It’s something I struggle with. Some bad news comes out about some public persona doing something shitty and they get cancelled. But sometimes I really struggle with giving up the things they’ve made because I like them. There are also occasions where the person has been accused of something and it doesn’t seem true to me, or I think they’re genuinely sorry and have been punished enough, and the context isn’t being considered.
What do you think? Who do you feel conflicted about enjoying?
That is certainly a personal preference someone might have. But the point is, if you know the painting you have displayed, is made by a child molester. You might not feel particularly comfortable with having his painting. Despite it being an otherwise beautiful piece of art.
I don’t care if Hitlers paintings are worth lots of money today. I wouldn’t want it anywhere near my place.
And that kind of knee-jerk avoidance of anything uncomfortable is at the core of reactionary thinking. If it makes you uncomfortable to be near something a child molester has touched, will you abandon their victims? The home they lived in? The clothes which they owned once but that others could use? The sidewalk they walked along to get to the scene of their crimes? Shall we all expel the things that make us uncomfortable? Some people are made uncomfortable by foreigners, and people who look different. Don’t tell me ‘but that’s different.’ It’s not. It’s the same reactionary childishness, and it might make you uncomfortable to acknowledge it, but that’s why we can’t use discomfort as a measure.
First off, Nice strawman by the way.
Second, It is FAR from the same thing. I’m not uncomfortable being near something some awful person have been near. People have walked on the street I walk on, for several hundreds of years. I have no doubt some truly terrible people have traversed that road.
But I don’t want their artwork at display in my house. What I put on display in my house, is a reflection of me and my taste. Which is why I don’t want to have such artwork from such a person.
If you’re fine with it, good for you. I have not once said it would be wrong. I’ve not once said no one can or should have such things. Only that I personally, wouldn’t want to.
You not being able to differentiate what people are comfortable with in their own home, and what they tolerate in public, is the centerpiece of your argument. Not a particularly strong foundation since it’s based on nothing but your own misconception
Being uncomfortable with it in your own home is only different in that you actually have some control over what is displayed in your own home, but the irrational judgement of the art based on the non-artistic conduct of the artist exists regardless of whether you have the power to force your judgement onto others. It all still applies. There is an implied moral superiority in the statement of ‘You do you, but I would never,’ in the same vein as someone who makes a point to say to gay people, ‘You do you, but I would never.’ Saying ‘I didn’t say you couldn’t do it’ is the same ‘I’m not saying anything like that. I’m just asking questions,’ excuse people use to get away with making all sorts of implications that they know they can’t really justify.
You’re the one reading into it. We’re talking about art. People like different art. And that’s ok. I do not imply any form of superiority, moral or otherwise when I say “you do you”. So you can scratch that off.
I have loads of stuff around my place that honestly, are not particularly beautiful or amazing in any way. But the artist is very dear to me, for various reasons. So I like to have them on display.
Why does it matter so much to you that some people would prefer to avoid artists due to their conduct? It doesn’t affect you. You just want to make it about yourself, by thinking that we judge you for listening/watching/buying/whatever from the artist. The world doesn’t revolve around you.
I don’t think you’re a bad person for enjoying Chris Browns music. I don’t think about you, at all.
It’s not about me. It was never about me or some art that I don’t have. It’s about you and people like you, and the lies hidden in silence.
The issue is not with the ‘you do you,’ but with the ‘but I would never.’ People only express the negation as applicable. You wouldn’t, for instance, say ‘I would never run backwards to Turkmenistan,’ because there is no reason to assume you would. If we all spent time saying the obvious negatives, we’d be babbling non-stop from waking to exhaustion. It’s more like the guy who says ‘I would never wear a dress.’ It doesn’t say openly that there’s something wrong with wearing the dress, but he wants you to know he’s not one of those lowly dress-wearers so badly that he’s going out of his way to say it. When you say ‘but I would never display such’n’such class of art,’ it is inherently a disavowal to place yourself apart from those who would. It is a signal, not silence. You can ignore the hypocrisy of your pretence, but it’s there regardless. The prejudice of the ‘but’ phrase is just as present in ‘but I would never’ as it is in whatever follows ‘I’m not a racist, but…’
I don’t know what you are smoking. But you need to stop. For your own good.
You’re trying to go into this massive tangent away from the topic and I’m just not going to follow.
I’ve already told you clearly what I mean and what I don’t mean. I’m not going to argue with you about how you personally percieve something. I’m sorry you feel that way.
I love ice cream, but I would never order a banana split. So that means I judge those that do? That I see myself above those that like banana split? The answer is no. I just don’t like banana split. You do you. Each to their own. Whatever floats your boat.