Take a look at this painting. It’s fabulous, isn’t it? Have you ever seen this painting before? Do you know that this painting was made by a very VERY famous painter? If it’s really that famous, how come you have never seen this painting before? It’s really beautiful, it deserves to be promoted more, right? What if I told you that this painting was made by the most hated man in history, would you still like the painting? That's right, the painter behind this painting is Adolf Hitler.
Should we separate the art from the artist? The million-dollar question we can’t seems to know the answer to.
I first heard this question before the #metoo movement came to explode. It was 2016, and I recall watching a trailer for a movie called “The Birth of a Nation”, by Nate Parker. I listed the movie in my “to watch” list and I Googled a bit about the storyline, before seeing it (the usual search I do before watching any movie). What shocked me was not the storyline of the movie itself, but the backlash and the scandal that was bubbling about its creator, Nate Parker.
The man (of whom I had never heard before), was accused of raping a young girl, who then committed suicide a few years after. His name was all over the news and not about his movie, which was considered to be a hit at the Box Office and a potential major player in the Oscar race of 2016; but about the terrible act, the director/producer/actor had done in his real life.
After the turmoil, his movie become a total flop at the Box Office and him being canceled everywhere. He was a terrible person and there is not much arguing about it, but what stood with me was the consequences his art faced because of his actions.
Everybody agreed that his movie was a great movie, but since he was a bad person, his movie was sentenced to die, as the public persona of his creator was going to. I recall taking a while to think about it and asking myself if that was actually the right thing to do. Did his art deserve to be killed because his master was a monster?
During the #metoo movement a year after, we saw hundreds of people being accused, undressed publicly by their titles and honors and shamed for their horrible actions. All their life work went to ashes and their public appearance faded to zero. It was like those people never existed. We all applauded strongly for those consequences, but we all in silence mourned the death of the innocent art that evaporated with them.
Even after the movement, I constantly kept asking myself the same question. Should we really separate the art from the artist? Is it fair to destroy a masterpiece just because of its maker’s faults?
When it comes to Hitler when I first saw his paintings I absolutely marveled. After knowing who painted them, I felt a sudden disgust and a weird anxious feeling. I didn’t want to look at those paintings anymore cause all I was seeing in them was the face of the monster who created them.
But Hitler is not the only artist with a horrible personality. Picasso, Caravaggio, Dali, Dickens, Goldwing, Elvis Prestley, John Lenon, and so many other artists have done very bad things in their life. Should we cancel all their work?
I recently came to face a situation with an artist I really admired for a long time. He is an American graphic designer, a photographer, and a great writer. I won’t mention his name, cause even bad publicity is publicity in the end, right?! I was following him on Instagram since he first started his IG page. A talented unique artist, who inspired me a lot in my artistic attempts, since the beginning. I really admired his work and the way he portrayed and talked about the values of family and society.
What he did a few days ago, was very disappointing for me. After complaining several times about the IG algorithm, and why his posts weren't having that much traffic or engagement, he decided to go in another direction. He blew away the morals and standards he was so much advocating to that day and started to delve into weapon promotion, anti-abortion propaganda, religious discrimination, and non-conforming politics. Started and encouraged debates on controversial topics that needed a very careful moderator to be conducted peacefully. What he did instead threw fuel to the fire and stimulated psychological violence among his followers.
He stopped making art and transformed himself into a medium of hate, fury, and violence.
Suddenly his page was blowing up with comments, engagement, and reach, as he let people slaughter one another on the questions he threw at them. Was it worth it? I don’t think so. A lot of his followers unfollowed him, me being one of them. Even though I was a faithful admirer of his work for nearly 10 years, I just couldn’t hide the loathing I felt toward that person. I took a look at his art and tried to analyze it. His art represented him. It is nearly impossible to separate his personality from the art he created, especially if that art consisted in building up his personality and his public alter ego as an artist. Promoting his art will mean promoting him. The two are linked together in eternity and it’s unimaginable separating them. One can’t definitely exist or thrive without the other.
So for one last time, I asked myself … Should I separate the art from the artist? The answer was clear and obvious. No.
Комментарии