When Creators go bad


I just saw a few comments regarding the recent Michael Jackson documentary. Now I haven’t seen it, but it makes me think of the question that this scenario always begs to ask:

How do you handle the art/product of an artist/creator who has done something abhorrent and unacceptable to society?

Roman Polanski, Bill Cosby, Michael Jackson, Woody Allen, Kevin Spacey, Louis CK, R.Kelly… :rofl:

These are all people who have created great works. Where do their created works stand, now that their horrific personal lives have come to light? Do we ignore them, discredit them? Or is it important to separate the art from the artist?

For me, you have to separate the art from the artist. MJ could have raped a million more kids, his music, unfortunately, is still good.


Doesn’t discredits their job and how good it can be, but certainly having a bad reputation that involves pretty messed up stuff isn’t going to disappear and naturally makes a lot of people want to forget them in every single regard possible.


But is it wrong to enjoy, say, Fat Albert in 2019?


Exactly where I am. Frankly, I don’t care what he did, I’m not interested in MJ the person, just MJ the artist. And his work is outstanding.


In those cases, no. That is a character they were interpretating and it’s separated from reality, but looking at that character after knowing their shitty deeds has a nasty impact on you. Just the feeling I got after discovering the Red Ranger from Power Rangers: Wild Force got charged with manslaughter.


It really depends. I currently deal with alot of artists who have the position that the copyright reform in the EU is a good idea. I appreciate it if they discuss it with me, even if they have another opinion about it.

Still I get angry if they just hold the sign into the camera they got from their lobby and then ignore all criticism.

While they are dicks about it, it is still democratic to… uh ask the MEPs to destroy the EU Internet? Dunno. I currently dislike the labels more than the artists now, so I am not buying any merchandise.

If we talk about the artist doing crimes, then… yeah well you can still enjoy the music… for free maybe? While I think MJ is more innocent people say, I think more of people like Sinatra or Dean Martin with their connection to the mafia which is really bad.


This is difficult for me, and I guess it really depends on what they did. Louis CK did not sexually assault anybody, I would still go to watch one his shows if I had the chance. I would not do the same for Bill Cosby or Michael Jackson if the opportunity presented somehow, I’m not giving any of my attention or money to a rapist. So it works on a grading curve, I suppose.


That’s a whole other thread


By this I mean of course to borrow the disk from a friend. :smirk:


Come on, @Urben, that’s not how you sell it. It’s a library, we’re getting the free stuff from a Library.


I’m genuinely sorry about this.



When he was a handsome man known for great songs and dazzling performances. Later, a corpse looking being that got into seriously deep issues. How things can change so much.





Depends on the crime


Theses days I take whatever controversy surrounding a celebrity with a grain of salt. Its far too easy for anyone to claim rape without proof or any due process and the accused party is guilty until proven innocent. So in cases like Bill Cosby or Michael Jackson, all I have to go on is “he said, she said”. That’s not enough for me to assume any kind of conclusion.

R.Kelly? He was caught on tape once about ten years ago and nobody seem to give a fuck so honestly, I’m surprise what all the commotion is now. Folks just figured he learned his lesson and won’t do it again? :unamused:

In terms of their artwork, I think people should just go by how you feel about it rather then by a sense a of obligation. If you find you still enjoy it, then keep on.


Good question. I think you should separate the work from the artist. Yes, they may have done some terrible things, but they have also done some truly great things, and up until this day and age we live in now where everyone tries to dig up anything they can possibly find on a long gone legend from decades ago that seems “bad” in any way, even though it really doesn’t matter, and pretty much no one cares about, and serves literally no purpose now, as there’s nothing to be done about something a deceased star did decades ago that does nothing more than please the ultra sensitive individuals who bother to waste their time digging for this stuff, just to ruin long time fans’ fandom of these stars…(sorry for the long winded rant, but to continue what I was saying before hand…) that is all they were known for.


Their reputation and fandom deserves to be ruined, the truth is important. Would you rather live in a world where we just go on blindly ignoring that one of the biggest entertainers in history molested a lot of kids? He should not get away with that, if we can’t punish a dead man we can sure as shit drag his disgusting name through the mud until it’s withered away and dead as it should be.


I try to separate the art from the artist/the work from the person. Even if I find someone’s actions to be abhorrent, I can still enjoy the work they’ve done.


I see your point. Do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that what he did was ok, nor am I saying that he should not have been punished for it. But I see no reason to ruin a life long fan’s interest in his music. I am fully capable of listening to his music and separating it from that, though of course it will still come to mind as I listen.


Oh, Christ. Someone asked it. sigh Here we go.

I don’t care what the entertainer did. I don’t care who they hurt or how many. I don’t know the person they hurt, that person does not entertain me and allow me to escape from the enormity of the day.

Michael Jackson could have molested every kid in America, all I know is that I love Thriller and don’t want to stop hearing it on the radio. Kevin Spacey could have abused a hundred teens, I don’t want to stop seeing his movies.

Even slightly less severe cases, like Johnny Depp, apply. Say he really did beat his ex-wife: I don’t know his ex-wife, she’s not an entertainer I even remember seeing in anything, and if I did, it’s not a standout. I don’t want to stop seeing Depp’s HUGE library of films.

Depp and Jackson and the others have touched more lives in positive ways than the person they hurt, and the collective hurt of their victims does not outweigh the good they did.

And this goes toward female entertainers too. If it turns out for example, that Meryl Streep had put hot irons against the asses of high school boys she picked up over the last ten years, well, I don’t know those guys, but I do know Meryl Streep has done more than they ever have, so it does not matter to me.