Thinking of two in particular - Roman Polanksi and Woody Allen - fantastic filmmakers, (the former - one of my alltime faves).
I’m at total loggerheads with coming to terms with the unforgivably reprehensible shit they pulled. Sometimes I’ll say fuck it: whatever they did in their non-artistic past should have no baring on their art, while at other times I’m like - uh, shouldn’t they be charged?
Despite the fact that RP’s victim’s mom was partying inside the house during the crime, and that the victim, herself, has stated she didn’t want any further pursuit of getting RP imprisoned, I still can’t see those facts excusing the hideousness of what he did, meanwhile, damn - I’d sure like to check out “The Tenant” for an 7th? 8th? time.
Maybe I’m the only conflicted person here on this issue, while folks here have a more cut-and-dry take on this?
Surely this topic has been discussed here before, but of course the search function is be cruel and sadistic to me by showing me nothing but a white page - every time! - so if a thread link can be provided - much appreciated.
I don’t think you can generalize these sorts of questions. What artist? What are his/her accomplishments and transgressions? What sanctions is one proposing against their art? Every case is different.
Like Hitler’s paintings. There is surely a vast difference between the very personification of evil and an accomplished artist with a lifetime of achievement who was accused of something bad. And in that vein there is a big difference between someone like Roman Polanski who fled the country to escape criminal prosecution and Woody Allen who hasn’t been charged with anything.
Allen has, however, been the target of seemingly endless smear campaigns mostly spinning out of his bitterly acrimonious divorce. He’s been accused of so many nasty things that even if some of it is true, most of it probably is not. And people who accuse Allen of being a self-absorbed narcissist are correct, but they miss the fact that if he wasn’t, he wouldn’t be Woody Allen and he wouldn’t be any good. He’s given the world a wealth of laughter and insight through films that all more or less examine our lives through the eyes of self-absorbed narcissists.
Those aren’t too bad. Hitler is a good example. Stalin as well. If one of them had a good symphony or sculpture I’d see no problem with enjoying that creation. My only personal reservation is if I know for a fact someone is on the scale of a Hitler or a Stalin I’m not inclined to enrich them by purchasing things that make them wealthier. Like if I knew for certain a particular item was made with slave labor I won’t buy it.
I’ve met one or two writers (or, as I used to be a volunteer with the San Diego Comic Con, artists) who, alas, were such total jerks that their work was forever ruined for me. I don’t care how good their work is, when they act like bullies, and mistreat others, and use foul language… Nah. They’re dead to me.
ETA: not just foul language, but foul language aimed directly at others in a hurtful fashion. Not just, “Oh, f—,” but “You f—er!”
I pretty much draw the line at artists who sue their own fans. (Metallica, Prince, etc.)
Beyond that, I can be pretty forgiving, as long as their creative output remains solid. For example, there’s Varg Vikernes, the black metal mastermind behind Burzum – I kept buying his albums even after learning he was imprisoned for murdering his bandmate and torching lots of historical churches. His pro-Nazi sympathies got me a bit salty, but ultimately the thing that drove me away from his music was that his newest output simply sucks balls.
What divorce? Allen and Mia Farrow were never married and/or divorced.
Mia discovered Allen was having an affair with Soon-Yi, her adopted daughter, when he left naked pictures of Soon-Yi in the open at his apartment when he knew Mia would be there. Two weeks before this, he had adopted Moses and Dylan, the children Mia had already adopted as a single mother.
Allen then sued Mia for custody of their two adopted children and their biological son Satchel, took her to court and made all sorts of false accusations against her. He totally lost the case and the appeal.
One statement Allen made in court was that he regarded adoptive children as different from biological children. He later married Soon-Yi and they have two adopted daughters.
For long-dead artists I agree that it’s not much relevant but for still-living artists some money may still be going to them. For example, if the OP goes to see an Allen movie then Allen reaps some benefit from that. I can understand why someone would be hesitant to support an artist they found odious.
Yep. I do not want to hand Roman Polanski money for any reason. Obviously, there are many layers of intermediaries between us, but when you boil it down to the bare essentials it is not possible to separate the two. You are giving this person money.
Frankly, I’m astonished anyone in Hollywood does business with these people to begin with. If he is genuinely innocent of the crime, he can come back and face trial like any other person.
Yes, sorry, my mistake, it was the bitter custody battle with Farrow that led me to think “divorce”. And “bitter” is an understatement when you consider the related lawsuit and appeals and the incessant stream of acrimony against Allen, most of which seems to come from Farrow and her kids.
But your post didn’t address what I said about Allen as an immensely talented filmmaker. As a fan, why would I care what he said about adopted vs. biological children, or any other irrelevant ruminations that he may or may not have made? As I said, every case is different, and in this case it’s not that I’m giving Allen a free pass, it’s that for me the merits of his work are separate from the dull roar of all the “he said, she said” allegations that are mostly fodder for the gossip columns.
Mia Farrow is supposed to have expressed the wish that major actors not work on Allen’s films, and Ronan Farrow in his everlasting crusade against Allen has said the same thing in at least one of his interminable essays – because apparently, it pains these people to see A-list celebrities in an Allen film. You know what, Farrows – all of you? If Allen’s films bother you so much, you don’t have to watch them. But I guess that doesn’t satisfy the vindictiveness you all harbor.
Not clear from the OP, but: Polanski is not risking extradition because he is accused of rape, and the victim’s forgiveness is also irrelevant. Normally a statute of limitations would apply if these were new accusations. However, the government wants him because he fled the country before sentencing, thus he is a fugitive not an accused.
Harlan Ellison?
Marion Zimmer Bradley died before her crimes came out.