Does someone's wrongdoings diminish their past works?

[Kujaku]

It's 6AM so what better activity than to wonder about things, but I'm really curious about this.

When you love a film you watched and some bad thing about an actor playing one of the main characters comes out (let's say they have a history of being abusive) does that 'stain' the film? If an author made a comment you don't agree with and that's generally frowned upon, does that mean that author should be blacklisted and you never touch another of their books no matter how much you enjoyed the ones you already read? Same for painters and basically every creator/artist you can think of. 

Also, does it depend on what they did? Is it worse if they said something bad or if they bribed someone in order to obtain their high status? Basically what would make you stop supporting someone and how does it affect their past works? 

[_hina]

(Ngl I had meant to type literally a single paragraph, I have no idea why its this long lol. I just think it's an interesting topic to talk about!)

For me, its a matter of being able to separate the creator and the series into two separate things. If it's difficult to separate your enjoyment of a series from the actions made by the author, your filter will continue to grow and your capacity to enjoy things will only get smaller. In the end, it's your call whether or not you want to support their works or not. Should the creators still have recognition for the works that people enjoyed? Or is it revoked? (personally, if I don't agree with their views and it's reflected so obviously in their works, then I'll just stop and look for another one to enjoy instead)

I mean, you can probably take the act-age situation as an example of this, right? Some people choose to abandon the series for what the author did, whilst others turn a blind eye and focused on the series itself. Shonen jump took immediate action to separate themselves to show their intolerance for such actions, and there are readers that are devastated that they'll never get to read a continuation.

If the author has a history of abuse or indecent intentions, do their works reflect their subconscious? To be fair, I am old enough, experienced enough, to know enough to notice what's problematic or not. If it's a series that I really enjoyed and they fucked something up (and that it isn't so forgivable), I can just erase the creator's presence so as not to ruin my overall experience. I'll just think that it's a fucking shame, that's all. (I can cry to act-age's night of galactic railroad arc but also point the middle-finger towards the author, I can multi-task that way xD)

But also, do you think reactions can vary depending on whether or not you were reading the series before the creator/actor stained it? So if you hear about the creator/actor doing shit without having read or seen their works, are you less likely to read it? Or will you read other people's reactions and decide if you'll read it from them?

(oh my gosh, I'm so sorry for the long ass post;; i don't know when to shut up)

[Afuckingdegenerate]

Slaughtering millions of disabled, gay, and jewish people is kind of a turn-off in my preference of painters tbh. But I guess that’s just me. (And the millions of souls that were brutally murdered) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[sarah3161]

There are things that when it is done "fully aware and not under substance" , that it cannot be forgiven. 

Of course, it all depends on the the others how they feel.

Personally, I may forgive and let it go by not getting back to the relationship and just accept that it will never be the same no matter what 

[Faithful Banana]

Here's my personal take on this.

I believe that a piece of art/writing/architecture/invention/movie etc, so something useful or artistic has its own value. And this value is unrelated to the moral standing or actions of the person who created it. A beautiful painting is still a beautiful painting, even if it was done by Hitler. A bad painting is still bad, even if it was done by an angel.

The question here is how much the viewer can separate their feelings towards the person from that person's creations. The answer will always be subjective. It can be hard for some, while others have no issue. I'm the latter.

The other question is should a person be punished for their wrongdoings by disconsidering their achievements? Personally, I think not. They can be punished in other ways. Or reasoned with, who knows, some people respond to reason. But it feels to me that this kind of punishment damages the creation along with the creator. And some creations are worth appreciating and preserving. I'm not only thinking about art here, but also about advances in technology or medicine etc.

Anyway, like I said, it's just my personal opinion.

[Kujaku]

There are some really good points on here. Thank you for replying to this, guys!

On 6/27/2021 at 7:12 PM, _hina said:

Shonen jump took immediate action to separate themselves to show their intolerance for such actions

I think it's harder for a business to ignore it. I mean, the public will want a reaction and if the business turns a blind eye they are going to get a lot of backlash. By continuing to publish said author they would basically say they agree with their actions so they really have no choice than to cease all collaboration with them. But this looks more like a marketing strategy to me than their honest opinion. As far as we know they could still pay that author as per their contract, or give them some sort of benefits.

On 6/27/2021 at 7:12 PM, _hina said:

If the author has a history of abuse or indecent intentions, do their works reflect their subconscious?

Hmm, an author's views and opinions usually bleed out into the art, doesn't it? I mean, they can only shape their characters and their actions according to the author's own thoughts and beliefs. I think it is most likely for their actions to influence their work in a way or another.

On 6/27/2021 at 7:12 PM, _hina said:

But also, do you think reactions can vary depending on whether or not you were reading the series before the creator/actor stained it? So if you hear about the creator/actor doing shit without having read or seen their works, are you less likely to read it? Or will you read other people's reactions and decide if you'll read it from them?

Oh, yes, definitely. Exactly like you said, after reading something that you really enjoyed you would think 'what a shame' when something bad that the author did came out. I know I had that reaction with some actors and then decided I don't want to watch anything involving them any longer.
And yes, for me at least, if someone did something bad I'm less likely to read or watch their work if I never had any contact with them before. If I consume their work I feel like I would aid their fame and basically say whatever they did is not that bad and doesn't matter. Same as continuing to support artists that I previously liked. They should be held accountable one way or another and stopping to give them my support is the only way I have.

[Kujaku]

On 7/15/2022 at 2:16 PM, sarah3161 said:

There are things that when it is done "fully aware and not under substance" , that it cannot be forgiven. 

I sometimes hear the argument that what you do under the influence is what you always wanted to do, but didn't have the courage to. Or were too sober to know it's not okay and worry about other people's reactions. If we take this as being absolute truth, should we really be more lenient on people who did bad things under the influence? I'm referring mostly about alcohol here, and not a serious addiction because that can really mess up someone's personality, but like a one time thing.

On 7/15/2022 at 2:16 PM, sarah3161 said:

Of course, it all depends on the the others how they feel.

So you'd base your reaction on what the majority feels? (just asking, I'm not 100% sure I got your meaning)

[Choree]

On 1/20/2023 at 11:43 PM, Faithful Banana said:

Here's my personal take on this.

I believe that a piece of art/writing/architecture/invention/movie etc, so something useful or artistic has its own value. And this value is unrelated to the moral standing or actions of the person who created it. A beautiful painting is still a beautiful painting, even if it was done by Hitler. A bad painting is still bad, even if it was done by an angel.

The question here is how much the viewer can separate their feelings towards the person from that person's creations. The answer will always be subjective. It can be hard for some, while others have no issue. I'm the latter.

The other question is should a person be punished for their wrongdoings by disconsidering their achievements? Personally, I think not. They can be punished in other ways. Or reasoned with, who knows, some people respond to reason. But it feels to me that this kind of punishment damages the creation along with the creator. And some creations are worth appreciating and preserving. I'm not only thinking about art here, but also about advances in technology or medicine etc.

Anyway, like I said, it's just my personal opinion.

+1

[Kujaku]

Please Register/ Sign In, in order to see the links.

That is a really good point. We did make a lot of progress, as humanity, through questionable means and morals.

On 1/21/2023 at 12:43 AM, Faithful Banana said:

The other question is should a person be punished for their wrongdoings by disconsidering their achievements? Personally, I think not. They can be punished in other ways.

While I agree and it's true there are a lot of ways of punishing someone, thinking about contemporary artists who did something bad, if we still consume their art, wouldn't that be some sort of reward? I mean, they still have to gain from being popular, their art can still sell.

[Faithful Banana]

Thanks for the feedback

Please Register/ Sign In, in order to see the links.

and

Please Register/ Sign In, in order to see the links.

!

I think it also depends on how bad the wrongdoings are. If a person commits a crime, they should be punished by the law. Of course, the law is not always infallible...

It's interesting how in this case the public actually has a weapon with which to also punish the wrongdoing artist. It is not an option with usual criminals.

As a side note, bad publicity is also good publicity and artists about which we find out did something wrong will become more popular exactly because of the scandal. So while some people stop buying their works, others become interested and start buying them. People work in funny ways...

[Kujaku]

18 hours ago, Faithful Banana said:

bad publicity is also good publicity

OMG, YES! Thank you! I feel like almost no one gets this, there are so many artists who thrive just because of bad publicity. People are so ready to pick up their pitchforks and badmouth them to anyone who would listen. I lost count how many times I saw someone writing a negative post about an artist online and someone else replying I didn't know about this person until now.

18 hours ago, Faithful Banana said:

It's interesting how in this case the public actually has a weapon with which to also punish the wrongdoing artist.

Only they don't use it, I think. I mean, exactly like the bad publicity, they might think they are using their weapon, but don't do it correctly and achieve exactly the opposite of what they mean.

[Villain]

I find this topic very interesting so I couldn't help myself but answer.

Personally I'm the ignorant type, like I never really care about the authors and most of the time I know nothing about them. If said authors do something bad it might take me years to even find out about it. I fall in love with the art and not the artist. So it's pretty much irrelevant to me if they do something bad, I see them and their art as separate beings.

An actor's job is to portray someone entirely different on screen so I don't even know who the actor is in real life while watching said movie and honestly I don't even want to find out. I just enjoy the movie and the story told by the characters. I'm very good at separating the two. When I read this I felt like it was about the actor from Call me by your name because I've recently heard about him at work, some sort of abuse story. I had no idea about it even though I watched the movie. Even after finding out about it I don't feel disgusted in regards to the movie, I rewatch it with the same joy.

Also I do believe that bad deeds should be punished by the law but the artwork itself has nothing to do with it. So basically punish the author but leave the artwork alone. Art is fictional anyway, it's shaped by the author's imagination combined with our own imagination as we all perceive art differently.

[Kujaku]

I actually relate to some of that, I also don't look up info about writers or actors or musician, with a few exceptions, but sometimes they do something outrageous that's on every site and everyone talks about.

Like in your example, I also liked that film (and there were things I didn't really think about while watching), but I can't ignore his acts and I think it's a good call that he lost a lot of work over what he did (although I suppose the goal there is for him to lay low until people eventually forget about it). I mean, the justice system didn't do and isn't doing anything about it. But 'Call me by Your Name' is a whole other conversation entirely, about the topic of the book/film, the author, and the actor. It's a lot.

Back on topic,

On 1/23/2023 at 10:58 PM, Villain said:

Art is fictional anyway, it's shaped by the author's imagination combined with our own imagination as we all perceive art differently

 Good point. I'm thinking that even if the author slips in bad stuff subconsciously, we still interpret the art according to our own moral compass.

Edited January 28, 2023 by Kujaku