The Backlash to the Backlash: Can We Separate the Art from the Artist?

Michael Jackson. Kanye West. Mark Wahlberg. Time and time again, artists touch the lives of millions with their work, all while committing unforgivable acts behind the scenes:  Jackson was accused of acting inappropriately towards children, West has a streak of alarming tweets to account for, and Wahlberg has confessed to a hate crime committed when he was a teenager. When we listen to their music or consume their work, we have to decide if what they are doing is right. Can we support the work created by artists who commit these wrongdoings? Can we separate the art from the artist?

A recent incident with renowned author Neil Gaiman has reignited this debate. Gaiman, who is known for his works of science fiction, including “The Sandman” and “Coraline,” was accused of sexual misconduct by eight different women—allegations he has denied. Gaiman’s work, which has captured the hearts of millions, has been studied and appreciated by numerous classes here at Stuyvesant. English teacher Judd Staley is among those who teach Gaiman’s work, in a past Science Fiction English class. After reading about the allegations on the cover of a New York Magazine, Staley told us that he found the news deeply upsetting, especially considering his power and past works. “He’s a person who has a lot of power in the field,” Staley remarked. “And in particular, for writing strong female characters.”

Staley finds the practice of separating a piece of art from its creator disingenuous, and that it often limits the extent of a literary analysis. “I understand the sort of impulse to want to do that, but I think that art comes from a person and from their personal experiences, and to totally divorce it from its context? I don’t think it really makes sense,” he explained. Staley emphasizes the inherent connection between an artist and their creation. Thus, while viewers can form their own opinions on the separation of the two, to completely divide them would prohibit true analysis of both the art and the artist. 

Staley adds that in a classroom setting, discussing an artist’s background can often enrich the conversation. He said, “I think, in a way, knowing the history behind an artist can enrich the work.” After all, no one is perfect, and certainly not artists who spend their lives in the public eye. As Staley said, “It’s hard to imagine truly profound art coming from someone who is a saint.” If all artists were good people with only good thoughts, good intentions, and perfect lives, art wouldn’t be interesting. Often, the most meaningful art comes from experiences and emotions that might complicate the artist or make the public deem them problematic. Nevertheless, knowing the horrible crimes some artists have committed can provide insight into their thoughts, ideas, or biases. 

However, some disagree, believing that when we are able to, it is better to set aside the artist and focus on the genius that is the art. English teacher Kim Manning is among those who champion this opinion. In her AP American Places and Perspectives class, she teaches the work of authors like Junot Diaz and Allen Ginsberg. In an email interview, Manning explained, “I absolutely believe a work of art can and should be separated from its creator.” Manning believes that we should not need to judge a person in order to judge their art, and doing so is a disservice to the quality of the art itself. Manning expressed, “My opinion of a work of art is based on the strength of the art itself.” In a way, when forming opinions of the art in conjunction with our opinions of the artist, one can form biases that hinder the full potential of the artistic experience.

But for some art viewers, context matters. Junior Anoushka Knowles, in an email interview, highlighted the difference in discussing artists in school settings. “To study an artist’s work from an academic standpoint is a completely different thing than to support the work and speak highly of both the art and the artist,” Knowles noted. Knowles emphasizes that acknowledgment in a classroom setting and support in a personal way are separate concepts, and should be distinguished from one another. Indeed, viewing art recreationally and not for analysis might make it harder to support artists who are morally questionable.

Freshman Sonam Kanaujia talked about her experience specifically with Kanye West, including the problem of supporting an artist financially. Kanaujia explained, “When you’re listening to [West’s] music, ultimately he’s getting paid for that. You’re supporting what they’re putting out, and that helps them.” If West did not profit off of his music, he wouldn’t have as large of a platform to express hateful sentiments. Kanakujia brings up the interesting point that art viewers might not want to actively support and sustain the lives of those we dislike. 

Knowles brought attention to the scandals related to James Charles, who allegedly had inappropriate relationships with minors as an adult. “I feel like no one talks about the grooming allegations he faced a few years ago. I think with TikTokers/influencers people move on too fast, but with musical artists it seems to last longer in the public psyche,” Knowles added. In a world where cancel culture is so normalized, it is crucial to consider and remember an artist’s harmful misdeeds, and not let it fade from our collective memory as quickly as the next video that pops up on your For You Page.

But how are we dealing with this art in our lives, in the classroom, and in our headphones? For Kanaujia, the answer is simply to cut the artist out. “After I’ve been seeing what Kanye’s been doing, I haven’t been adding his songs to my playlists. I’ve just been avoiding him,” she said. Sometimes, acting against controversy is as straightforward as doing nothing. However, Kanaujia still believes that one should not degrade the worth of the art simply because the artist isn’t worthy of respect. “I think Kanye’s amazing at producing music… I’m not going to say his music is bad just because he’s bad, but supporting the music still supports [him],” Kanaujia expressed. Just as society doesn’t define people’s morals by the quality of their art, maybe it is not society’s place to define the quality of art by the artist’s morals. One can recognize talent that is objective and still not support an artist. 

The first step to grappling with all this, inside the classroom and out, is to inform oneself. From teachers to students, knowing what occurs behind the art can help to make educated decisions about supporting artists that have done bad things. Whether it be opening the cover of a book or hitting play on a favorite song, knowing all that is behind the art we consume is imperative. Kanaujia concluded, “It’s important to know who you’re listening to and what’s behind it. It’s important to be informed.” 

However, after informing ourselves, it is our choice. In the classroom and out, case by case, it is ultimately a decision we have to make as individuals. Art is a deeply personal expression of a person’s thoughts, feelings, and ideas. As Staley expressed, “I think the reason I say you shouldn’t divorce the artist from the art is because I think it’s important to recognize that art comes from a human place.” Art is ultimately a manifestation of our humanity, and, according to Staley, it must be treated as such.

 Separating a piece of work from its creator can be harmful, or it can help us appreciate a piece of art to its fullest. Whether we align ourselves closer to Staley’s belief that art is permanently tied to its creator or with Manning’s belief that art should be interpreted on its own, we must be mindful and aware of the actions of the people we support. We must learn to live in a world where the morally grey are sometimes the most influential of our time, and it is up to us to distinguish these aspects of our media consumption.