/ls025657965/

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

2 years ago

bump

(this has been suggested more than a year ago so it goes without saying that for many of these celebrities, we're not in "suspicion" level anymore)

659 Messages

 • 

20K Points

2 years ago

"Not all the geniuses are good guys."
-These are very true words.

And its a yes for sure.

Champion

 • 

4.3K Messages

 • 

133.7K Points

2 years ago

Typo:
... Is boycott the only ethical answer?

534 Messages

 • 

18.1K Points

2 years ago

I have a question related to this idea. But a question that has no place on your poll anyway. :/
.
Why is EVERYONE TALKING ABOUT SEPARATING ART FROM ARTIST ONLY WHEN THEY'VE DONE SOMETHING UNACCEPTABLE BY SOCIETY?

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

Well I guess it has to do with the negative connotation of the word "separation", if you've done something that is acceptable by social standards then it's likely to have a positive influence on your reputation, I don't know it sounds pretty obvious but I might have missed one subtlety or two :)

PS: I fixed the typo

534 Messages

 • 

18.1K Points

Well, as I said before, even though it's related to this one, it has nothing to do with it either. :/

Champion

 • 

6K Messages

 • 

175.6K Points

2 years ago

Live Pollhttps://www.imdb.com/poll/0-r5fwLc74Q/?ref_=po_ho Bravo, ElMo, on another smart poll on a meaningful subject. 

795 Messages

 • 

29.7K Points

2 years ago

What a great idea !!
In my opinion, we must separate the art of the artist. We can not be obtuse and, for example, say that Kevin Spacey is a bad actor. Yes, he is probably an idiot, but as for his acting qualities he is really good and this applies to many other actors.

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

Indeed. While I think there's no definite answer (what if you're close or related to a victim... or one of them), an artistic creation can be so great it goes beyond the reach or even the legacy of its own creator as a person and yes, many great persons aren't good. But then again, there's no definite answer.

795 Messages

 • 

29.7K Points

Yeah, you are absolutely right, a good artistic creation can surpass the legacy of it's own creator.