Picasso and Polanski committed horrific acts. What do we do with their art?
www.abc.net.au
Post MeToo, audiences are reconsidering great artistic works in the light of their creators' transgressions. But is it truly possible to separate the art from the artist?

When the MeToo movement took off across the globe in 2017, it changed how we think about artists and their art.

As victims of sexual harassment and assault spoke out, the public became more aware of the behaviour of well-known people, including successful artists. Audiences immediately began to view these artists’ work through the lens of their actions.

As a result, many of our favourite books, songs and art works became irrevocably tainted by the transgressions of their creators.

Admiring the work of Pablo Picasso — the cubist artist who burned his partner Françoise Gilot’s face with a cigarette (and painted it) — or Alfred Hitchcock — the film director who tried to destroy actress Tippi Hedren’s career when she rebuffed his advances — became a less straightforward proposition.

“In the aftermath [of MeToo], people were left wondering what to do about their heroes,” US critic Claire Dederer writes in her new book, Monsters: A Fan’s Dilemma.

  • WhoRoger@lemmy.world
    1·
    1 year ago

    Re the phone thing. What I meant is that you can boycott whatever you wish, and try to convince me too I guess, but some people tend to go waaaaay too far.

    Like with the recent thing about a Harry Potter game, when some people were absolutely bullish to anyone who wouldn’t agree with their view, and if you’d say that that you’d buy the game regardless, they’d deem you a monster and cancel you too.

    This may be an extreme example, but there’s really this entire culture about cancelling and legacy erasing for… Anything at this point.

    So first problem is that if there’s barely any difference if I get cancelled and bullied for buying a video game or murdering someone, then what is the incentive to behave anymore? That’s also my point in lots of other discussions, but I won’t get into it.

    Then as I said, the whole concept of how it’s only okay to enjoy content of the right people. I just can’t get behind that. It’s natural to a degree, but let’s not go too far.

    So, it’s not your case, but if someone becomes too loud regarding these things and how we’re also accessories for willing to acknowledge Kevin Spacey as a good actor or whatever - then yea, I’ll totally point at their phone and ask what’s their position on that.

    Besides, yet another issue is that all these anger campaigns are fads that fizzle out in a week, because it’s not even about making a change, but appearing righteous. So maybe the footnote idea could work, as that way there would be at least some record of the whole affair.