Separating the art from the 'artist'

I can't listen to any Amy Winehouse songs, even if they're not that bad, because the artist herself is such a nuisance.

 

I don't watch Hanoi Jane.

 

Likewise with Platoon. It's hard to feel empathy with Sheen's character Chris's (I think it was) plight when his letters to his grandma would feel more accurate describing the *****s he's had and the drugs he's done.

Incidentally, I think people often get the 'suspension of disbelief' thing wrong: it's supposed to happen to you, not be something you decide to do. e.g., with good fiction, you will find that you have become immersed in the narrative and 'believe' without knowing it. If you have to deliberately decide to play along, then the material isn't doing it's job and your disbelief is not really suspended. SoD is the domain of the writer/director/actor/et al (like you describe with McKellen), not the consumer.

 

Gaear, I have to disagree with you a little on that score -- I see it as a symbiotic relationship. Of course, the artist(s) involved have to produce quality material -- that's their side of the relationship.

For the part of the audience, though, they do have to be willing to not look for faults and flaws -- if someone is bound and determined to look for flaws, they WILL find them, no matter how transcendant the work. But audiences engage with an artistic piece for the purpose of enjoyment, and they have to be in the proper frame of mind in order for the "suspension of disbelief" to occur. If they are in a different frame of mind, nothing will happen for them.

Now in terms of separating the artist from his/her work, that's an interesting thought. I'm coming to a point in my life that I don't want to know much about the private life of the actors I am watching on the screen. I want to evaluate their performance strictly on what I see and here from the artistic piece. I find it difficuilt to do when I know something about an artist's personal life.

Real Life example, in 1996 or so a movie came out entitled "Powder" -- it was a lame riff on Travolta's "Phenomenon" movie. I was marginally interested until I found out that the director was a convicted pedophile. He had served a few years for buggering a little boy, and was out again. Now, I don't advocate violence against those who have served their time and all, but I determined that not one cent of my money would go to the upkeep of this disgusting human being. I refused to attend the movie on that basis, even if that meant maybe missing a really amazing movie. I'll never know, and I;m comfortable with that. It's my tiny way of protesting the pathetically lame sentences pedophiles get.

From Wikipedia:

 

What is the appropriate sentence? You made this thread poltical, so let's get into it. Why is it that someone can kill a child and get probation in our courts, as I have demonstated on these boards in the past. And I don't hear much from others about children being massacred here in the US, Afghanistan, or anywhere else, but as soon as it comes to sex, people wig out to the point of hysteria. I wish you people would get a grip. I'm not defending pedophiles, far from it, I have two young girls and a baby boy, all of whom I protect and hoover over to no end. And I believe there should be consquences for such abuse. Why is it that being an actual "child killer" is considered not nearly sufficiant to demand such wrath from some quarters? Maybe Beren would like to comment on the difference, or if we are getting too far off topic since this is his thread.

http://www.openmarket.org/2009/08/1...f-starved-md-child-to-be-released-after-plea/

 

I'll grant you that - someone with a closed mind is not likely to be affected, deliberately or not.

As to the separation question, I find that I oftentimes don't want to know about the artist either. Take (gasp) Lady Gaga. I actually think she has a nice voice, but whenever I hear a Gaga song all I can think of is how she resembles Marilyn Manson in costume, not how nice her voice is. I also don't really care what any of them think of President Obama, Fox News, US foreign policy, or school lunch programs. Those are areas where the common man has demonstrated at least an equal amount of smarts as they have.

 

At the risk of a thread derail, I am all for tougher sentences all around. Up to and including the death penalty. IMHO, if you murder your kid, you should get the needle. If you rape your kid, you should get the needle. If you place your kid in a filthy stinking basement and force him to eat his own excrement, you should get the needle.

In other words, I'm not just focused on sex crimes. Believe me, I have a grip on this issue. If Salva had been convicted of murdering someone -- ANYONE, not just a child, I would have been just as happy to conduct my one man boycott.

Which is a reason why I don't want to know much about performers. I can't enjoy what they do in good conscience if I know that they are filthy murderers or rapists. And like Beren, lesser offences also take their toll. I have a hard time with any Mel Gibson movie now. I never have liked Charlie Sheen, so that one's no problem for me

 

It seems that many would agree with you. I'm not sure I agree, since I don't really agree with the death penalty except in extreme circumstanes [like those two killers in CT]. I believe that once people serve their time, they should be left alone. The only thing I would add is that you better be sure someone is really guilty of the crime before you start sticking anyone with needles. There is a reason the death penalty has been put on hold in some states, and why we see people falsley convicted and serving long sentences suddenly in the news because of DNA evidence. It seems that the system is far less than perfect for some of us can be that comfortable with your notions.

Beren, you can move my response to your new thread, since you just posted it.

Just for the record, IMO, prisons are criminal factories.

 

I keep reading the thread title as "Separating the arm from the 'artist'" and thinking, "Somebody didn't like the last movie they saw."

On topic, Dave Mustaine's current political views make it slightly harder for me to enjoy the later Megadeth albums. He used to come across as a critically-thinking guy, like a "thinking man's rock star" if you will, whereas now he apparently just listens to talk radio and eats it all up.

However, this has absolutely no impact on how much I enjoy the early Megadeth albums, and there's plenty of other reasons besides this for me to dislike the new ones.