Art builds bridges between people, and when we have to burn bridges with an artist that we’re deeply connected to, cutting those ties can feel like a messy breakup—you know it’s over, but you can’t help scrolling through their old posts. This raises a question: at what cost do we have to put a thin line in supporting artists that do not align with our morals? Do we cut off our admiration for them and their art so we can keep away from their craft? The real dilemma? Figuring out where to draw the line—do we turn a blind eye to the messy truths or keep enjoying the pretty picture, even when it leaves us morally cringing?
Admitting we’ve secretly been enjoying a problematic artist’s work while everyone else condemns it feels like sneaking in a guilty pleasure. That nagging guilt? It’s hard to shake off, even if we don’t fully realize it. At the heart of it, the guilt hits because it’s like our moral compass got a pop quiz—and we’re not sure we passed. Despite the reason we are differentiated by our experiences ergo shaping and dividing our perspectives, to define what is ‘problematic’ rallies to an individual’s standpoint. Every individual has their unique vantage point where they make sense of their collective daily experiences thus being cumulative how they characterize who is ‘problematic’.
As much as it is given that every artist’s art resonates with the experiences they tell from their own stories, how they continue to create it denudes their genuineness no matter the intention. Through their art, it does not simply reflect how they view the world and interpret it in their creative manner, but it is also a quest to deeply understand life. Even so, it also poses the question of whether an artist comes off to be indifferent to their art, does it lose its appeal?
There have been artists who are still presently well-fortified in the industry despite having multiple ethically questionable behaviors. Some have been accused, and others have been condemned. Artists like Chris Brown have been involved in violence towards women by drugging, raping, and showing brutality to them. The 34-year-old lead vocalist of American pop rock band LANY, Paul Klein, was allegedly practicing predatory behaviors. Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has faced intense backlash for her controversial comments about the trans community. Controversial Filipino rapper, Skusta Clee’s several problematic issues from plagiarism to cheating. Co-creator of the famous adult animated science-fiction ‘Rick and Morty’ and voice actor Justin Roiland was subjected to two felony charges while renowned painter Pablo Picasso’s long history of misogyny and being a womanizer was evident during his time.
The issue being raised lies in the separation of art from the artist. It may occur siding to disconnect the art from the artists since both are entities different from their own. For instance, attempting to separate it constitutes the prompt of focusing solely on the art rather than who made it; you appreciate good art for its aesthetic not mainly who made it. But, even when people opt to detach their focus from who made it, the point at issue remains. As the argument poses an unhitched scheme of black-and-white answers, it adds up to deeply contextualize who we hold explicable.
The line that arose whether we still uphold the need to consume their craft could be situated in ways where we ask ourselves how our consumption benefits the artist, and whether we resort to putting the artist in the object of admiration. While we cannot inherently separate the art from the artist because it loses the essence of art unfolding parts of themselves, to conciliate how much the artists impact their work is to be aware of where to set a stopping point.
If by chance the problematic artist’s art consumption benefits and establishes a power structure reaping in favor of them, that is one consideration where we draw the line. We question if we untie the contribution to the artist’s famous works. Is it wrong to rewatch any of their work? Does it devalue the triumph of their art? Its validity does not coincide solely with a black-and-white answer, but rather a certain type of feeling of being bothered, excruciating, and for some just taking the medium nonchalantly. To veer in aspects of art resonating a part of themselves attached to it, completely turning a blind eye does not merit sustenance; its ignorance reduces culpability.
It’s tough to deny that when an artist is problematic, it becomes nearly impossible to separate them from their art. As someone who’s listened to LANY for a while, I have to admit that continuing to support them makes me complicit, even if it’s just through streams. Each play gives them more power, more reach, and inadvertently contributes to the problem. The grooming allegations—especially with multiple receipts—are not something I can just ignore.
Now that they’re back in the country, fans going wild for them and the whole fast-food chain stunt feels like a textbook PR move. It’s hard to shake the feeling that they either don’t see the gravity of the situation or are just hoping it blows over.
The scene has become increasingly polarized, with “enabling” and “being an enabler” thrown around like buzzwords. Take J.K. Rowling’s controversial remarks about the trans community, for instance—it’s not easy to just erase Harry Potter from your life, especially if it’s woven into your childhood. But there’s a bigger picture here: humanity, decency, and recognizing what truly matters for the future.
At some point, you have to prioritize being a decent human over nostalgia. Saying goodbye to Harry Potter may feel like a loss, but it’s a necessary step in showing solidarity with the LGBTQ+ community. Our role as life consumers isn’t just about indulging in what we love; it’s about making conscious choices that align with our values. Sometimes, letting go of a cherished franchise is essential to stand up for what’s right.
Art, no matter its form, seeks to express freedom of artistic creativity. Although it idles curiosity, it extends not only to disturb the comfortable but also acts to meet where we are. While the art and artists may vary from each other, it does not signify going along the lines of separating it interminably. We must uphold the capacity to distinguish who to hold accountable despite inclining to consume their art through music, painting, films, and a lot more. In this way, we do not stay dubious relatively not knowing how to bear with it.
