Can Bad People Be Good... Even Great Artists?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jackson Pollock doesn't strike me as the world's nicest guy. Picasso either.

Being a creep doesn't disqualify one from being a great artist, no.
 
and yet…

sin doesn't disqualify one from being a Saint
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Jackson Pollock doesn't strike me as the world's nicest guy. Picasso either.

Being a creep doesn't disqualify one from being a great artist, no.

Those two were exactly the two who came to my mind when I read the title of the thread. Caravaggio will also fit into that category.
 
In modern day artists, I've talked to a few who did really good work but were quite snotty. 🤷‍♀️
 
People who break the law should be prosecuted like anyone else. You can't take away what's already been done though. If they've already made art, or performed surgeries, tried cases, taught classes, etc., you can't erase it, but you can certainly take away their status or certificates to continue to practice. With artists, it's up to the people that have the work on their walls whether they still want it or can separate the art from the artist. There is no right answer. The artist can still paint from their jail cell, if given those benefits. Same goes with their "good/bad" views. It's up to the people who support them. You can't really jail people for their views, but you can be disgusted enough to think about it every time you see/listen to their art. Isn't that the audience's decision? It's not a black and white world.
 
People who break the law should be prosecuted like anyone else. You can't take away what's already been done though. If they've already made art, or performed surgeries, tried cases, taught classes, etc., you can't erase it, but you can certainly take away their status or certificates to continue to practice. With artists, it's up to the people that have the work on their walls whether they still want it or can separate the art from the artist. There is no right answer. The artist can still paint from their jail cell, if given those benefits. Same goes with their "good/bad" views. It's up to the people who support them. You can't really jail people for their views, but you can be disgusted enough to think about it every time you see/listen to their art. Isn't that the audience's decision? It's not a black and white world.

I think in practice society's willingness to forgive and forget depends on how long the artist has been dead. Rumor has it that Caravaggio had carnal relations with some of his young male models, something which is today, well, kind of frowned upon. Those who hold up Oscar Wilde as "gay icon" also tend to conveniently forget that some of his young lovers were thoroughly underaged by today's standards. So had those guys lived today, perhaps their work would be burned in public and so on and so forth (it's kind of ironic that Wilde would have today received a far heavier sentence than he did at the time, albeit on a different charge).

But once the artists are long dead we don't mind their personal lives so much anymore, and we begin to see their art. It's not even just artists either. E.g. Marcus Aurelius is hailed as a sort of benign philosopher, and we forget that he presided over slavery, wars of conquest, gladiatorial games, crucifixion and who knows what else. By modern standards he was as much of a monster as Hitler or Pol Pot.

Perhaps, in another century or two or ten, Harvey Weinstein will be largely remembered for the films he produced, and audiences will once again chuckle over the exploits of Dr. Huxtable and his lovable family. Funny memes featuring Hitler will be as devoid of sting or controversy as ones starring Julius Caesar.

But if some current famous artist turns out to be a rapist or murderer or something? Well, for one thing, art or not, we will not tolerate such behavior among the living. And who doesn't just love to see a hero fall?
 
Ya, maybe we'll all just finally forget what Hitler did (and every other genocidal evil monster did) and we can all just have a good laugh, right? I think in some ways you might be right--that many many years after these monsters are dead, people do seem to forget, unless people that were directly affected are still among the living. Just like how people who were not directly affected by Hitler in modern times don't really care about what he did. It wasn't their family, why would they? Fewer and fewer people care. This is why history will just keep repeating itself.
 
One of the best examples of an artist of real merit who surely qualifies as a "bad" human being is Carlo Gesualdo. He is likely known only to those well-versed in classical music. He arguably ranks second only to Monteverdi among Renaissance composers... and some of his later work bends the rules of music of the time beyond anyone else.

Gesualdo was Prince of Venosa and Count of Conza. In 1586 he married his first cousin, Donna Maria d'Avalos, the daughter of Carlo d'Avalos, prince of Montesarchio and Sveva Gesualdo, princess of Venosa. It has been suggested that Gesualdo failed to live up to his husbandly duties and was obsessed with his musical efforts. Some years into her marriage with Gesualdo, Donna Maria began an affair with Fabrizio Carafa, third Duke of Andria and seventh Count of Ruovo. On the night of October 16, 1590, at the Palazzo San Severo in Naples, the two lovers were caught in flagrante by Gesualdo who had suspected her infidelities and doubled back to his estate after informing his wife that he would be gone a few days on business. Carafa was held by Gesualdo's servents while Gesualdo repeatedly stabbed his wife and finally shot her in the head while screaming, "Is she dead yet?!" At gunpoint Carafa was made to dress in his lover's clothing and then also shot to death. Gesualdo then had the bodies dumped on the steps of her parents' palazzo. As both Gesualdo and Donna Maria's parents were of the aristocracy, he was pardoned in spite of a delegation's interview of multiple witnesses and a report that did not skimp on the gruesome details.

Justice... or rather revenge between wealthy and aristocratic families was commonly dealt with personally between those involved through the vendetta. Following the murder, Gesualdo laid low for a year or so until the death of his father when he became the third Prince of Venosa and eighth Count of Conza. He married again, to Leonora d'Este, the niece of the powerful d'Este Duke Alfonso II and moved to
the home of the d'Este court and one of the centers of progressive musical activity in Italy, especially the madrigal. The relationship between Gesualdo and his new wife was not good; she accused him of abuse, and the Este family attempted to obtain a divorce. She spent more and more time away from the isolated estate. Gesualdo wrote many angry letters to Modena where she often went to stay with her brother. Historians wrote, "She seems to have been a very virtuous lady ... for there is no record of his having killed her."

Late in life, he suffered from depression and repeated dreams and hallucinations involving his dead wife. Gesualdo had himself beaten daily by his servants and he engaged in a relentless, and fruitless, correspondence with Cardinal Federico Borromeo to obtain relics with which he hoped to obtain healing for his mental disorder and possibly absolution for his crimes. His later works have a dark and disjointed edge that may have been rooted in an unstable mental state.

 
Ya, maybe we'll all just finally forget what Hitler did (and every other genocidal evil monster did) and we can all just have a good laugh, right? I think in some ways you might be right--that many many years after these monsters are dead, people do seem to forget, unless people that were directly affected are still among the living. Just like how people who were not directly affected by Hitler in modern times don't really care about what he did. It wasn't their family, why would they? Fewer and fewer people care. This is why history will just keep repeating itself.
I would like to think that the evil wrought by Hitler will not be forgotten... nor that of Stalin and Mao. Nero, Commodus, and Caracalla are still all known for their evil deeds. Napoleon, I think, is different. He had power thrust upon him as a result of the wars against the French by the allied European aristocracies that feared the revolutionary ideas of the French spreading. He never dreamed of an eradication of even his enemies but rather a unified Europe. Like the French Revolution itself with spiraled into the horror of the Reign of Terror, Napoleon's goals... which may have been noble in intention... resulted in endless death and suffering. I do think that humor has long been one of the prime weapons against tyranny and authoritarianism... but unfortunately, we have more than a few who fear change and the "other" and will whole-heartedly embrace authoritarianism.
 
I would never suggest that an artist is some sort of being that should be held above the law... but trying the human being for his or her crimes is not the same as vilifying the works of art. I would not see think of blaming the sons and daughters of a murderer or rapist for their father's crimes than I would think of blaming Tristan und Isolde for Wagner's antisemitic writings. I would also point out that in most instances, all humans are complex beings and cannot be defined as wholly good or bad.
 
Reads like a deleted scene out of The Godfather, eh Sno? Well... we know where the Mafia came from. You ought to read up on any number of other Italian Renaissance aristocrats and their gruesome deeds and misdeeds.
 
I would never suggest that an artist is some sort of being that should be held above the law... but trying the human being for his or her crimes is not the same as vilifying the works of art. I would not see think of blaming the sons and daughters of a murderer or rapist for their father's crimes than I would think of blaming Tristan und Isolde for Wagner's antisemitic writings. I would also point out that in most instances, all humans are complex beings and cannot be defined as wholly good or bad.

In most instances, yes, but there are major exceptions. There are exceptions in Hitler, Idi Amin, The Roman empire, The Turks...and the other people you listed for mass butcherings of millions of people. Having views and doing actions are two different things. Henry Ford, or Wagner didn't do much but write things, maybe they disseminated those writings, and that's enough. Like I said, it is up to other people how they'd like to view what they want to look at or put into their ears.
 
Oh, and there's the buzzer to signify the end of the round!

Yet another topic that can come to no good, so it will have to come to an end.

And look at that, it was started by the same person who started the last one. What an odd coincidence!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top