Should we separate the art form the artist?

Should we separate the art form the artist?

Attached: 5D6A86C2-B645-496A-B353-D113FA081205.jpg (475x670, 56.31K)

you should separate my penis from your butthole nigga

depends entirely on the artist

What the fuck did you just say 2 me?

You must. If you don't, then you can only look at a piece of art as an extension of the artist, and you can only judge a piece of art as you would the artist who made it. What's your favorite film directed by Orson Welles? If you don't separate the art from the artist, then you can't have a favorite Orson Welles film. All his films are the same, and if you like Welles as a person, then you like all his films the same way, and if you dislike Welles as a person, then you dislike his films the same way

Absolutely. I love Wagners music but I do acknowledge that he was anti Semitic and probably would have supported the holocaust.

I think you heard my friend

Attached: 1579462450410.png (260x334, 161.23K)

In some cases it's hard to do that but we totally should.

>All his films are the same, and if you like Welles as a person, then you like all his films the same way, and if you dislike Welles as a person, then you dislike his films the same way
truly terrible take. you can like the art without liking the entire person that was the artist

>and probably would have supported the holocaust.
Big stretch there m8.

>you can like the art without liking the entire person that was the artist
That was my point. That line of reasoning is stupid, so you must separate the art from the artist

You must not know Wagner. I mean, he had Jewish colleagues but he wrote an essay on why Jews are ruining music. We will never know of course whether he would have been okay with the Holocaust.

>You must not know Wagner
You must not know this fist I am going to shove up your ass.

>you must separate the art from the artist
even if the art is a direct reflection of the shittiness of the artist? like what if I raped women and took artsy nude photos of them afterwards? can you still separate my art from the person I am?

Recognising the artist allows the art to be better understood. Why would they be separate?

checked

Which German man from the 19th century wasn't anti-Semitic? it's not fair to push the views of today on guys from centuries ago. Maybe we'll be the bigots 200 years ago because we don't support the right to fuck a monkey with a toothbrush.

Sometimes. When I watch Chinatown, Roman's crimes are completely irrelevant. It's a great film, and it will continue to be great no matter what anyone in the movie does in their personal lives. But sometimes if the artist is a bad person, that can make their art more interesting. Like rappers.

>Which German man from the 19th century wasn't anti-Semitic?
Nietzche wrote tons of shit deingrating Wagner for his antisemitism. It wasn't as widespread as you seem to think.

>like what if I raped women and took artsy nude photos of them afterwards? can you still separate my art from the person I am?
Yes

I already know Zig Forums is going to defend the child rapist. Stop wasting your time OP.

>l aIready know Zig Forums is going to defend the child rapist. Stop wasting your time OP.

Attached: angry cuck.jpg (378x378, 27.85K)

alright user you will be the first in line to my "Women After Rape" series

Yes and no. Art has personal meaning to the observer, and no one can argue that. However, it also often has rich meaning from the context of it's origin. That's sullied when the context is different than what was assumed. Like, for example, Louie CK jokes about public masturbation. However I could still enjoy a fantastic film made by someone who was a racist shithead, because that context doesn't change the things I like about the setting, plot, cinematography, etc.

>___ raped a child? Ruining a life forever?
>Yeah, but he makes good products I can consume!!!! So separate the art!!!

Because eventually critics begin praising art because of the artist instead of the art's own value.

Not sure how much you listen to hip hop but it's sacrilege to say anything Kendrick Lanar makes is anything less than amazing.

Half the stuff in the Louvre isnt as good as stuff being made in your own backyard but none of that stuff will lead to lasting acclaim because David will forever be held up as man's example of marble works.

Separate this. It's a nice painting, isn't it user?

Attached: images.jpg (225x225, 12.17K)

>>___ raped a child? Ruining a Iife forever?
>>Yeah, but he makes good products l can consume!!!! So separate the art!!!

Attached: soii.png (928x608, 217.54K)

didn't the chick say she didn't want him arrested

Literally you. Kek.

Art is subjective and humans are slaves to bias. The latter is the real issue here.

>not nice enough for the Vienna fine arts academy

Attached: hitleryounger.jpg (500x723, 25.91K)

Alas, true.

>LiteraIIy you. Kek.

Attached: 1588488940708.jpg (596x1008, 207.37K)

Yes, but we should also keep in mind what kind of person was inspired to make the art