Point of Discussion: The Artist and the Art - Music

RockyRaccoon
Is it solipsistic in here or is it just me?

Gender: Male
Age: 33
Location: Maryland

Moderator

POINT OF DISCUSSION

This is Point of Discussion, a thread for people to discuss issues and topics related to music in a thoughtful and productive way. The goal of this is to make you think, to make you take a look at what you believe, why you believe it, and what others believe. Good discussion is the key to any society, and this is a place where, hopefully, that can be fostered. If you would like a certain topic to be discussed or question to be posed, PM me and I'll toss it in when I can.

All of that being said, there are a few guidelines.

The Guidelines:

Don't be a dick

All opinions are welcome

There are no wrong opinions

The conversation can go anywhere

The Topic:
Since this is the beginning, I figure we'll start with something somewhat simple. When listening to music (or experiencing any form of art, really), should one attempt to separate the artist from the art? Is that even truly possible?
_________________
2023 Chart

Early Psychedelic Rock

Electronic Chart

MrIrrelevant

I'm just here to support the idea. My go-to guy when thinking about this is Kanye. Not a likable guy at all (even though I think he's a good dude overall), but should that affect how you listen to his music?

When I am on a music website talking about music, I separate the art from the artist. I think everybody should try to. Just like when I'm talking basketball, I think of MJ as a basketball player, not a world-class dick. Basketball MJ is different than Street MJ, just like In-Studio Kanye is different than Street Kanye. But I get that it's tough to do, and I sometimes boost guys on my charts because I like them for the person they are.

LevonTostig

Ultimately, for me, it's nearly impossible to separate the artist and their music. I'll just list reasons.

1.) Their art is often reflective of their personalities and experiences-they write their personas into their music.
2.) Some art is better appreciated when listened to in context. Nick Drake's lyrics are all the more impactful when one is knowledgeable in regards to his life and tragic death...it enhances the emotional weight that the words carry because he felt them and we know he felt them.
3.) Some artists are just awful people and don't deserve to have their art heard. I'm not going to listen to Manson because he doesn't deserve my time. Kanye is consistently rude to other artists and had jokes about Parkinson's in his music...he doesn't deserve my time. Why should I pretend an artist is a decent person when they're actually despicable?

babyBlueSedan
Used to be sort of blind, now can sort of see

Gender: Male

I think it definitely depends on the album and the artist. For the most part I couldn't care less about what an artist is like in real life, unless it bleeds into their music. And even then something like "being a dick" isn't enough for me to dislike them. Kanye's super arrogant but I'd be lying if I didn't like his music more because of his confidence and the character he is. Besides, the character he presents in his music is pretty complex when you consider his more "insecure" songs like on College Dropout and the second half of MBDTF.

Really only a huge difference in opinion will stop me from listening to an artist. I had to stop listening to Jedi Mind Trick's Violent By Design because of how unnecessarily homophobic it was - it was just annoying and a little immature. If someone wrote a song about how vaccines cause autism I'd probably find it hard to listen to even if the music was great. But even in this case there are exceptions. I love XTC's Dear God even though it doesn't represent my religious beliefs, so sometimes it comes to how well an artist carries out their work.

LevonTostig wrote:

2.) Some art is better appreciated when listened to in context. Nick Drake's lyrics are all the more impactful when one is knowledgeable in regards to his life and tragic death...it enhances the emotional weight that the words carry because he felt them and we know he felt them.

Totally agree with this, especially the "some" part. Not all albums carry the weight of the artist's situation, but the ones that do hit hard. A big example is Big Star's 3rd. It's hard to appreciate that album without knowing what the band had gone through in the years leading up to it.
_________________
And it's hard to be a human being. And it's harder as anything else.

RepoMan

Just not something I ever think about when listening to an album. I just don't care if a famous person is a dick or not. If they make great music,m I'll listen to it. I do think there is something about unstable, volatile, highly driven, narcistic and/or egomaniacal personalities that lends itself to creating interesting & creative music.

RepoMan

Quote:

2.) Some art is better appreciated when listened to in context. Nick Drake's lyrics are all the more impactful when one is knowledgeable in regards to his life and tragic death...it enhances the emotional weight that the words carry because he felt them and we know he felt them.

I actually disagree with this. When I first heard Nick Drake and Big Star's sisters/lovers I knew nothing about the personal circumstances involved & yet they still brought me to my knees. Sure what they were going through lent itself to making insanely great albums. I just don't think knowing the backstory is even close to a major factor in why I love those albums so much. In fact, I still don't really know what was going on with Alec Chilton besides a general sense of commercial disappointment, and I'm a HUGE Big Star fan. There isn't a single back story or narrative that I can think of that made me like an album more. Usually, I only seek those details out way after falling in love with an album.

Edit: Thought of a great example to illustrate my feelings on this. Both Pornography & Closer ruled my teen years. They are both exceedingly dark & claustrophobic albums. Not ever, not even for a second, did I ever have the thought that Ian Curtis' death lent more gravity or meaning or weight to Closer than Pornography. To me, Pornography was the more musically interesting album so that was always my favourite.

Last edited by RepoMan on 02/11/2015 15:24; edited 3 times in total

babyBlueSedan
Used to be sort of blind, now can sort of see

Gender: Male

I guess saying it's hard to enjoy without knowing the backstory might have been a bit of an exaggeration, but for me at least it enhances the experience. Not so much for Nick Drake, but "Thank You Friends" works better once you realize it's a sarcastic song lamenting the band's lack of success. Music should ideally be self contained, but sometimes the extra information changes the way I react to songs.
_________________
And it's hard to be a human being. And it's harder as anything else.

Norman Bates

Gender: Male
Age: 51
Location: Paris, France

LevonTostig wrote:

Ultimately, for me, it's nearly impossible to separate the artist and their music. I'll just list reasons.

1.) Their art is often reflective of their personalities and experiences-they write their personas into their music.
2.) Some art is better appreciated when listened to in context. Nick Drake's lyrics are all the more impactful when one is knowledgeable in regards to his life and tragic death...it enhances the emotional weight that the words carry because he felt them and we know he felt them.
3.) Some artists are just awful people and don't deserve to have their art heard. I'm not going to listen to Manson because he doesn't deserve my time. Kanye is consistently rude to other artists and had jokes about Parkinson's in his music...he doesn't deserve my time. Why should I pretend an artist is a decent person when they're actually despicable?

I think the better way for me to answer the question is to rebound on what Levon has told us right here.

1. Thinking that an artist's art "is often reflective of their personalities and experiences-they write their personas into their music" is banking on their sincerity, and I can't do that, because: a) I don't know what they think; b) I'm not sure artists are the best people to know what their art means; c) I don't think sincerity is the foremost value in music. A lot of very sincere artists and all-round nice people are just putting out music I consider tarrible.

2. If a record can only be appreciated in its context, it's not good. To take the example of Nick Drake, the first time I heard his music, back in the early 90s, I didn't know who the guy was. I didn't know if was really the utterly depressed individual his music seemed to portray. It never prevented me from relating very strongly to it.

3. If I were to rule out dicks from musicians I can listen to, man I wouldn't be listening to much, and I would be the kind of ball of contradictions that doesn't have Kanye on his chart because he's a prick but has some Oasis records because the Gallaghers are pricks but come on it's Oasis.

Ultimately, every individual draws his own line. I won't listen to white supremacists advocating the return to pre-Christian tribal Aryan druidic life because it utterly disgusts me, but hell if I can assure anyone I don't have any of those in one of my charts (in fact I might have a David Allan Coe record somewhere that's particularly, er, clueless, albeit not neo-KKK strictly speaking). It doesn't make it ''right if I don't know'' or anything, but once somebody sets as high standards as Levon, that means he has to have the very precise context in every case to 1. fully appreciate the music and check if it's heartfelt (something I don't care about. I don't care if it's heartfelt, I care if it sounds heartfelt). 2. verify if the guy wasn't a prick in some way. John Cale has a fascination for firearms, something I don't share, but fuck me if he didn't make good music. Same goes for all the punk/postpunk outfit who were so dangerously 'interested' in fascist imagery (I'm thinking Throbbing Gristle/Joy Division-New Order/et al here, not fucking Skrewdriver of course - in which I contradict myself because I can and I'm a human being and I can't help it and neither can Levon.)

Ended up not making any sense but there you go.

Last edited by Norman Bates on 02/11/2015 15:28; edited 1 time in total

RockyRaccoon
Is it solipsistic in here or is it just me?

Gender: Male
Age: 33
Location: Maryland

Moderator

Personally, I'm of the belief that one should absolutely separate the art from the artist. I would agree that having the backstory of an album or something can enhance it for sure, but I don't think the artist should cloud the judgement of the art, good or bad. I think Jack White once said that caring about the personal life of an artist is like caring about what shoes Michelangelo wore and I tend to agree to a point. The art and the artist are two separate entities. Though one came from the other, they are no more integrated than a parent and child are. Two separate things that are connected, but should be judged separately.
_________________
2023 Chart

Early Psychedelic Rock

Electronic Chart

LevonTostig

Norman Bates wrote:

I think the better way for me to answer the question is to rebound on what Levon has told us right here.

1. Thinking that an artist's art "is often reflective of their personalities and experiences-they write their personas into their music" is banking on their sincerity, and I can't do that, because: a) I don't know what they think; b) I'm not sure artists are the best people to know what their art means; c) I don't think sincerity is the foremost value in music. A lot of very sincere artists and all-round nice people are just putting out music I consider tarrible.

2. If a record can only be appreciated in its context, it's not good. To take the example of Nick Drake, the first time I heard his music, back in the early 90s, I didn't know who the guy was. I didn't know if was really the utterly depressed individual his music seemed to portray. It never prevented me from relating very strongly.

This is an incredibly extreme interpretation of what I wrote, and you're completely misconstruing the first segment...
All part one says is that many artists write in a style that reflects themselves. Just because not all artists are "sincere" in their writing does not mean that what many artists do create isn't a reflection of their selves.

Read my post again. I said some art is better appreciated in context. Nick Drake is brilliant without knowing his backstory...but Pink Moon with its history is better than Pink Moon without it.