Deep Thoughts.

[cyrano]

So, recently after purchasing tickets for the DropKick Murphys show next month, I heard second hand anecdotal evidence that the boys in the band are unpleasant racists. Which... I confess, did not entirely surprise me, but it did disappoint me greatly.

And it got me to thinking. How much does the artist affect/taint the art? Where does my support need to be cut off? Do I pay money for a print of a painting made by somebody who believes in the power of the unfettered free market? Do I go buy a CD from somebody who won't associate with black people? Do I see a movie starring somebody with Zionist or anti-Zionist professions? Or directed by somebody who has sex with underage partners?

All this assumes that those professed beliefs are not visible in the art itself. If some Oi band is writing songs about all the god damned Jews, then that's a much easier choice to make.

I strongly encourage, even politely request, that you share your thoughts on the matter.

Comments

[handworn.livejournal.com]

History is stiff with examples of honoring one characteristic, or a few, in a person, while repudiating their other characteristics or actions. We admire the courage and boldness of Columbus and other early American pioneers, but hate the way they treated the Indians. We admire the vision and hard work and creations of Frank Lloyd Wright, while finding the way he treated his wife and children disgusting. We admit Pete Rose and Ty Cobb were truly great baseball players, but poor as people.

And the French essayist Michel de la Montaigne once wrote, "There is no man so good who, were he to submit his every thought and action to the law, would not deserve hanging ten times over." This may be a commentary on his times (17th century) or on the law, but it does raise the question of how much and why we demand heroes to appear to be good in every way.