Donate

Can We Separate the Artwork from the Artist?

| February 11, 2014 | 126 Comments
  • Share:
  • Facebook
  • Pinterest
  • Reddit
  • Email
@justinbieber/Instagram

@justinbieber/Instagram


To respond to the Do Now, you can comment below or tweet your response. Be sure to begin your tweet with @KQEDEdspace and end it with #DoNowArtist

For more info on how to use Twitter, click here.


Do Now

Can you still appreciate a work of art even if you don’t like the artist as a person? Should we continue to celebrate art by people who do bad things? Can you separate the art from the artist? Should you?

Introduction

Artists are people, and sometimes people make bad choices or behave despicably. For example, Picasso was thought to be a womanizer, and Jackson Pollock was known to be abusive due to his struggle with alcoholism.

Throughout history, the debate about whether or not to judge an artist’s work by their personal character has had no shortage of fuel. Woody Allen’s recently resurfacing controversy around allegations that he sexually abused his daughter have brought this conversation to the forefront again, one that has also been stirred up by pop stars whose bad behavior makes headlines, including Chris Brown and Justin Bieber.

It is difficult to suspend judgement of these artists, knowing that it’s nearly impossible for an artist to separate their soul from their work, but should we try, instead, to evaluate the work and the artist separately?

KQED’s radio show, Forum, recently addressed this topic, and explores how the controversy surrounding Woody Allen has been reflected in his films. KQED Arts bloggers also weighed in, sharing our opinions and specific examples of artists who have come under fire for controversial behavior. Have a read (and a listen) then let us know what you think. Do you still love Chris Brown’s music even though he was accused of abusing Rhianna? Do Justin Bieber’s recent run-ins with the law affect how you feel about his work? What about Woody Allen? Are there any songs, films, or other artworks that you loved until you learned more about their creators’ misdeeds?

Resource

KQED Forum segment Can You Separate Art From the Artist?
Woody Allen’s adopted daughter Dylan Farrow recently accused him, in a New York Times op-ed, of sexually abusing her when she was a child. The Academy Award-winning director has denied the charges, but the incident raises an age-old question that’s dogged artists ranging from Mozart to Michael Jackson. Should we take an artists’ personal conduct into account when we judge their work?


To respond to the Do Now, you can comment below or tweet your response. Be sure to begin your tweet with @KQEDedspace and end it with #DoNowArtist

For more info on how to use Twitter, click here.

We encourage students to reply to other people’s tweets to foster more of a conversation. Also, if students tweet their personal opinions, ask them to support their ideas with links to interesting/credible articles online (adding a nice research component) or retweet other people’s ideas that they agree/disagree/find amusing. We also value student-produced media linked to their tweets like memes or more extensive blog posts to represent their ideas. Of course, do as you can… and any contribution is most welcomed.


More Resources

KQED Arts post From Woody Allen to J.D. Salinger to R. Kelly: Can You Separate Art from the Artist?
Recent resurfacing of controversy surrounding Woody Allen has made us — and many others — consider whether an artist’s work can be separated from his or her personal life or public reputation. This subject has long been debated — from James Brown to Roman Polanski to Michael Jackson. It is difficult to untangle public perception of an artist from the meaning we, as hungry consumers, attach to a singular work of art. But if we have a hard time separating our own relationship and context from a work of art, then doesn’t it make sense to consider how that work is inherently influenced by the life experiences of its maker?


Explore: , , , , , , ,

Category: Do Now: Art and Popular Culture

  • Share:
  • Facebook
  • Pinterest
  • Reddit
  • Email

About the Author ()

Kristin Farr produces arts videos for KQED and writes monthly features for Juxtapoz magazine. She lives in the East Bay, and her favorite color is all of them.
  • Nate knudsen

    @kqededspace I think that the people should receive the same credit for whatever they have accomplished. Such as in Michael Jacksons case even though he was accused of many things he still was a great artist and wrote many top charters like Thriller http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOnqjkJTMaA&feature=kp #DoNowArtist

  • Alyn Kirby

    @KQEDEdspace We can seperated the artist from the artwork. It is about thier gifts and not their actions. I do not care that Ronnie Rodke, from Falling in Reverse, has been arested. I do not care if he was or not. He is still my favorite artist. Also being an artist and people do not always like my actions, I still get rewarded for my artwork. My actions do not play in to factor of my artwork.

    #DoNowArtist

  • shawn salazar

    @kquededspace I believe that art should be based upon that persons artwork and not necessarily there personal life unless it is a serious offense in which case there artwork gets affected. People may not even know that the music sung by there favorite artists talks about there past life which in many cases is drug or crime related and even degrades a certain gender to which they dance or listen to. Californiacation a good song by the RHCP talks about his passed life which may be disturbing to some. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LV34GMYLXcA

  • Angie Guizar

    #DoNowArtist

    I believe art should’t be judged based on the artists’ personal life. Whether an artist has killed a man or thrown a smoothie at obamas face the audience won’t be repelled to watch your work. I’m not saying it’s ok to kill someone or do thoughtless things that hurt other people but even if an artist were to do those things their master pieces aren’t going to be avoided. It’s like a greasy cheese burger. It’s filled with bad ingridients but that doesn’t stop most of us from eating it any way. Another example is chris brown beating rihana. People still listen his music regardless of his inapropriate behavior.

  • Kaleb Heasley

    Art is Art, and nothing can change that. I believe as long as the art is not effected by the artist and what the artist has done, that nothing is wrong with it. Like Micheal Jackson, even though he was “accused” of child molestation that was not in his music so I believe there is no problem with that. Music is for the ears, so as long as the music isn’t influenced by the outside life of the artist, the music is still just music.

    • Zach Shuman

      nice job

    • Hyaden Beck

      huh?

  • Mallie

    I think for me at least, it is hard to get past what the artist has done in his or her life, because sometimes it can be reflected in what they do and it makes me uncomfortable to watch them on television, see their art work, or listen to their songs after hearing about the bad things they have done. An example of this is the guy that plays Pee Wee Herman in Pee Wee’s Big Adventure when he acted like a child and then was found with some child pornography on his computer. Still can’t get past it all.

  • Ena Muharemovic

    What artists do on their free time doesn’t change my feelings towards their art, Justin Bieber’s stupid actions, don’t influence my feelings towards his music.

  • Lia Liu

    #DoNowArtist @kqededspace
    I dont think an artist’s work should be judged by their personal actions. people make mistakes, some more forgivble than others but as long as the work doesnt reflect their bad actions I think that we should continue to listen or watch until it does. People still like Chris Brown after what he did and his music is still really good.

  • Kori Goller

    @Kqedspace #donowartist I think that even though the artist has or could have done terrible or unforgivable things, it should not affect the view on the artwork itself. I think that by viewing the artwork as its artist could ruin the artwork for you, someone that the artwork is made to be enjoyed by. For example, Carlos Irwin Estévez, who is better known as his stage name Charlie Sheen, is a potential murderer but you don’t associate the show with the things he has done. I think part of that might be with how convincing or good the artist has done to separate the artwork from the artist.

  • Alma Lancaster

    i hate how i like this song, then i hear the background knowledge about the artist or song then i hate it too. I think that the background knowledge shouldn’t affect our opinion on the song but it does to me. i hate it

  • Miah Rose

    If the art isn’t affected by what the person has done then it doesn’t matter. I don’t let what they do in their own time ruin the art that they are doing. Justin Bieber actions don’t change my feelings about his music.

  • Skylar d.

    You can not Seperate the art from a artist. The actions they do is what inspires them to make music. That is how they find song lyrics. Examples are Red hot chili peppers. They made songs about the drugs they used. Most music is based off of something someone did or someone else did, or an activity that occurred.

  • Shelbie Hilton

    @kquededspace #DoNowArtist Some people freak out about reality, and peoples mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes and you cant expect every artist to be perfect. They have a lot of pressure on them especially because they are well known. U2 is one of my favorite bands and one of these examples. When one of thier band members dies of a stupid cause, he made a song about it. And now everytime I listen to that song i think of that mistake, and thats ok. What you think of someone you look up to you should think of them as your hero and have to except the fact of his/her mistakes.

  • Zach Shuman

    I think that if the art portrays the issues of an artist and it bothers you then from then on it will bug you and you will not like the product of the artist. However if you do not care or see any resemblance you can still be bothered by the music if they did something you do not care for. I feel most people don’t care like with Michael Jackson he was accused twice for molesting children but people still love him.

    • Tate W.

      That is exactly right! People don’t care as long as the music is good, and Michael Jackson’s music was good.

  • Tate W.

    I think that art does not depend on the artist it depends on the art. Some of the best artists in all of history have been some of the craziest people on earth. And we don’t care about who they were, we care about how good their art was. And if it was that way then I think that it should stay that way now. Van gogh was crazy enough to cut off his own ear, and we still know him as one of the best artist ever to live. And I don’t think that that should change now.

    • Coop NasT

      Spot on, Great job,Tate. Really captured the essence of the subject. Perfect reference

  • Hyaden Beck

    Before I would say that art isn’t effected to the artist. I would have thought that I could separate the stuff that I don’t agree with with the things that I do. About two years ago I got really into the Band “Modest Mouse” i loved all of thier albums and most of the songs on them. they were continuously playing on my iPod. After about six months I found out about the lead singer’s, Issac Brock’s, political beliefs. I started to listen to his music less and less; especially certain songs. I still enjoy the occasional Modest Mouse track, but I do not listen to them nearly as much as I did. I was surprised that something so small as political beliefs would change my opinion of the band.

    At the same time I LOVE the RHCP! I think that I like their art because it talks about their problems and how they got over them.

    I have recently started listening to Issac Brock’s solo project; called Ugly Casanova. Life is strange sometimes.

  • Guest

    I dont think that the persons life should have an impact on their work, because when someone s

    • Hyaden Beck

      nice picture

    • Guest

      I find this very offensive and Inappropriate. i cant believe someone would post this

      • Guest

        I am disappointed too

        • °John Oletic°

          are you new to the class hyaden?

          • Hyaden Beck

            why did you post this?

  • Guest

    i think the persons life shouldn’t have an impact on their art in any way shape

    • Guest

      nice

    • Hyaden Beck

      This was john oletec’s post

  • Coop NasT

    If you base art on the people who make it then art is quite unappealing. If you look as famous musicians, especially in their free time they look like dirty drug addicts, not all but most of the real musicians. For instance, Anthony Kiedis of the Red Hot Chili Peppers had a long run with heroin growing up in LA but his near death experiences allowed him to put his life and soul into his lyrics that play with some of the most unique tunes played by Flea, Chad Smith, and Frusciante or Klinghoffer. The Red Hot Chili Peppers have rightfully earned their Rock n’ Roll Hall of Fame spot but owe their success to their good times and bad times growing up in Cali.

  • Coop NasT

    The Red Hot Chili Peppers just played at the Super Bowl, “America’s game” but you can trace their beginnings back to a lot of heroin but that should never effect the way people view their music because it’s the best

  • Coop NasT

    The Red Hot Chili Peppers just played at the Super Bowl, “America’s
    game” but you can trace their beginnings back to a lot of drug (heroin) use but
    that should never effect the way people view their music because it’s
    the best

    • Tate W.

      Spot on! Great job Cooper! I think that you are completely right, that people shouldn’t view their music badly just because of their problems with drugs, because their music was good.

  • M Jesús García San Martín

    From Spain, the students at the Master’s Degree for the Use of ICT and Digital Resources in Primary Bilingual Education in Universidad Rey Juan Carlos are starting their Do Now today Wed 12 Feb, and we will be twittering using #DoNow_urjc

    I hope you enjoy our tweets.

    Best,

    @mjgsm

  • arron

    i think that we judge celebrities on the mistakes they have made and it is wrong, but not only that i think we shouldnt know personal stuff like that about them either. we judge them too much even though we have done stupid things in our life before too

    • Fabian Arias

      I agree on how you say its wrong to judge celebrities by there mistakes. We also make mistakes.

  • Vivi

    “i think that we judge celebrities on the mistakes they have made and it is wrong, but not only that i think we shouldnt know personal stuff like that about them either. we judge them too much even though we have done stupid things in our life before too.” TBH OMG THIS IS SO ACCURATE!! like first of all everyone makes mistakes in life don’t act like youre perfect, their mistakes are just publicized!

  • Guest

    I think we should separate the artist and his artwork because he already into drugs and all. His artwork is not bad, but does he even have the right to graffiti the wall.

  • Xillia

    I think we should separate the artist and his artwork because he already into drugs and all. His artwork is not bad, but does he even have the rights to graffiti the wall.

  • MIzael VIllegas

    if an artist did something wrong of course people are going to judge them. I think that we can separate the art from the artist. If their art is amazing then we shouldn’t care how the artist messes up. But some artist go to the extreme when they act up. LIke for example Justin Bieber.

  • Miriam J

    I think that their art and personal life are two different things. People make mistakes and do things without thinking about the consequences sometimes.

  • Felicia Bueno

    every got their bad side but the art does not represent the artist. Their work is very different to how they act and do not influence their action to the public.

  • aortiz

    I think we could manage to separate what the artist did from their work. Its not like they’re perfect or anything, people make mistakes. Some people need to move on and get over it.

  • Rosemary

    I think that business and your personal life should never be put together.

  • Alberto Munoz

    We’re still able to seperate the two, even tho you might not like the person, their accomplished work could be appreciated, like Michael Jackson, remember so many jokes about hime being a pedophile and everything, in the end. but did we think his music and dancing was bad? HELL NO.

  • Tyra Archer

    I think we should separate people personal life and their art because they came to promote things they love, not for to look in on their personal lives. It’s called PERSONAL for a reason thats suppose to be for them and close people around to know things that the whole world is knowing. People make mistakes that’s for you to learn from them not for someone to judge you because no ones better than anybody. I’m sure the people that judge did things that everyone wouldn’t agree with but it’s your life and you live it how you want to with no regrets. Live everyday as if it was your last.

  • jasmine

    let them live their famous

  • Sofia I.

    I think what the artist does with their work helps separate them from their life. Chris Brown is still relevant to this day and people still listen to his music, despite his past. As well as Justin Bieber, he had a D.U.I and experimented with drugs. People are still going to buy his album but they it’ll change their opinion on his lifestyle choice.

  • Daniel69

    Let them live their fantasy.

  • jacseny

    i think that we can separate it because he’s not really known for art but for his music and now that he has gotten in a lot of trouble it makes a big difference to because he would say that he would ask for permission to write on the walls but since he did something illegal makes it seem like he doesn’t care and mostly because he knows he doesn’t have legal papers

  • John

    I believe it is relatively easy to overlook both the good and the bad of people. It all depends on the individual and whether or not they chose to view the persons work as they did in the past or look at it with a new perspective.

  • STUFFF

    I think it depends on the person like i can others think that just bc they make mistakes everything about them sucks so they just don’t bother associating themselves with the artist anymore. But its stupid bc everyone makes mistakes and if it was someone who wasn’t famous nobody would care .

  • Francisco Ortega

    i dont care its their lives

  • OsvaldoA

    I believe that artist should do what they have to, they are still human beings they are not some sort of special being. Everyone is going to make a mistake so what they do with their lives obviously impact their performance in what it is they do.

  • #BossUpCeci

    I think Artist should be seperated from there art and personal life because there art is something you do and are good at . There personal life is them like everyone else has there own personal life .

  • Brenda B.

    We can separate the artwork from the artist and I think that we should. The opinion of an artwork should not change because of the who the artist is or what they have done. As long as the artwork is good it shouldn’t have to matter who the person is because you are just enjoying their work, not supporting their bad choices.

  • marina

    I think it depends on the artist because some artist express how they feel in their art. However, those artist’s who don’t express themselves in art can be separated from art due to the fact that there is no emotional connection.

  • Margarita

    I think that you can separate the artwork from the artist. I think that it’s two different things and shouldn’t mix them. People take things too seriously and care a little too much.

  • linda

    yes, i would be able to separate the artwork from the artist.The fact that people can be different and express themselves in another way while doing artwork and act different as a person.

  • Thania

    I think that there art has nothing to do with there life. Is there life that means that there not perfect because there human. maybe it would affect there art but if we think positive then it wouldn’t matter.

  • sergio

    if they do something wrong it dosent mean i will not like their are work like hitler his artwork is beautiful but he was a bad person

  • Daniela

    We are able to separate the artwork from the artist because you can like the artist because of his or her art work but you might not like them as their real life person.

  • Joanna

    I think that art and their lives are two different things. Art is a way to express your self, but it doesn’t tell you the way they act.

  • yapatino

    I think that you can separate the artist’s work from their personal life, but only to a certain extent. If that person made a mistake and realized they made a mistake then its okay but sometimes artists dont get punished for doing bad things just because they’re artists and that’s not right.

  • Yadira Escalante

    Yes, because their work is not based on their personality or features.

  • Osiris Ascencio

    i think that they should do whatever they want to and like Danny said let them live their fantasy!

  • Jade Gordon

    What a lot of people don’t understand that artists are humans too. We all make bad choices at one point in our life, but there life is lived under a microscope. A lot of these artists are young and that’s usually the stage where people make mistakes. Yes, we should separate an artist from his personal life. We should judge the artist by what he/she puts out.

  • Guest

    lmllk

  • Amanda Stinger

    “Could you enjoy another movie? See another concert? Or would that grim knowledge of how those artists conducted their lives — and how misguided, reprehensible or simply callous they could behave”
    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-02-03/entertainment/ct-hoffman-allen-commentary-20140204_1_separate-art-philip-seymour-hoffman-tv-spots

    no i believe that art should not be judged by the character. It also depends on the artist and how he/she expresses himself. It is a talent to have and shouldn’t be judged by what happened in the past good or bad.

  • Daniel

    Just because of a person’s choices doesn’t mean that their art is totally unable to be seen. Look at famous rock bands, who are famous for drug use and exploitation of women, but when you listen to a Guns and Roses album, you don’t think about that. You think about the craft and the actual product put forth.

  • Kyle Williams

    I think that no matter the situation, a piece of art should not be based off the character of someone who made it, no matter if you like or dislike the person. Being bias over someone’s mistakes is just hypocritical, because everyone makes mistakes.

  • Fabian Arias

    I believe that even though you don’t like the person, you shouldn’t hate there art work. There art might not even have anything to do with the bad choices they take. Maybe art is the only place they can excel in a positive way. People might not always separate there thoughts of the artist from the work, but it should be done.

    • Lane

      I agree with you there, just because some one is a bad person, per say, does not mean that their art is bad or depicts bad things.

  • Aaron Houin

    Though there are times that artist with sketchy backgrounds make a good produce, I believe there is an importance in keeping in mind who the person is behind this new media. Movies can be enjoyable no matter how shady an actor in it may be, but I do not like the idea of supporting an actor that does foolish things.

    • Kyle Williams

      Agreed, just because the artwork is good, it doesn’t make them good, same if the artwork is bad, it doesn’t make the artist bad.

  • Anarely Arroyo

    I believe a persons character and the way to express them self’s do not need to be judged the same because there talents could be different to there character for example there artwork would be pretty good but the persons personality could not be the best but only because of that persons personality

  • Camdon Hisey

    I think everyone has flaws and those flaws are going to effect them in their career whether it’s in art or not, but if they are doing what they are doing well I think one should look past the flaw.

  • john

    A persons art is how they feel and who they are. Yes, you can appreciate someones art without liking the person in general. Art is something special that is within you. A persons past/present should not affect your thoughts over their art because that is a different part of a person. That is my thoughts over people and their art.

  • Cole Reinhold

    I don’t think the art itself should be judged by the character of the person. Art shouldn’t be considered ugly if a person with an ugly personality makes it, but that also means that someone who make horrible art but has a great personality shouldn’t be told that there artwork is great.

  • Clay

    Can you still appreciate a work of art even if you don’t like the artist
    as a person? Should we continue to celebrate art by people who do bad
    things? Can you separate the art from the artist? Should you?

    I don’t think you can truly separate the art from the artist. If you don’t like a person, then everything they do you will judge by what you think of the person. I think that if you CAN distinguish the art from the person, then yeah, we should celebrate the art. But there will always be that preconception of dislike towards everything that person does.

    • Clay
      • Spencer Uyhelji

        I agree. Some artists are so hated that their art is loved, however. Interest is peaked in some art merely because people hate the person, but wonder what their artistic side – possibly their only good side – is like.

    • Quentin

      I agree. There are only things that should be described by what you think. Not by what is going through other peoples minds

    • Arthur Clemons

      I agree, first impressions can either be your success or downfall.

  • Lane

    We should be able to separate the art from the artist. Who cares what the artist does in their free time as long as it is not affecting you then why do we care? why should it change the artwork? it shouldn’t and we shouldn’t. if you take a look at some of Adolf Hitlers artwork they are stunning, http://www.catinwater.com/2013/06/19/paintings-of-adolf-hitler/ a link so you can check some of them out. They are breathtaking but since of his reputation people would condemn these paintings, Just because somebody can do horrible crimes that does not mean that they can not make breathtaking art. we should celebrate the art as art and not care what the artist was doing during the time that they wear working on the artwork.

  • Monica Figueroa

    I think that artwork can still be appreciated even if you don’t like the artist. Artwork can be treated separately because it’s how you feel about the artwork itself and not judging the person who made it.

  • Quentin

    I think you can still like a work of art even though you may not like the artist. People that make art by graffiti for example make some really powerful messages. I think that they can convey points across to the public better than works of art on paper. They use words to convey points most of the time! Some people just want better for our society and they feel that art is the only way to convey their point across to them. That is why I think that you can still like a work of art but you may not necessarily like the artist.

  • Spencer Uyhelji

    Can you still appreciate a work of art even if you don’t like the artist as a person? Should we continue to celebrate art by people who do bad things? Can you separate the art from the artist? Should you?

    I can still appreciate the art, as the art itself may be the one redeeming factor of the person. We should continue to celebrate art by people who do bad things, for no one is truly wholly evil/bad. Seeing the good things in a person is oft the best thing that one can do to help them stop doing the bad. No, I can not separate the art from the artist, and no one ever should.

  • Arthur Clemons

    As human beings to separate the same thing and like and hate it at the same time is difficult, the only way that could be possible is if that person didn’t know it was made by someone they don’t like. I think we should celebrate the art, and not the person. I mean they should still get the credit for the piece, but still if they are bad they shouldn’t be put in the spotlight.

  • Isaac Scarborough

    I think that we should suspend judgement about the artist themselves, as it really has no impact on their artwork. If you do, I feel you’re just limiting yourself to all kinds of art, and simply judging a perfectly good piece of art just because you dislike something about the artist himself is ignorant.

  • M Jesús García San Martín

    Here you are a Storify with a selection of some of the best tweets by students at University Rey Juan Carlos from Madrid, in Spain, that have been taking part in their first Do Now ever: http://stopandlearnenglish.blogspot.com.es/2014/02/donowurjc-donowartist-storify.html
    Hope you enjoy it.

  • Owen Manns

    It really depends how much you don’t like that person. You should be able to look past it and notice the good parts about there artwork. I believe that art is art no matter who made it. If its good I’m going to appreciate it.

    • Ben

      I agree, you should only look at art work and not let the creature influence your opinion.

  • Samantha Wojcik

    I think you can still appreciate art work even if you don’t like the artist. I think that art work should be judged by the quality of art rather then be judged by its artist.

  • Ben

    I think the artist should be separated from their work. I doesn’t matter who the person is you should be able to give your own opinion on the artwork alone without the influence of who the person is.

    • Wesley Seidelmann

      I agree with this. The artwork in itself is an expression and should not be considered as the “artist”.

  • 18jcol

    I don’t think it matters if the artist does something because you’re watching his or her work, and if you like there work I don’t think it matters if they’ve done something wrong.

  • 18kgoe

    I think that to a point that the artist should be separated from their work. Some of these artists are the way they are because of fame, and what would happen if that was taken away from them, but what would happen if their bad deeds brought them more? I do not know a complete answer, going either way can damage the actual person in them forever. If they commit a crime like murder or rape, I will not ever watch/listen to them, but anything else I think I can look past it.

  • 18dcag

    I think that it really depends on two things. How much you like the artist and how horrible the crime was. I still like Russell Crowe even though he threw a phone at a hotel worker. Heck, I would probably throw a phone at someone if I was angry. And if I liked a sports player who did drugs, I probably wouldn’t like them anymore. So to me, it truly depends on those two things.

  • 18tmon

    I think that we can still appreciate the art work but not in the way that you should. Not how great it is, but, if you really think, how the artists’ problems can be reflected in their art.

    • Aaron Houin

      I agree, so why support art that has parts of a bad person in it?

  • Dakota Brooke

    If someone makes a mistake a few years ago, it doesn’t mean that you have to hate anything that artist ever puts out. But first of all, people make mistakes, everybody does and for someone to judge another person for something then despise anything that artist puts out, it isn’t fair.

    • john

      I agree with this. thats like judging Miley Cyrus for her Country music because how she is now. she has changed herself but her previous art should not be judged by who she is now.

      • Dakota Brooke

        But what about her new stuff? If it’s good, it’s good. You shouldn’t make that judgment there either.

  • Wesley Seidelmann

    I think that you can appreciates someone art no matter who they are or what they’ve done. The art itself didn’t commit those acts and it’s an expression of someone who went through whatever they went through. I would say that we distinguish the art apart from the artist and still appreciate it, if not both of them.

  • 18cloc

    I think you can separate the art from the artist. Even though it’s the same person I think you can still seperate them. For instance Justin Bieber got in trouble while being the pop star that he is, but he hasn’t gotten in trouble for making art work. I believe that the artist gets in trouble because it’s to much for them to handle the fame, fortune, and fans, but when they make art I believe that they are trying to make there life better and trying to relieve stress.

  • 18rche

    I think you should appreciate someone’s artwork or their music, whether you actually like the artist or not. If there is a good song or a famous painting that you really like, you shouldn’t just never listen to it again, because the artist did something you don’t like. It’s hard to seperate and enjoy artwork when the artist is someone who did something bad, but I think people should still try to have your opinion on the art.

  • Pinya Colada

    I think you should separate an artist from their work. Even though they might’ve done bad things, their music or their art can still be amazing. For example, I still like some of Justin Bieber’s songs, despite the things he has done. When I listen to music, I try to separate artist and the song, because they are two different things.

    • Aaron Houin

      But the things he does are immature and dumb, so why support him by paying for his songs, or buying all his paraphernalia

  • KnowEl

    I think that you can separate an artist from the art, but it depends on what the artist does and how you feel about their actions. It really just depends on the fan.

  • Margaret Roberts

    Everything artists make is part of them, but most people except for a few psychopaths aren’t just one way, most people in the grey, not exactly good, and not exactly bad. Therefore even “bad” people are capable of making good things. Because of this we should look at the art and judge it for content and esthetics. Even if the content is offensive, it does not negate the success of the artwork, what I like/ agree with does not determine its success overall, take JB for example, his artwork is unoriginal, bland, and not fun to listen to, for me, but he is very popular.

  • Andrew J Shelton

    I think that you can seperate the art from the artist. However, if that artist did something very bad, it would still change your opinion on the artwork. For instance, if an artist that made a piece of art but that artist was known for a murder crime or something, it would change your view of that artwork because of the artist.

  • Samantha_M

    I think you can separate an artist from the art. Although i feel like sometimes it depends on what the artist does, and how you feel about their actions, and themselves as a person. Everyone can make mistakes and do things they aren’t proud of. Although because they are more well known its harder for them to not make mistakes with people always watching them, they can crack under pressure. There have been people who i personally don’t like, BUT i admire the works of art that they do. Its all about setting aside your personal feelings towards the person and focusing on their art and how the art makes you feel. Sometimes artists put all of their feelings and emotions into a certain piece of artwork. This can be the way that this person expresses themselves, maybe they want to be heard or noticed. So yes i believe it is possible to separate the artist from their art. http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2014/02/06/when-should-we-separate-the-art-from-the-artist/5228631/

  • kyle green

    i think you can like someones artwork even if they are a bad person. Sure the artist may do bad things that you don’t like but if there art work is good why should you hate it. For example you like a song that comes on the radio but you don’t like the singer, you don’t automatically hate the song because of the singer. in other words don’t hate something because of what is behind it.

    http://blogs.kqed.org/education/2013/09/17/how-to-make-a-meme/

  • Kenny Moran

    We should be able to separate the art from the artist. Who cares what the artist does in their free time as long as it is not affecting you then why do we care? why should it change the artwork? it shouldn’t and we shouldn’t. if you take a look at some of Adolf Hitlers artwork they are stunning, http://www.catinwater.com/2013/06/19/paintings-of-adolf-hitler/
    a link so you can check some of them out. They are breathtaking but since of his reputation people would condemn these paintings, Just because somebody can do horrible crimes that does not mean that they can not make breathtaking art. we should celebrate the art as art and not care what the artist was doing during the time that they wear working on the artwork.

  • Ashton Walker

    I believe that no matter what the artist has done prior to or after they have made some form of artwork, that should have no influence on how you look at their art. No matter what the artist has done, that doesn’t really affect the art they have painted. So if some actor you don’t like is in a movie, you automatically aren’t going to like the movie because of that one person? No, odds are you’ll like the movie regardless of who is in it if the story is good. So how is art different? If you like the work, then you like the work. http://thefederalist.com/2014/02/05/can-we-separate-the-art-and-the-artist-in-woody-allens-case-its-the-same-thing/

  • Margaret

    I think to some extent, all artists’–and every person’s–work is influenced by life experience and beliefs. I think it also can be harder to appreciate art without knowing the background that the artist has gone through to create his work; therefore to separate the two is leaving out important background to help one get a better understanding of the work. But this is part of the beauty of art and every person. There are different sides to everyone and we must appreciate them for their different aspects. Someone who stands for bad principals may create beauty in his art, and that is perfectly okay. It is something we must consider, but that does not mean that we should not appreciate their art. It is simply a different part of themselves. In fact, if you dislike the person but enjoy their artwork you will begin to see them more complexly and in a more three-dimensional and honest way than if you ignore one part of who a person is.