Have definitely bought my share of dumb-ass audio gear in my day. Thankfully, there is the redemption of St. Audiogon.
Not all, for sure, but more than a few gifted/talented individuals are/were “wired” differently than the rest of us, are egomaniacs with talent and an incredible work ethic, are tortured souls, or deviate from the norm in other ways; and their creativity might be what keeps them from going completely over the edge. But talent in one area does not necessarily equate to good manners, kindness, education, overall intelligence, or a pathway to sainthood.
I have no control over the behaviors or beliefs of others , and I tend not to be a raging fanboy over performers, so mostly remain blissfully ignorant of their personal lives.
Until, that is, they end up in a police lineup, dead from a suicide or overdose, or use the stage and their fame to prosyletize for some “cause,” usually political. (I turn on the stereo to escape from the constant bombardment of political noise, not to consume more of it.)
The town-crier nature of the internet and advent the cellphone video have made paparazzi out of us all, so keeping dark secrets is all but impossible anymore.
There really is no reason to even bring up Mark E Smith. (RIP) People already know him and know how they feel about him or the don’t know him and never will. The Fall is my all time favorite artist, no two ways about it. I have been in the presence of MES and I believe the reason that band is so great is the tortured mind of MES. Anyway.
Mark, you are on record that you can compartmentalize the music from the musician. That’s great, and as I wrote above, I am somewhat envious, e.g., I would like to be able to enjoy Pink Floyd’s music without thinking about the fact that Roger Waters is, IMO, an anti-Semitic asshat. But not all of us are able to listen to music the way you do. For those of us who sometimes grapple with the dilemma of liking an artist’s work while having serious issues with the artist him- or herself, this thread serves a valid purpose, I believe.
Ok… I / WE get it - ad nauseum - feel / live out your angst, how this thread doesn’t sit comfortable for you.! Nothing can kill a thread quicker for me than a badbeef disquisition on intertextual analysis …just saying, bro. ‘Away back to the best thread on the forum’.
I was thinking of changing my vote in the ‘biggest jerk in rock’ poll, above, from Roger Waters to Ted Nugent when I happened upon the below link. While obviously sarcastic and tongue-in-cheek, I think it captures the essence of why some of us have issues with Waters and/or Nugent. I will let my Waters vote stand for now, but I could have voted for Nugent and I may still switch.
As someone who has worked collaboratively in professional capacity with visual artists for most of my working life, I have seen widely varying types of personalities. The common trait that unites pretty much all of them has been an extremely intense focus on beating the odds and rising above all the other creative people seeking a place at the top. No matter what one’s creative discipline, to succeed as an artist of any kind you have to be focused, competitive in the beginning of your career, and to some degree - selfish. I don’t think that someone with the personality of a bodhisattva is likely to find themselves at the top of any creative discipline unless they evolved that way as they matured. Unfortunately, success in today’s world begets an insulating bubble of sycophants that reinforce bad tendencies in too many successful artists. With the “town crier nature of the internet” (as Hthaller so well describes it in post 80) virtually no one can escape the virtue police these days. One seems destined to a lifetime of disappointment if expectations of artists having advanced moral and ethical purity are a precondition of appreciation. I just finished reading “Stravinsky Inside Out,” an objective look at Stravinsky as businessman, father, collaborator, and composer. I think most musicologists would rank he and Schoenberg as the most influential composers of the 20th century but that sure didn’t translate into making him a great human being to be around. He was a philanderer, difficult overbearing father, unwilling to share credit with others who helped him, prone to ignore contractual agreements with publishers and promoters, just a generally difficult individual in so many ways. But in spite of those failings, he was still Stravinsky the great composer.
Outstanding post, and lots of food for thought, thanks @Photon46.
I do have some concern regarding your reference to the “virtue police,” which I assume is meant as a pejorative term for people who cast stones at others while ignoring their own failings. In my view, the term might apply to someone who calls out an artist’s PRIVATE/PERSONAL failings (e.g., drug addiction, spousal abuse, failing to pay child support, taking advantage of groupies, etc.).
But I do not believe the “virtue police” moniker should be used to describe people who call out artists for PUBLIC statements they make and/or PUBLIC positions they take.
For example, according to Wikipedia, at an August 22, 2007 concert, while wielding what appeared to be assault-like rifles, Ted Nugent said in reference to President Obama, “suck on my machine gun.” In the same gun-wielding rant, Nugent said of Dianne Feinstein, “ride one of these you worthless whore.”
People who avoid Nugent’s music and/or criticize him publicly because of his vulgar pro-gun public advocacy are not ‘virtue policemen,’ I trust you would agree.
I have no interest in Nugent’s music for reasons having nothing to do with his public persona, so there is no dilemma for me there. With artists such as Brian Eno and Roger Waters, however, there are issues because I greatly appreciate their musical work but I dislike their overtly public involvement in the BDS movement and certain public statements they have made in that connection. (I have no knowledge of or interest in their personal lives or private activities.)
Thanks again for a great contribution to this thread.
I think you’re absolutely right with your arguments and your personal consequence is respectable. I personally would just take the appropriate measures directed to the direct intercourse with the “bad behaving” person in presence and future. E.g. I think it’s right not to contract an actor or producer of films anymore after it got obvious he abused others and before he got his legal sentence. But that doesn’t mean for me, his works should be dammed, hidden away or not appreaciated for the art they are (if they are) independent of the person’s private behavior.
Bootzilla, no personal offense or judgement intended towards you, my apologies if it came off that way. When I used that term it was just in reference to the current internet climate where seemingly no public figure can escape the wrath of being called out by someone who’s offended by a belief, statement, or action on their part. I understand your distinction between calling out people for personal failings vs. destructive beliefs and generally agree with you. Perhaps I should have used a less “loaded” term. I agree with Jazznut as far as how we should judge the creative output of those who are found guilty of crimes towards others.
@Photon46: I did not take offense or think for one second that your prior post was directed at me. No apologies necessary, but thanks.
I simply wanted to draw the PUBLIC/PRIVATE distinction expressly, because there are posts in this thread that seem to lump everything together and conclude that we should not judge musicians on anything but their music. When a musician gets political publicly, I hope we can all agree that he/she is fair game for proportional public pushback.
Not related, but they dropped my girl friends portrait off the Land O’ Lakes butter packaging. Now, that my friends, that’s a pisahua!
My point, which I will eventually get too, is if one is to be PC, please make it worthwhile! Let’s stop hunger, wars, pandemics and many great challenges.
I’m a big fan of The Fall as well and have been since I first heard there music in ‘82. And while I would have gladly shared a pint with MES, I would have never wanted him as a house guest.
After this has gone back and forth now for so long, I’ll reiterate my earlier thought - that, simply put, I support artists whose artistic expressions I enjoy. Call me an ostrich if you must, but I feel no need to learn about any of their socio-political views, or personal foibles, that might otherwise color my perception of their art, or my enjoyment of it. Some of them, like Nugent, can’t be avoided due to general media exposure, or some, like Jackson Browne, just from their artistic expressions and causes they publicly support, but I doubt I’d have heard anything about Waters and antisemitism had it not been for this thread. And while his singing was enough to make his songs my least favorite of the Floyd’s to begin with, and therefore not much of a personal loss to me (if I do decide to avoid him), I don’t really want to learn the mental machinations and opinions of all the other artists in my library. There are a lot of them, so many that I have no doubt that some digging would bring up a lot of dirt. I don’t care to take that risk, so I prefer to keep their art free of associations I might find disagreeable to me. So I blissfully remain ignorant, to the extent I can.
Funny that you mention Jackson Browne. In another thread on this forum, someone claimed he was a wife beater. I had not heard that allegation before, so I Googled it. After reading a detailed overview of the incident in question, I posted a response in semi-defense of Browne:
Even if the 1994 Joni Mitchell song to which you refer – “Not to Blame” – was supposed to be about Jackson Browne, it would not be proof of anything. And in the same year that the song was released, Joni expressly disclaimed that the song was about anyone in particular (ellipses in the original):
Q: There has been speculation that “Not to Blame” was inspired by specific incidents, possibly the O.J. Simpson case or the allegations about Jackson Browne and Daryl Hannah. Any comment?
A: Let’s not go gossipy on any of these songs. . . . I should have put a disclaimer. . . “Any resemblance to any people living or dead is merely coincidental.” This is a song about batterers of women. It’s dumb to reduce the song to a portrait of an individual.
My Interesting observation about Joni, Jackson and Daryl, the latter two ‘may’ have inspired the song. The song, not the reason for writing it, is the only element here that is certain. The circumstances concerning those people are not certain.
disquisition on intertextual analysis …just saying, bro. 
‘Away back to the best thread on the forum’.