Comments

i think you're right about most things. on others, it's true to an extent. i'll use jk rowling as an example. 

i think that people are very worried about being moral in a world where morals are disappearing. when they open a harry potter book, all they can think of is the harm that jk rowling is causing. they don't want to spend money supporting someone like that. when the artist's beliefs are revealed, its hard to think of their work without thinking of what kind of person they are.  

artists also have a tendency to include themselves in their work because art is used as self expression. its rare to come across art that has little to no connection with the artist. they don't want to support bad people, and when i say "bad people", i'm talking about people who are highly inhumane or actively causing damage towards people. jk rowling puts the money she earns into oppressing transgender people. this causes serious harm towards them. i know people do go too far by cancelling people for the smallest of things that they dont like or disagree with, especially these days, i think this can only apply for people who do great harm or damage to people and/or the environment. 

art is supposed to have meaning, and if the meaning is immoral, people don't like it. but i do think it also depends on the work. 

greek philosophy is still very important today, but greek philosophers tended to be very misogynistic. most people were back then. but their art still matters, and their art is still art. 

people are very judgmental as well. for example, people who still listen to melanie martinez get a lot of insults thrown at them for supporting someone like that. it's hard to separate the art from the artist when you're actively supporting an artist who has done bad things or when you're peer pressured into hating certain artists. 

i think "separate the art from artists" is true to an extent, because when you still interact with the artist's work, you're supporting them. i wouldn't buy another harry potter book, but i would probably listen to music- for example- from a singer who just said something controversial. however, i think it's still okay to read harry potter books you already own or pirate them. 

"is work allowed to stand on its own?" it is to an extent. the plot of harry potter has nothing to do with jk rowling's beliefs. d4vd's songs (like "romantic homicide") for example basically had lyrics nearly identical to the crime he committed. 

honestly, it depends on the artist and the connection the artist has to the work. 

i don't know if i worded this very well but hopefully my point gets across lol