saturday night i was doing a little catch up reading of the blogs i follow, and was excited to see a review of the new movie, ender’s game on the surly biker. this is one of the first novels i read by orson scott card,and i remember being blown away by it at the time. i have read many orson scott card novels since then, but none had quite the same impact.
while i was excited to hear that the movie is good, i was dismayed to learn that orson scott card is openly opposed to gay marriage, and homosexuality in general. can i go see the movie? can i read any more of his books?
i do my best to vote with my wallet. when possible, i choose not to patronize companies or individuals whose views i find unacceptable. i miss chick-fil-a, but we don’t eat there anymore.
i know it would be impossible to avoid paying all companies i disagree with. the list of companies using gmo’s. dyes, soy, artificial sweeteners, and who knows what all else, grows every day, and it would be easy to make yourself crazy trying to avoid it all. i have no doubt many big name retailers have questionable business practices, but time and finances do not always allow me to make things myself, or buy artisan made alternatives. but when someone like salvation army comes out and says homosexuals should be put to death, i don’t patronize them any longer.
the surly biker goes on to say that “sometimes we have to remember, as many have said, the art does not always define the artist.” i am not sure whether he misspoke here, but i usually ponder the issue in reverse. does the artist define the art?
i don’t know where art would be without picasso. most art historians would consider him one of the most influential artists of the 20th century. he is credited with co-founding cubism and co-inventing collage (that is cool right?). he was also rumored to be an abusive husband and a serial womanizer. not someone i would want to spend time with, yet i respect his art, as well as his creativity.
i asked mr p if there were any composers that inspired the same conflict, and he mentioned that wagner was very unpopular in his day. in addition to his antisemitic views, he was exiled several times for political reasons.
i guess it is safe to assume that picasso and wagner are no longer personally enjoying revenues from their artistic pursuits, and so the wallet voting probably isn’t relevant in this instance. you get my point though? can we separate the art from the artist? should we?