Similar to the recent question about artists where you can successfully separate them from their art. Are there any artists who did something so horrible, so despicable, that it has instantly invalidated all art that they have had any part in?

  • Tetra@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Very boring answer but JK Rowling.

    Her books already had some questionable shit in them but witnessing that shockingly venomous transphobia really recontextualizes everything. I used to re read the Harry Potter saga every few years, but never again now, this whole, very nostalgic for me franchise is forever ruined now.

    • Centillionaire@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 years ago

      I looked up all her tweets, and I don’t see much to disagree with.

      If you go to Thailand, trans men are called ladyboys and if you ask them if they are women, they say, no, I’m a ladyboy. There’s nothing wrong with having the opinion that trans women will not be real women. She’s not saying she hates trans people, just that they will never be the same as biological women.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          What is a human? What is knowledge? What is virtue? What is justice?

          We have known for 2500 years that some words are very difficult to define in such a way that every single edge case is handled, it is complete, and short. The most famous example, 2500 years ago, was an academy defined human as a featherless biped. The next day someone released a plucked chicken.

          For those words that are very difficult to define we develop criteria and gradually alter the criteria as time goes on, mostly based on the idea of ordinary language.

          • Jaytreeman@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            I want him to define it.
            Even cis women might not be ‘biologically female’
            It comes from a high school level understanding of genetics.

  • Eh, not really.

    Now, there are some examples where I won’t/can’t actively seek out their work, and would never contribute to them by buying anything at all, ever.

    Cosby falls into that category, just as an example.

    But, I have a complete separation as far as the work itself being valid/good despite the origins. Using Cosby as the example again, if I’m somewhere and one of his performances is on, I’m not going to care enough to change a channel or leave, or even say anything.

    That’s pretty much anyone and everyone. I just don’t have that thing where a given item, piece of work, whatever, is “tainted” just because the person that made it is a piece of shit. I don’t form an association like that. It’s that I choose to not seek out some things as a matter of principle.

    But, as a general rule, if they’re dead, I don’t care at all. And, if the person in question is only one person involved in a group effort, that group effort is fine by me. Like, if the guitarist of a band is a piece of shit, but everyone else is not, why would their work be a bad thing?

    Now, this isn’t to say that I ignore any bad acts when interacting with a given work. Take van Gogh as an example. His excesses and disturbing behaviors are part of his work to an extent. It’s a thing where knowing the person’s flaws informs the interaction with the work. Kinda like “gee, I wonder how much of this work stems from the same root as the bad acts did?”

    But, I can enjoy the work of people I personally despise with no issues. I just don’t have whatever it is that other people have that makes a thing tainted based on the creator.

    Part of that is knowing how shitty humans in general are, and how hard it is to find any artist that didn’t/doesn’t have massive flaws. In music and painting in particular, you run into a shit ton of artists that were abysmal people. If I did have that whatever it is that causes a connection between the art and the artist’s flaws, I wouldn’t be able to listen to much music at all.

        • DessertStorms@kbin.socialBanned from community
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          You mean the distinction between engaging in consensual intercourse (aka “fucking”) vs committing a heinous crime?

          If you think pointing out that babies can only be raped, is the problem, not saying he “fucked” them, this is a you problem…

            • DessertStorms@kbin.socialBanned from community
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 years ago

              I’m making the point that babies cannot be fucked, only raped, which obviously isn’t “inherent” to the person who said “he fucked babies” which minimises the reality of the “scenario” as you call it (more minimisation, why do you do that? To preserve your own comfort of course!). Words matter, and if you think pointing that out is “splitting hairs” (when you’re literally the only one making a load of fuss over this valid distinction), then again, you’re the one with the problem here (and taking issue with someone pointed out that babies can only be raped, not “fucked” is definitely a problem that needs addressing, like seriously - imagine being the person dying on the hill to defend the use of “fucked” to describe baby rape… 🤦‍♀️).

        • chunkystyles@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          The point is that we should try to stop using euphemistic language around rape. It happens all the time, and it lessens the impact of the act for the reader. We should be explicit.

  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 years ago

    Foo Fighters used to be real down with the whole AIDS denialism, even financially supporting it.

    I know David Grohl is an internet sweetheart, but every time I see anything Foo related, I just immediately wonder how many people died pointless and preventable deaths because they believed the denialism Foo Fighters pushed.

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 years ago

      To be fair, it wasn’t Dave’s idea or something he supported. It was bassist Nate Mendel’s message that they were, admittedly, amplifying. Even the info on their website had a disclaimer that listed it as “being displayed at the request of Nate Mendel”.

      I think they all regret being involved in amplifying that message too, including Nate. In the 20 years since they initially broke support with the people involved, they’ve played several shows in support of HIV/AIDS awareness groups, fundraised for Elton John’s AIDS Foundation, and every tour they do now has some kind of fundraising or auctions to support AIDS education or LGBTQIA+ rights.

      It feels like they know now, in hindsight of course, that it was harmful and have at least tried to do more good to make up for it. Mendel was even quoted saying that the only reason he did it was because he thought he was helping people, not hurting them.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 years ago

        To be fair, it wasn’t Dave’s idea or something he supported.

        And yet he kept mendel in the band, and had the message plastered on their website.

        Thats not something you get to handwave away with even the grossest incompetence claim.

        Mendel was even quoted saying that the only reason he did it was because he thought he was helping people, not hurting them.

        I mean, yeah. he likes his career, of course he says that.

        • Zoolander@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 years ago

          No one is hand waving anything away. Nate is a member of the band. The message on the website was clear that it was his message.

          You make it seem like people can’t change their views based on new information. It’s not like they could go back in time and not do those things after the fact. They’ve done far more in support of AIDS education. It’s not fair to vilify them for something they did for a few years while ignoring everything they’ve done since for more than 20 years.

          • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 years ago

            You make it seem like people can’t change their views based on new information.

            I never said or implied that.

            I said you cant handwave away or excuse Grohls involvement, and that a person who values their career has an incentive to say a certain thing after being called out for being a piece of shit.

            Anything beyond that is just your fiction.

            • Zoolander@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 years ago

              Except you did. You’re literally on a discussion where you posted Dave Grohl because of something he was a part of for maybe 2 or 3 years that wasn’t even his idea to begin with while ignoring everything he’s done for 20+ years since.

              And now you’re being dishonest about it.

  • gzrrt@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 years ago

    Kanye West. Maybe he was never ‘all there’ mentally to begin with, but the guy was clearly a role model to a lot of young people and utterly destroyed his own legacy.

    • drasticpotatoes@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 years ago

      I honestly wonder what happened to this guy. It was like a switch was hit and suddenly he was spouting nonsense and getting in trouble.

      • OceanSoap@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 years ago

        His mom dying on the table during an implant surgery was 100% the catalyst that thrust him towards what he is today. Totally unexpected, and she wasn’t anywhere near the age that her death would have been a thought.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          I am just thinking about something my wife told me, she is a nurse in cardiac unit mostly. She told me the ones that are the most devastating to the families is when there is nothing wrong until there is. Grandma was fine yesterday, she is not fine today.

    • Delphia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      NGL If I were rich Id probably buy one of his paintings just to hang it in the least used guest barhroom.

      Id never mention that it was a “Hitler” or why I had it. Id just like to have his failure be something my least favorite relatives have to stare at while they take a shit. My own personal fuck you to the cunt.

      • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        That’s really inviting layers of ugliness into your life and your mind, and subjecting your guests to stealth ugliness.

        • Delphia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 years ago

          Nope, its hilarious.

          Reducing anything that anyone who venerates Hitler or Nazis to a joke is better than destroying it. Because its just a shitty painting, its not evil, it doesnt hold psychic power, its not a banner to rally behind. Its just a terrible mans terrible painting that is now something that hangs above Uncle Joe while he clogs the toilet with his mammoth fast food dumps.

          • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            It’s poison, and you’d be subjecting yourself and your guests to poison.

            It’s not funny, and Burt K is a drooling moron. He’s pretty much brain dead.

  • Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Bono. U2 is pretty mediocre to begin with, but with that asshole in front singing Id rather listen to Miley Cyrus.