With the rise of cancel culture, it’s something that’s got me curious, why are so many works (music, literature, tv shows, etc.) no longer separated from their controversial makers? Is it purely to do with money (e.g. not wanting to give money to people you don’t agree with?) and what about controversial people who are dead? They don’t gain anything, so why isn’t the art separated from the artist? What’s your opinion on this topic?

  • remon@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    I think that’s slightly different, as artists that were good people typically means there message is good.

    Well if the evil is part of the art itself, then there is no need to separate the art from the artists in the first place, so I’d drop the entire “message” column. The question really only makes sense when they are unrelated.

    But alright, you only support artists you like while they are alive. That’s fair enough.