h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

About two years ago, the radio station of my choice started playing this one song. Simple in terms of chord structure (e minor / D Major...), but truly a great piece of composition. Two guitars, one bass, a big percussions section that keeps nicely in the background, a brittle male voice, and at times an oboe or maybe it is a clarinet, who knows? A wonderful song. The DJs kept repeating the name of the song and the band because listeners kept calling in to ask about this song. Then, suddenly, they stopped playing the song.

The song was "Le vent nous portera" by French band Noir Desir.

What had happened? The singer of the band had killed his girlfriend. To be more precise, he beat her up badly. Then he left her lying in their hotel room. When finally he finally did get her medical assistence, it was too late - she had fallen into a coma and died several days later in hospital.

As generally people are a sick bunch, Noir Desir's record sales sky-rocketed after this. To the best of my knowledge, the singer is still in custody, awaiting a criminal trial for charges of manslaughter.

So, why am I posting this?
I want to hear your ideas on this dilemma of mine - I am in two minds about the radio not playing that song anymore. On the one hand, I understand and am sympathetic to the idea of not playing the music of such a b@st@rd person. On the other hand, I do miss hearing that song. Or put differently, can you appreciate an artist's creation without considering what kind of person the artist is and what sort of things he has done?

I realize that I am having difficulties formulating my thoughts here. But maybe you understand what I am trying to put onto screen here. Anyway, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on all this.

Y.

Keep listening to it. Odds are he didn't write it anyway.

My philosophy is that good music should not be ignored, no matter how much of an asshole its creator is. I offer you Frank Sinatra, Jimmy Page, Keith Moon, Elton John, John Lydon, Liam Gallagher and many many others as an example.

B

Richard Wagner, Gustav Mahler, Gary Glitter... Michael Jackson?

Do you mean you like Gary Glitter's music?just curious

Richard Wagner was a noted anti-semite. Mahler was a tyrant who forbade his wife to write music as there was only room for one composer in his house. Gary Glitter was done for child pornography. Michael Jackson is ... ahem.

Should we stop listening to their music?

Well now what about all those talented musicians that are equally tyranical,pornographical and anti semetical that haven't revealed their true nature to the world(probably for commercial gain)We could all be listening and enjoying without ever knowing what terrible people produced such music .
What about art and paintings would you apply the same logic?Think you were evasive about liking Glitter's music

I have that album, bought precisely because I loved "Le Vent..."

I didn't know about the tragic circumstances between singer and girlfriend. I'm moved now to dig out the CD and play it...

Is there a bit of insanity in "the artistic temprament"?

They do say there is a fine line between genius and madness?

There is a significance between listen to and purchase...is it wrong to listen to the musical output of a 'criminal', not neccesarily, but it becomes a whole different deal, purchasing the music of that 'criminal'. Is it right to line the pockets of these sick individuals *thinks Garry Glitter, Michael Jackson* just because they can produce a piece of music you like?

*hmmmmm*

But you could be purchasing music that is produced by closet perverts or tyrants that conceal their true identies ,how would you ever know?

I do not think you should/should not listen to a song due to the performes personality.
but if you are having a problem decided why not get the CD either a copy or download it off the internet that way you are not supporting the band as such as they are not getting any money for it, it will not show up in CD sales records and you can listen to the song to your hearts delights.
at the end off the day by enjoying somebody's music you are in no way condoning the person who's makes the music's actions.

What about the other members of the band? If it was one filnm star like Sean Connery would you not watch films he co-starredin?

When someone serves a sentence should we still commercially ostricise them or allow them to get on with their business like we would any other convict trying to get on with their lives again?

Mike Tyson was famously stopped from plying his trade in some places because of his history of violence, but how else is he meant to make money?

I would be appalled to see these people cheered on for their worst excesses but who here has lead a blameless life?

Should a child who was naughty yesterday not be loved for their good qualities today?

one love

if only someone had bought Adolf's paintings we may all have led a more happy existence

I am sure that we all encounter in our lives people, who if we knew their history we may not like or approve of,they may be your boss,your doctor,the checkout operator or lawyer.We cannot or should not judge someone without really knowing who they are or what they did.Surely art should be judged on its own merits not of the artists merits.

pdante's comment is interesting, though.

Who knows what would have happened if people had bought Hitler's paintings. But we know what did happen. Would you today gladly praise Hitler as a great artist (or even, artiste) if his pictures happened to be any good? I would not.

And this is, in short, the question: how much pain a person inflict on the world before I am not willing to accept other aspects about that person?

You see, I begin to suspect that my own position is a bit hypocritical. From a certain perspective, it looks like this:
Be some mafia puppet and a great performer - fine.
Kill your girlfriend, be a great musician - fine.
Kill, say, 10 people, be a good, say, politician - fine.
Kill 129 people - well, here it gets tricky.
Be responsible for some of the worst destruction and the most attrocious killing of millions of people - definitely not fine.

Put different: how much do I grant people can get away with?

Y.

Well I wasn't suggesting you praise Hitler's paintings(I cannot as I have never seen them)but what I do think is that when you view a work of art or listen to good music that is what you should be judging.After all who knows what the artist may be like as a person or what you have heard is true.You can still produce great art and be a pervert or criminal it doesn't mean the art itself or music is bad?

Wasn't Hitler a painter and decorator, as opposed to a proper painter?

B

I don't have a clue about that

No, he was a 'proper painter'. Just not a very good one, so we don't have to worry about any ethical dilemmas, fortunately.

Whereas Wagner ... There was a good deal of controversy last year about a series of performances of Wagner in Israel. The conductor invlved (who was, if I'm remembering correctly, himself German) made a point of introducing each performance with a brief lecture on Wagner's anti-Semitism. Then he conducted the orchestra.

That may seem a bit cumbersome, but it does make sense to me.

<>

Why not? If you didn't know they were by him, you preusmably would judge them on their merits, and it's hypocritical to suddenly not like something because you find out it was written, composed, or painted by someone who is/was an utter b*****d.

There is a singer/songwriter (two actually) who come into the scumbag category, and yet I concede they have done some *great* music.

I am reminded of some of the screwier atheists who enjoyed C S Lewis Narnia books until they found out that not only was Lewis a Christian but that the Narnia books contain Christian allegory!