Art and the Artist.

To seek inspiration for this article, I turned to the interweb and asked the people of Instagram for their ideas. Despite many good ideas which I seriously considered, such as Finland's government (or lack thereof), a Sigrid album review, or a look into modern day Marxism, congratulations must go to Robert Rattray who suggested I write an article establishing whether Art can be separated from the artist, following on from Michael Jackson's documentary, R. Kelly being on bail and much of the #MeToo movement. Rattray, a fine man who once gave me his coat to rest my head on when I fainted, is himself a talented man who recently produced his own audio drama examining the history of the death penalty in the UK and society's attitudes towards Death. I highly recommend immersing your ears with it here.

Anyhow, praised individuals aside, lets begin our look into what is a very difficult subject.

It should be said straight away that Michael Jackson is still the 'King of Pop' and one of the most successful artists of all time. Irrespective of how you may feel, R Kelly will keep his platinum discs and Spacey his Oscar. As emotionally charged as the debate over Michael Jackson is, I’m going to try and remove emotion from this discussion and evaluate whether a piece of work can be critiqued without knowledge of its creator. 

My initial thoughts were no. Music is an expressive art and the messages conveyed through verses, choruses and even the occasional bridge, can only be judged on their impact by the singer/songwriter who felt so passionately about them to sing them in the first place. To strike a chord with the listener. Even now in 2019, the songwriter:singer ratio is seemingly increasing. The singer will always retain artistic control over the art by communicating with their writers who can better express lyrically how the singer feels.

When listening to music, the mind wanders. It wanders to places of fortune, despair, happiness and hatred. The music we immerse ourself with has the potential to not only reflect but also shape our moods and actions to others. With the music world now extending beyond audio through the mediums of TV and the internet, the role and image of the artist is central to such imagery and symbolism. To focus back in on Michael Jackson, ‘Thriller’ evokes *that* video set on Hallow’s Eve. Billie Jean reminds us of the moonwalk, an iconic dance which growing up for me, decades later, was seen as iconic symbol of rhythmic control and poise on the dance floor. These moves will remain in history, yet all of these features are defined by the image and legacy of Michael Jackson. And therein lies the problem.

As a wider artistic statement, I believe as painters, sculptors and choreographers do not have this problem of being front and centre, simply because they are not the focus of their own work. Whilst Guernica was painted by Picasso, an iconic master of his craft, it is remembered for its dystopian depictions of the Spanish Civil War, and the losses and brutalities stemming from it. Michelangelo’s ‘David’, despite being sculpted by the famous Renaissance artist, depicts the biblical legend, who defeated the mighty Goliath and at the time of its sculpting came to represent the civil liberties desired by the people of Florence. A defender of freedoms against the almighty Rome, where David was looking towards. These individual masterpieces are defined by their historical context and composition, not by the artists who acquired their fame by producing said masterpieces. This is in contrast to Jackson and Kelly.

It is Kevin Spacey where things get intriguing. After the allegations that emerged, it is clear that Spacey deserves no future in Hollywood, should he be proven guilty, his behaviour has been appalling and surely only a lack of evidence will prevent the legal system treating him appropriately. Yet I believe Spacey can be separated from his films. Firstly, Kevin Spacey was not the sole artist with ultimate artistic control over how his work was portrayed. He was working for a director whose own artistic vision they were trying to convey. These directors simply do not deserve their work to be damned by the actions of others who they cannot control outside a film studio. Secondly, when Michael Jackson performed, and Picasso made a self-portrait and so on, they were presenting themselves. As individuals they were portraying an identity and image to be identified by. Spacey, as an actor, portrayed characters. Characters who, both fictional and not, should not be judged based on the individual who found themselves portraying the characters. These characters should be judged for their persona and identity conveyed  by the actor who plays them. The patriarch in Baby Driver, a conniving immoral boss with power and authority above everyone bar the law, should not be eliminated from Edgar Wright’s portfolio due to the prior actions of a cast member. Frank Underwood, a megalomaniacal politician with a thirst for control, does not deserve being forgotten by the history books, as one of Netflix’s biggest ever shows. (However, after the allegations against Spacey emerge, I do support Spacey not appearing in subsequent episodes and being written out of future scripts). 

Let history judge Spacey for his actions. Actions which have undermined his decades of reputation and successful acting - if these allegations are proven. But we should not let the wider circle of cinema and television to be left with a gaping hole of where such productions once lay in history. When watching any production, you watch the characters, not the actor. I understand why TV channels have chosen not to air films starting Spacey. But I do not believe individual viewers shouldn’t be allowed to watch some of the most commercially successful films of decades gone by. Not least, because film is a genre where art and the artists are intentionally separated from one another. Otherwise all films would be biographical, and isn’t that rather self-centred?

As for MJ, no new music will be released due to his death in 2009. So as for his existing music, it depends how comfortable each individual is with listening to the music, whether they individually can separate his behaviour to his on-screen persona. That however, may prove to be a challenge. Unless you reject the witness testimony the Leaving Neverland documentary provided. In which case, my faith in humanity will regretfully diminish.