I evaluate authors, artists, and publishers on their public works not their private lives. In particular the scandal sheets and tabloid reporting. There are damn few people, maybe even me, who could stand a tabloid report on their private lives. If you are one of them go ahead and shit on anybody's private life you want to. We will see what the tabloids say when they get you on the cover.
When autobiographical data that I disagree with creeps into art or fiction, I will criticize the character or art as inappropriate or socially dysfunctional, but even if there is credible evidence that the artist is similarly dysfunctional, that is herm privilege, and only those close enough to be affected have the right to comment.
This is one of the reasons that when I quote authors, whenever possible I quote the character, with proper annotation of the work and the author and date. People who allege that an author believes something and quotes a character to prove it I will shout bullshit, even if there is evidence that the author in fact does believe something like it. If one wants to shit on an author's beliefs, better get and cite the source of the direct quote by the author.
There is a current trend in virtue signaling to claim that personal behavior even after the fact revelations of the creator taint the value of the work which quickly turns artistic discussions into gossip sessions. This consigns many excellent works to the dustbin of public opinion when the behavior of the creator had no apparent effect on the message or the value of the work.
11/21/17 update. Finally women are speaking out about sexual assault by public figures, as they should, but removing the public figure from herm public position is the wrong solution. These public figures should be held accountable in a court of law, civil or criminal depending on the statute of limitations on the crime or violation, with witnesses given appropriate protection from retaliation, and cross examination limited to veracity and consistency. External considerations such as "enticement via dress or behavior" should be explicitly excluded. The law should provide appropriate sanctions but loss of position should not be one of them unless associated with a felony etc. where a felony is a disqualification.
Public opinion may affect ratings and votes, but it is the ratings and votes that should determine the fate of the public figure not the allegations.
In spite of the failure of Title IX the in camera fact gathering feature of the system encouraged women to come forward with allegations of harassment, assault and retaliation for speaking out. The failure was in the fact that there was no similar in camera for the accused to respond before the allegations became a public issue as institutions responded to the allegations before proper investigation of the situation was made and the "Believe the woman" brought the whole issue before the court of public opinion with disastrous results for all involved including the complainant who inevitably will be outed when the shit hits the fan. In one University case I followed the Title IX administrator, several high ranking officials, and the original complainant all left the university "early" in the face of public displeasure at the outcome of the case.
Superman music
1 day ago
No comments:
Post a Comment