In this weekend essay, Battle of Ideas speaker Professor Ian Pace argues that we should not judge art simply from the biography of the artist – even if that were really possible.
An important article. Thank you. I personally have no interest in who made the art, only if the art interests me. There is far too much performative virtue.
I got booted out of an organisation I helped form for saying that I did not care if an editor was in the Ku Klux Klan, as long he or she did a good job of editing my work, so I guess I belong to the camp that says it is possible to separate the art from the artist. I believe this was the case throughout much of human history, which is why some of the most profound, universally acclaimed works were made by the sort of people most of us would shun socially. When I look at the awful art being produced by those whose claim to fame is they are on the "Intersection of blah-blah and blah-blah and seek to decenter this and queer that," I long for those days when the work mattered more than who made it.
To "the speaker opposing the motion claimed that nobody buys a book without knowing who its author is*, I can add a data point. I have quite an extensive collection of books collected over 50+ years, and spanning about ten times that number, and I know almost nothing about almost all of the authors. What I do know was found out incidentally. A good book (or music, or dance, or film) is good on its own merits. I suppose I'd better add this to the list of reasons I'm "nobody".
When Steve Alibini died Julie burchill pointed out he supported peadophilia and he’d produced some of my favourite artists I felt awkward
Not only having missed he had those views
Turning a blind eye to happy Mondays homophobia was one thing I recall when it turned out some artists had toured with a couple of Neo Nazi pink vends before they revealed their views
I also felt Julie burchills obituary of Shane McGowan being a plastic paddy and pointing out John Lydon and Morrisey had both called out the IRA was much more admirable
An important article. Thank you. I personally have no interest in who made the art, only if the art interests me. There is far too much performative virtue.
I got booted out of an organisation I helped form for saying that I did not care if an editor was in the Ku Klux Klan, as long he or she did a good job of editing my work, so I guess I belong to the camp that says it is possible to separate the art from the artist. I believe this was the case throughout much of human history, which is why some of the most profound, universally acclaimed works were made by the sort of people most of us would shun socially. When I look at the awful art being produced by those whose claim to fame is they are on the "Intersection of blah-blah and blah-blah and seek to decenter this and queer that," I long for those days when the work mattered more than who made it.
To "the speaker opposing the motion claimed that nobody buys a book without knowing who its author is*, I can add a data point. I have quite an extensive collection of books collected over 50+ years, and spanning about ten times that number, and I know almost nothing about almost all of the authors. What I do know was found out incidentally. A good book (or music, or dance, or film) is good on its own merits. I suppose I'd better add this to the list of reasons I'm "nobody".
When Steve Alibini died Julie burchill pointed out he supported peadophilia and he’d produced some of my favourite artists I felt awkward
Not only having missed he had those views
Turning a blind eye to happy Mondays homophobia was one thing I recall when it turned out some artists had toured with a couple of Neo Nazi pink vends before they revealed their views
I also felt Julie burchills obituary of Shane McGowan being a plastic paddy and pointing out John Lydon and Morrisey had both called out the IRA was much more admirable