Art
Can you separate the art from the artist?
Is it possible to admire the art of a monster, or are they as much a part of the art as the brushstrokes or notes themselves?
It’s a minefield.
Allow me to elaborate…
Exhibit 1: Clapton
Guitar pioneer. Bluesman. Legend.
Seriously; the Beano album is required listening, and that wah-wah solo on White Room is to die for.
However, it turns out he’s an anti vaxxing fruit loop. And a bit of a racist too.
Can the art be separated from the man? Is it OK to lose yourself in a solo and ignore what lies beneath?
Exhibit 2: Fox
A talented actor from acting royalty heritage. Famed for all his diverse role. (My particular favourite was when he played a nobhead watching telly with his cousin)
Anyway, it turns out he’s also bat-shit crazy.
Same symptoms as Eric apparently. Probably even more so. Can one still enjoy Celebrity Gogglebox knowing the star is an arse?
Exhibit 3: Valance
Is there a finer slab of early 2000s pop than “Kiss Kiss”? I don’t think so. And that video! A marvel of contemporary culture. I’ve watched it countless times. And occasionally paused it at the best bits to fully appreciate Valance’s artistic vision. An absolute masterpiece.
You can see where this is going can’t you. Look at this.
Seriously, Valance. What on earth were you thinking? Of all the offensive dickheads in the world, you cosy up to the only who can out douchebag both Clapton and Fox. But, is it still acceptable to put the Kiss Kiss video on repeat? Hmmmm.
You may be wondering what this has to do with a magic blog?!
Allow me to explain.
You see, ever since my dogs blog last year, I have fallen foul of the North East dog community.
(Here it is, if you haven’t read it yet)
Just look what happened…
My point is this;
It’s OK to separate the art from the artist. Even monsters can produce worthwhile art. And dog people – it’s OK to hire a magician who’s nonplussed by dogs.