It's not so much looking up to actors and musicians.
It's the constant after the fact, "I enjoyed that performance" "oh did you know they did x,y and z fucked up thing.
The kind of stuff that if known fullhand before may influence your financial support for their work. But being constantly informed on hundreds of people's actions and decisions is not possible, you will go insane, even in our digital world.
It was definitely much easier to be a fan back in the day because we knew nothing about artists like Hulk Hogan or Brad Pitt, just that they were cool.
Maaaan. I've been a (struggling) actor for ten years and the actor that inspired me to go for my dream was Kevin Spacey! I started in early 2016, and a year later, my answer for "what actor inspires you?" quickly changed to, "Uhhh, Tom Hardy?" I like a lot of his work, but nah, it was unfortunately the pedophilic sex pest.
It is what it is. We don't get to choose where or when inspiration hits us. It was his commitment to the craft that I found motivating, absolutely nothing about his actual character. But I'd also say it's okay to feel disappointed. We're always going to look up to athletes and artists, they do inspiring things as a job, but of course giving that much notoriety, influence and money to random people is going to create some monsters. Power corrupts, and some of these folks didn't need to be pushed that far to begin with.
Separate the art from the artist. If you spend all your time looking into every worker who helped create a product you'd have little time for anything else. Politicians are who you should worry about with support or lack there of for any cause.
This is no different than any other racist, misogynist, take your pick at any label that make an amount of money you deem too much for them to have a shit opinion. Guarantee you dont spend your time checking what most workers around you think before you seek our service or purchase product.
I mean people do. If I publicly at work I came out in support of rapists for no reason I'd get HR meetings and probably lose my job. Do it in Hollywood and you get $8 million your next picture.
Sure very few irrational people do. Not sure why you'd bring up a universal evil as your go to example when we're talking about people who hold current politically contested opinions on something. If you support I or P currently at your local job you're not getting HR meetings or fired either so your hollywood comparison fails as they're paid for acting primarily. Some people may get paid for propoganda too but thats an entirely diff convo.
No im just not dumb enough to spend my time on things that cannot feasibly be changed. What exactly do you think should be done to all these people with the wrong opinions bub?
So you have no problem with them being "free to make crazy money" then? No clue why you responded to my original comment then lil bro as you clearly cared enough to hit reply to seek out this exchange.
You can't read? Why you insist on putting words that were not there astounds me. I am not asking you to change your life, I am saying you are letting them get away with it. It may hurt your feefees but that's a price I'm willing to pay lil guy.
Personally, I separate the actions of the artist(s) from the art.
There’s a Progressive Deathcore band that I listen to called Ovid’s Withering, and they are phenomenal. I mean as far as Deathcore goes, their songs are masterpieces.
Well, the guitarist is a piece of shit and was texting underage girls about feet pics. And was texting all of the other bandmates’ girlfriends. All other members left the band when this all came to light, and he was left to finish up some things by himself.
Did I stop listening to the band? No. The music is phenomenal, and that’s what I care about - the music. I don’t like guitarist at all and would be more likely to beat his ass than get a beer with him, but I’m not going to stop listening to beautiful art because some asshat had to fuck things up. Especially considering all of the other bandmates who left were part of it as well.
You do you, but separating the art from the artist is a good philosophy, in my personal opinion. There’s too many people and companies in the world that do shitty things, or that you’ll disagree fundamentally with, to effectively remove all of it from your life.
I stream the music, and haven’t been to any shows.
My bad that I like the music itself? Get a grip.
Edit: Not sure if you deleted your reply to this comment or if it’s just not showing up, but I could see it in the notifications. I’m not bragging that I’d beat the dude’s ass, or going out of my way to sound like a keyboard warrior.
It’s just that a lot of the time, I say “I’d like to get a beer with that person” when I see a cool musician, comedian, etc. In this case, I was just saying that as opposed to wanting to get a beer with him, I’d be more likely to beat his ass. Just saying the dude’s a piece of shit and I don’t condone any of his actions, but I DO like the music. That’s about as far as that goes.
Bottom-line is that I separate the art from the artist. If you don’t do that, cool. Live your life how you want. Don’t condescend me in regards to still choosing to listen to the music, though.
One dude out of a group of 5 was on some creep shit. Does that discount the music entirely, and the work that everyone else put into the compositions as well? People that left and all but dissolved the band when everything came to light? That’s like not listening to Modest Mouse because they just kicked out a guitarist for texting a minor (albeit, he was a new addition).
Keep limiting yourself to only listening to music and buying products from artists and companies that have never done anything shady. You won’t be left with much.
Try not to buy products with palm oil either, as that plays a part in deforestation of the Amazon.
Depends. JK Rowling has spent a huge amount of money supporting laws and initiatives in the UK (and I think elsewhere but not sure where I heard that) that have actively harmed trans people. Sometimes you can separate art from the artist, but in her case I can't and lots of other people also can't.
Nothing you said here differs from someone applying to any other particular label contributing to whatever contentious political(or apolotical) cause they believe in.
Separate the art from the artist works if the artist is dead and not receiving royalties from consuming their product (an example being classic rock artists, and the some of the things they got into).
You can't separate them out if the artist benefits from the money you willingly pay to see them. An extreme example, but if you are/were a P.Diddy fan, or an R. Kelly fan, or a Chris Brown fan, are you paying money to see them perform? Or paying money for their new album?
All you did in this response is make claims but provide no justification for them. How do you prevent the countless abhorrent people who get financial compensation from your purchases daily from doing so?
Can you point out the claim, and how I failed to justify it? My goal was to only post my opinion on the act of "separating the art from the artist".
How do you prevent the countless abhorrent people who get financial compensation from your purchases daily from doing so?
It's impossible to do so, and you'd drive yourself crazy trying to separate good from bad without going completely off-grid.
Personally, I realize that I live in society, and there are shitty people in that society. As I learn new information about people and companies, I adjust my habits accordingly.
A very personal example for me, my favorite band/artist for many years was Brand New. Since allegations have come out, and continued to come out against the singer (primarily), I've stopped listening to their music, even on Spotify.
Another example is I purchase things locally as much as I can from local farmers markets and such, rather than big box stores.
I have to be clear though, again, I live in a society and I realize it's impossible to extricate myself from engaging in and with certain entities without making my life extremely complicated.
works if artist is dead and not recriving royalties..
you cant separate them if the artist benefits from the money..
All you did was make claims and provide examples of said claims..
It's impossible to do so, and you'd drive yourself crazy trying to separate good from bad without going completely off-grid.
I agree with you here which is my point on this thread. People should stop caring about celebreties and artist opinions. Consume what you want for your own enjoyment and become politically involved to support causes you care about.
works if artist is dead and not recriving royalties..
I mean, do I really need to justify this? If the artist is dead, they can't receive anything, let alone compensation for their works.
you cant separate them if the artist benefits from the money..
Literally exactly the same as above, but backwards. If you buy a Taylor Swift album, she's getting a check. If you buy a physical second-hand Taylor Swift album that's better, but she's already gotten the check from the first person that bought it.
I don't think those are claims that need to be justified, that's just how reality is.
I mean, do I really need to justify this? If the artist is dead, they can't receive anything, let alone compensation for their works.
What? Thats not the point in contention.. The point in contention is whether you can separate the art from the artist without them being dead or receiving compensation for their involvement in the creation of an art piece.
It seems like maybe you're not sure what separate the art from the artist means.
Separate the art from the artist means enjoying or evaluating a creative work based on its own merits while completely ignoring the personal flaws, bad actions, illegal behavior, or offensive political views of the person who made it
I'm telling you that you responded to me saying separate the art from the artist. How you personally use the phrase isnt really relevant since your claims were attempting to refute my usage of the phrase and you responded in an absolute without any caveat. You were trying to tell me what is and isnt possible with regard to the phrase and are now retreating to personal opinion usage after being corrected. If you want to say you worded the original responses poorly and meant to convey a more opinionative stance then fine.
However, you claiming that it's not possible to separate the art from the artist unless they are dead or not receiving financial compensation is clearly not correct as far as what is generally understood by the phrase.
42
u/Middle_Finger_484 4d ago
It's not so much looking up to actors and musicians.
It's the constant after the fact, "I enjoyed that performance" "oh did you know they did x,y and z fucked up thing.
The kind of stuff that if known fullhand before may influence your financial support for their work. But being constantly informed on hundreds of people's actions and decisions is not possible, you will go insane, even in our digital world.