• Wurstkiste@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    If only there was a way to distinguish between the artist and the art… but since both are always the same, it will for all times be impossible to enjoy the art of an artist that committed some assholery.

    Wait till people figure out what DaVinci, Rembrandt, Mozart, Picasso did and say when they were still alive, young, inexperienced and horny. Yes! Horny! Despite their talent they were ordinary people, young men with dicks! We’re going to have to empty the whole effing Louvre after finding out.

    • Peruvian_Skies@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s an important difference: those guys are all dead, and so are their victims. Somebody’s great great great great grandmother won’t retroactively become more abused just because you look at a painting.

      It isn’t about enjoying art created by someone who did awful things, it’s about continuing to reward that someone with fame and fortune and giving them free passes to do more awful things just because they have a talent that you appreciate. It’s about valuing aesthetics over morals. By all means, continue to enjoy art made by scumbags. I do. Just don’t continue to bankroll their abuse of others after you find out that they’re scumbags.