[purple, happy]
You know how sometimes you don’t want to keep consuming media after finding out who wrote it?

[blue, a finger raised]
Sure, people would say you’re having a hard time separating the art from the artist

[purple, distraught]
Well the other day I was reading this book called “Mein Kampf” which was alright, then I looked up the author’s bio on Wikipedia and… damn

[blue, blasé]


https://thebad.website/comic/advanced_media_literacy

  • Tattorack
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    You shouldn’t and cannot separate the art from the artist. That’s not how art works.

    • Donkter
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You can. I think what you’re referring to is that you can get a deeper meaning of the art by learning about the artist, but you can still separate the art.

      This comic is a perfect example. You can separate Mein Kampf from the artist, and guess what? It’s still a terrible piece of art. Bingo bango, all it took was media literacy.

      If you couldn’t separate the art from the artist to dismiss art then you would be saying that if someone has evil beliefs their soul is evil and they are not capable of creating good art. Which is a heinous belief. Bad people can make good art.

      • Tattorack
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I said nothing about skill. Neither does this comic.

        • Donkter
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          And neither did I. A bad person can still make something soulful and meaningful.

    • luminish
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      You can however like and dislike different things an artist and an art does. Its just siloing the stuff you dislike away as if the context never matters is simply wilful ignorance.

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Why? I totally don’t care who made it, when I like what is made.

      So, teach me the ways of the art and how it works, please.

      • Tattorack
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        An artist is not a machine who just prints stuff. When an artist makes something, regardless of what it is they’re making, their feelings, experiences, teachings, worldview, and personal beliefs/opinions shape the art they make.

        If you take those things away you have an AI generator. No music, writing, poetry, rapping, drawing, painting, or even corporate logo design can exist without the events, influences, and decisions of the one making these things.

        • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          22 hours ago

          An artist is not a machine who just prints stuff

          No. But I didn’t question that. I just don’t care if this music I like was made by AI, Adolf Hitler or Or two gay penguins. I value art for what it is to me, not what someone wants it to be. I don’t look behind the curtain.

          If you take those things away you have an AI generator

          Nah. I am the living proof. I consume the front, pay for it (mostly) and everyone is happy. And behold! The artist is still there, even without me caring. Might he do whatever he does to create the stuff I like.

          • Tattorack
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 hours ago

            An artist who is a terrible person draws from those elements that make him a terrible person to make art. If you’re selectively choosing to ignore where that comes from then you yourself are a terrible person.

            However, you have already more or less admitted that by saying you do nothing but consume.

            • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              So, you, a very smart person, would only admire art, for which you exactly, and personally, know the artists intentions, moral compass and general ethics? That does not only sound pretentious but also hypocritical and deeply impractical.

              As if you’d know every artists fucking life-story. And, by your logic, you mustn’t consume otherwise. Missing knowledge doesn’t protect.

              And yes, I only consume. What else do you do with a e.g. painting? Rub one out in front of it? Pray to the art-god? Write letters of admiration to the artist, scented with your perfume? I just hang it on the wall and admire it for what it is. Art.

              Also…a bit simplistic to just assume a “terrible person” draws exclusively from terrible sources to create art. As if people are black or white. And also, who on this earth is not a terrible person in the end? How clean and “good” are you hm? Do you spend every minute to help those less fortunate than you? Do you not profit from childlabour and slavery when purchasing goods that aren’t made by your neighbor while you were watching? Thought so.

              • Tattorack
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                As if you’d know every artists fucking life-story.

                As if not being a religious bigot, sexist, abuser, fascist, apartheid apologist, corporate bootlicker, or war criminal is such a high bar.

                Assume so.

                Fixed.