Of Artists, Morals, and Art

Post Reply New Topic

W.B. YEATS was a bit of a nut. . .
GUNTER GRASS is an ex-Nazi, yet he masqueraded as the "Conscience of Germany" for more than four decades. . .
T.S. ELIOT was a bit of a Jew hater too. . .
JAMES JOYCE was a snob. . .
MARCEL PROUST was a foppish, wimpy snob. . .
WILLIAM FAULKNER was a drunken snob. . .
JONI MITCHELL was a heroin addict. . .

This could really go on and on.

Do the actions and beliefs of these people devalue their art? Can you respect a crazy artist?

Art is a form of communication. When someone is conveying thoughts to me, I focus on the message, not the person delivering it. To attack the communicator rather than the ideas being communicated is to commit an ad hominem.

Ideally, art should probably be experienced in a context entirely independent of the artist.

The "crazier" the artist, the more I respect them.

Edit: as long as they're not out for world domination.

Last edited by SilverProteus on 03 Feb 2008, 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

hitler was a good artist

idk

Actually, he was considered a mediocre artist. He went into politics because no art school
would accept him.

I've seen reproductions of his pictures. They were just pencil sketches of buildings. Not bad, not great.

In my town no one cares about art. People devalue singers/actors for getting loose and not wearing underwear and acting like spoiled children with no significant civil consequences.

I don't consider most of said singers-actors to be artists. I consider them "entertainers".