- Share This Post
- submit
- 2
-
Sparkle (0)
I like my idols flawed and human. If I'm going to give my fan dollars away, I'd rather give them to an honest foul-up than a soulless automaton parroting the same canned (read: correct) answers every time he meets the press. Drunken outbursts don't phase me. Caught on tape passed out with detritus of several illegal substances at your feet? I'll still buy your albums and listen to your music. Inappropriate? Yes, definitely. And at times sad and a waste, but never has that been grounds for shunning. Maybe I'm jaded that way. Or maybe I'm not the only one. Sweetney says in her recent post "In Defense of Kayne West:"
A good part of how and why I feel the way I do about West I think also relates to having an strong natural capacity for compartmentalization, whereby I'm able to easily separate out an artist -- the person and persona behind the art, their life and what they do and say in it -- from the actual art. And though by every possible measure Kanye West may be a jerk (I don't know if I agree with THAT sweeping of a condemnation, but for the sake of argument), he's also an extremely talented man who has been acknowledged by public, press, and the music industry alike as one of the important musicians of our day. He is, simply put, a complicated and contradictory individual: by turns arrogant to the point of absurdism (at one point calling himself the second coming of Christ, for example) and humble to the point of discrediting himself and his achievements...
Drunken onstage buffoonery is one thing, but in light of Mackenzie Phillips's recent allegations of sexual abuse at the hands of her father, Mamas and Papas founder John Phillips, and acclaimed director, Roman Polanski's arrest, I wonder how far we are willing to excuse someone's behavior simply because that person is an "artist?" 138 of Polanksi's film industry peers, including Woody Allen and Martin Scorsese signed a petition demanding his release. From Jezebel:
Yes I can totally see how arresting a fugitive child rapist is a slippery slope toward censorship. If I were a creative professional, I'd certainly be concerned about the authorities coming after me and my work! Except, I am a creative professional, and I'm not worried, because unlike Roman Polanski, I have neither raped a child nor jumped bail and evaded capture for three decades. See how that works? Don't rape a child and flee sentencing for it: Enjoy your personal and artistic freedom! Rape a child and flee: Get arrested! (Eventually.) Is there something I'm missing here? Like the part that explains how arresting a fugitive child rapist has fuck-all to do with festivals traditionally being a haven for controversial filmmakers? Is that really supposed to mean they should also be a haven for known felons?
Flawed is one thing: felon is another. Granted, I've yet to see the same support for John Phillips (well, he has been dead for some time), but the validity of Mackenzie's statements have certainly been questioned. (I believe her.) It's sick to think that because one "makes art" he gets an automatic pass. What are your thoughts? How far are you willing to "separate the art from the artist?"
Related links:
- Huff TV: Arianna Talks Iran, Republicans and Roman Polanski On Morning Joe (Huffington Post)
- Roman Polanksi is a Rape-Rapist (Mamapop)
- John Phillips Even Worse Papa Than We Realized (Stereogum)
- Mackenzie Phillips: Incest, drugs, fame and blame (BlogHer)
