Is it possible for an artist to do something so
detestable that his or her work should be banned?
Wow. That's a tough one, primarily because as people we find it difficult to separate the creator from the work itself. In a perfect world, the work would be able to stand on its own merits and the creator's life wouldn't be taken into account when analyzing whether the work itself held value. I believe even a detestable person has the capacity to create something good (after all, in my belief system, we are created in the image of a creator, so creating comes naturally to us all in some way).
detestable that his or her work should be banned?
Wow. That's a tough one, primarily because as people we find it difficult to separate the creator from the work itself. In a perfect world, the work would be able to stand on its own merits and the creator's life wouldn't be taken into account when analyzing whether the work itself held value. I believe even a detestable person has the capacity to create something good (after all, in my belief system, we are created in the image of a creator, so creating comes naturally to us all in some way). For example, had Charles Manson written a great play, would it be "moral" to perform it because of the awful, horrible person he was?
Personally, as long as the play itself wasn't detestable, I wouldn't hold it against a theater company who chose to perform it. But I'm sure the families of Manson's victims might feel differently -- and with good reason.
In my own life, I know that Richard Wagner's symphonic works are often associated with Hitler, but it doesn't make me appreciate the simple beauty of the melodies any less.
I tend to discourage wholesale banning on any official level anyway, and I prefer to leave it up to individual people and companies to make those decisions based on their beliefs, values, and clientele. For example, a family-run, community theater might find performing a Manson-penned play a distasteful endeavor and refuse to produce it, but another theater troupe might enjoy sharing the work in spite of the Manson connection. It becomes, at least to me, a matter for the individual and individuals of the company to decide for their circle of influence, not for the governmental powers that be to decide for the rest of us.
True censorship makes me feel very, very uncomfortable, because it involves making decisions about what's best for the whole of society, and I'm not content to let others make that decision for me -- or for me to make that decision for others, except for perhaps minors in my own house.
Manson was apparently a tolerable songwriter, to the point that Dennis Wilson (of The Beach Boys) considered working with him. This was before he went all 'kill-y'. I've heard one song he recorded, and wasn't impressed. Wagner was a rabid Antisemite--Stephen Fry did a whole BBC special about his own personal conflict with loving the music, and detesting the man. Overall (and not to compare gayness with racism and murder), I'm pretty sure by now that Mick Jagger and David Bowie having sex is NOT gonna turn me gay or make me cross-dress. Not my cup of tea, but it's not going to stop me from loving their music--because it's SICK for anyone to worry about what other people do in their bedroom, just as it's an arrogant sickness to be arbiters of what information people are allowed to get. Point being, I think the litmus test for even the possibility of banning anything should be exactly how irreparably harmful something is to society. Child Porn or handy DIY manuals on bombmaking would be the obvious ones, NOT Huckleberry Finn or Catcher in the Rye--or even Mein Kampf (which I read to see how evil works).
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Jim.
DeleteThe creative life can attract the worst of humanity. Great liars are often great storytellers ("Battlefield: Earth" is a really enjoyable read regardless of the harm Hubbard's other lies have wrought). There is a particular requirement of being a great artist that gives The Fast Lane to sociopaths: The penchant to separate oneself from others for long enough periods to become technically proficient at something or to sift through enough failed creations to arrive at a handful of amazing things.
ReplyDeleteEzra Pound boosted Hitler and Mussolini. If his poems don't evoke a revulsion in you, it is in part because you didn't hear his radio broadcasts at a time when it was not clear that they would lose. The children of great artists very often have a far more conflicted opinion of the works that their parents cared more about than for their kids.
"The children of great artists very often have a far more conflicted opinion of the works that their parents cared more about than for their kids."
DeleteI've seen that in so many documentaries about great creators. An excellent point, James.