The influence of artists' ideologies or non-musical behaviors

[Todd]

I'm going to just stream.  I almost never blind buy anymore.

I like to buy blind (or deaf).  Every couple months or so, I peruse discounted items on Amazon and buy only recordings that cannot be streamed, just for fun.  And some foreign market items are blind buys.

A better question is: does ideology influence one's playing style? For instance, Maurizio Pollini is a communist. How does this ideological affiliation reflect in his recordings? Not at all, of course.

Yep.  In general, I don't know artists' politics, and I don't care.  If and when I learn their politics, I still don't care.  The same applies to other unpleasant things artists may do (eg, murder, rape, endorsing restaurant chains).

[AnotherSpin]

A better question is: does ideology influence one's playing style? For instance, Maurizio Pollini is a communist. How does this ideological affiliation reflect in his recordings? Not at all, of course.

In a strange way, Levit's leftist political stance  is reflected in his style of musicianship. It feels false. Or so it seems to me.

[AnotherSpin]

Yep.  In general, I don't know artists' politics, and I don't care.  If and when I learn their politics, I still don't care.  The same applies to other unpleasant things artists may do (eg, murder, rape, endorsing restaurant chains).

You are an exception. Western society is never slow in cancelling musicians or other cultural figures.

[Todd]

You are an exception. Western society is never slow in cancelling musicians or other cultural figures.

I'm not so sure about that.  Some unpleasant artists take career hits, some don't.  That you use the nebulous word "cancelling" is helpful. 

[Florestan]

Yep.  In general, I don't know artists' politics, and I don't care.  If and when I learn their politics, I still don't care.  The same applies to other unpleasant things artists may do (eg, murder, rape, endorsing restaurant chains).

I draw the red line at paedophilia. James Levine, for instance.

[Todd]

I draw the red line at paedophilia. James Levine, for instance.

Forever?  For instance, do you listen to Saint-Saens?  Will you watch a Polanski movie?  I listen to Levine's recordings, Saint-Saens' music, and watch Polanski movies.  I have no qualms doing so. 

[Florestan]

Forever?  For instance, do you listen to Saint-Saens?  Will you watch a Polanski movie?  I listen to Levine's recordings, Saint-Saens' music, and watch Polanski movies.  I have no qualms doing so. 

AFAIK, Saint-Saens' case is not at all so clear cut, there is no conclusive evidence he was a paedophile. I don't remember having watched any Polanski movie --- for no specific reasons, it just happened.

[Todd]

AFAIK, Saint-Saens' case is not at all so clear cut, there is no conclusive evidence he was a paedophile.

He reportedly stated "I am not a homosexual, I am a pederast."

Do you listen to Gesualdo?  He of course murdered his wife.  Is that better or worse than what Levine and Polanski definitely did, and Saint-Saens almost certainly did?

[Florestan]

He reportedly stated "I am not a homosexual, I am a pederast."

Yes, but he was enamored of, and famous for, quirky jokes and pranks on most other people so that is not conclusive evidence.

Do you listen to Gesualdo?  He of course murdered his wife.  Is that better or worse than what Levine and Polanski definitely did, and Saint-Saens almost certainly did?

Murdering one's wife in a fit of jealousy is neither better nor worse than paedophilia, it's different.

But we digress, greatly. Let's say that in 99 % of cases I clearly separate the artist from their art, and in the specific case of political opinions I couldn't care less about them. Some of my favorite writers and musicians are/were diehard leftists or downright communists.

[Todd]

Yes, but he was enamored of, and famous for, quirky jokes and pranks on most other people so that is not conclusive evidence.

Not conclusive, not exonerating. 

Murdering one's wife in a fit of jealousy is neither better nor worse than paedophilia, it's different.

Well, yes, murder is different from pedophilia.  Do you ever listen to Gesualdo, and if you do, how do you rationalize your behavior given that you have taken a moral stance against Levine?

[AnotherSpin]

I'm not so sure about that.  Some unpleasant artists take career hits, some don't.  That you use the nebulous word "cancelling" is helpful.

Certainly some people get their careers cut off, some don't. I was referring to the phenomenon itself, which is becoming more noticeable and serious every year. You can use any word to name it.

[Florestan]

Not conclusive, not exonerating. 

Yes. He might or might not have been a paedophile. We will never know.

Well, yes, murder is different from pedophilia.  Do you ever listen to Gesualdo, and if you do, how do you rationalize your behavior given that you have taken a moral stance against Levine?

I don't listen to Gesualdo on a regular basis, not because of his acts but because Renaissance is not among my favorite periods --- but yes, every now and then I do listen to Renaissance composers, Gesualdo included. Yes, he was a murderer but at least he regretted it and made penance for it all his subsequent life. I am not aware of any such repentance from levine.

[AnotherSpin]

He reportedly stated "I am not a homosexual, I am a pederast."

Do you listen to Gesualdo?  He of course murdered his wife.  Is that better or worse than what Levine and Polanski definitely did, and Saint-Saens almost certainly did?

The real question is, do people actually choose what they "do"? And if not, does it make sense to blame and punish them for something they didn't choose?

[Todd]

I suspect that digging into any artist's past will dredge up something horrific...

What they do has little to do with their craft.

Absolutely.  I am interested in the art, not the unsavory behaviors of artists.  How many German and Russian and Italian and Spanish artists from the last century would I have to avoid if I worried myself about misbehavior, for instance?  Can I enjoy Picasso's blue period given his nastiness?  Can I enjoy Ray Charles given his questionable behavior?  (The answer is yes to both.)  While I don't seek out knowledge of artists' bad behavior, if I do learn about it, I acknowledge it and then move on.

I was referring to the phenomenon itself, which is becoming more noticeable and serious every year.

Not really.  The recent apex was during the Me Too movement.  It's not as bad now.  Indeed, some men felled by Me Too are rehabilitating their careers.  People have been condemned by society for various moral reasons for millennia.  Occasionally, good art comes out of it.  Think Hawthorne.  There's nothing new under the sun.  Social media merely speed things up.

Yes, he was a murderer but at least he regretted it and made penance for it all his subsequent life. I am not aware of any such repentance from levine.

This demonstrates that people can and do rationalize anything. 

[Florestan]

The real question is, do people actually choose what they "do"? And if not, does it make sense to blame and punish them for something they didn't choose?

Oh, no, I will most definitely not go into discussing free will.

[Florestan]

people can and do rationalize anything. 

Of course, it's in their human nature.

[Todd]

Of course, it's in their human nature.

You missed the point.

[Florestan]

You missed the point.

What was it, then?

[Brian]

I recently read a new book, Monsters by Claire Dederer, that tackles this very subject of "problem" artists with complexity, wisdom, humility, and a willingness to see all sides. She actually starts with the example of Polanski, before moving on to many other so-called "monsters" past and present.

I couldn't possibly summarize all of Dederer's thoughts in this space - it really is one of my favorite books I've read in a long time - but some that were of value to me included:
(a) that we should be honest about the role our feelings and emotions play in our assessment of "problematic" artists;
(b) that it is fine to acknowledge the difference between monstrous behavior that does or does not affect how you perceive the art itself (e.g., I can listen to Saint-Saens without thinking about his personal behavior, but I find Woody Allen's Manhattan deeply creepy and uncomfortable, having knowledge of his real behavior);
(c) that a private consumer cannot really hold any such artist accountable, so the point of managing our own feelings is precisely that: managing our own feelings;
(d) that art critics who say "we feel this" or "we should feel this," with the royal "we," as if their own feelings are normal and right, are grandstanding; and
(e) that there really isn't a wrong answer except to be frustrated at the artists for making us think about these things in the first place.

[Florestan]

What's that cliche? You can be right, or you can be happy? The older I get, the more and more I value happiness.

Lovely quote and sentiment.