@misc inspired by a friend's comment that we need to reverse separate the art from the artist (the death of the work) after Kaur refused to go to the White House in protest over Gaza
@julieofthespirits@misc The whole "separate the art from the artist" thing just tells me that people don't actually understand how art is made or how Modernism, fame and the art market function. The hand/mark of the maker is literally what art is all about.
@julieofthespirits@misc It's also thinking about art as a commodity and not a conversation we have with ourselves and our culture. It's a way to try to circumvent that very conversation and to avoid dealing with complexity.
@fifilamoura@julieofthespirits Yeah if it's meant literally and taken as the end of the conversation, definitely. But I feel like it could also be meant as a statement that someone loves a work of art even as they realize it was created by someone who acted in monstrous ways.
@misc Yeah but you can appreciate someone's work while also recognizing they were an asshole (and how the whole "assholes are geniuses" mythology of our culture elevates and gives carte blanche, or even encourages, people to be assholes...this is entirely the problem with being an uncritical fan who can't tolerate complexity). The problem is actually with uncritical fandom and not with art and artists (artists are obviously just people with all that entails, both good and bad, but fame and also failure distort a lot of people's perspectives when they're more focused on that than being able to pursue their craft). @julieofthespirits
Add comment