Ok really tangential rant here!
I find societal attitudes to art and morality really crazy.
I don’t necessarily disagree with the idea that art and morality should be linked, but it only ever seems to happen in a negative capacity of “don’t listen to x because they did y”.
There’s a whole strain of:
- Artists who are not necessarily bad people, but whose art is aggresively immoral (I guess an obvious example would be Biggie Smalls or someone who frequently raps about sexual assault and violence in a positive way, but also the ammount of mainstream pop or country that has sexist or racist undertones)
- Artists who try hard to inject their morality into their work (such as Becky Chambers’ climate positive fiction, or Giancinto Scelsi’s anti-facist music)
On the whole, I don’t see anyone care very much about the above two points, people just “like what they like”, which is as if we think morality and art are two seperate things.
That makes sense, but then there’s this wierd category where “oh that person did this bad thing, so now their art is invalid”.
So, what’s the overall attitude? Like, art isn’t related to morality generally, but there’s some mysterious line where if it’s crossed art moves into the “forbidden zone”?
I’m all for calling bad people to account for their moral behaviour, but the way we do it in art is so jumbled and inconsistent.
AI: “Have you tried funding public transport and regulating the carbon industry?”
Ok, now we need to make a new AI so that AI can solve global warming but without using an existing solution that might marginally inconvenience the mega rich.