Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
<
[-]
Welcome To Rant Central
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username:
  

Password:
  




Artist and art: an unbreakable bond?
#1
Ender's Game, an upcoming sci-film based on a beloved novel by Orscon Scott Card, has been threated with a boycott by some groups because Card, a Mormon, has intensely homophobic views, even to the point of saying things like this:

"How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn. Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die."

Also, in 1990 he claimed that anti-sodomy laws should be "kept on the books". In my opinion, Card is a bigot and a moron. His views are reprehensible, and I happily deride the cretinous oaf for them. However, I will still be paying to see Ender's Game. It's something I want to see based on its story - which isn't in any way about homophobia - and genre, so boycotting it would be hypocritical of me, I think.
A lot of my favourite writers held views which I think are rotten. Patricia Highsmith, author of the original book The Talented Mr. Ripley, was a vicious racist who hated Jews and thought that black children should be placed with white families. The poet Philip Larkin was also a racist. My favourite writer of all time, Flannery O'Connor, believed in "restraint" over birth control, even if that led to a world over-populated into poverty. Moving into music, I've even enjoyed "Rock and Roll Parts 1 and 2" by Gary Glitter, and the less said about that walking justification for vigilante kickings the better.
The mistake, I think, is to see artists as somehow "other". They're from the same crop as carpenters, chemists and priests. They're just as depraved or good as any wildly disparate group of people lumped together by some vague label.

This is all JMHO, of course. What do you think? Should Ender's Game be boycotted, and more importantly, is it possible to separate artist from art?
Reply
#2
My father is strongly opposed to many of the things I consider to be personal freedoms that cannot be questioned.

Because of that he cannot enjoy the music of Elton John because he truly believes that listening to and (admitting to) enjoying his music means that he supports homosexuality-- it is ludicrous in more ways that one, but the fact that he believes that by enjoying the work of an artist who is also homosexual is somehow supporting that artist's lifestyle choices is the most bewildering part to me.

Being raised in a highly intolerant part of the world, I have to deal with this often. Because a singer participated in Gay Pride parades and has a gay sister (Garth Brooks) or because an actor plays a prominent role in which the character is gay (Heath Ledger/Tom Hanks) many people in my part of the world refuse to acknowledge the talent because of the beliefs (real or supposed) of the artist.

I think my tone conveys that I am no fan of this sort of thinking. To go back to square one, who gives a fuck what someone thinks and believes when entertainment is concerned? And to proceed onward, why would enjoying music played by The Devil himself be a bad thing?

I personally give two shits. I still clap my hands to Glitter's song when they play it at football games-- yeah, sometimes I have a stomach-wrenching moment when I think of what he was accused of and caught doing, but the song is still classic regardless.

There are many artists whom I consider to be poor excuses for human beings and yet still greatly enjoy their work.
Reply
#3
(07-18-2013, 06:56 PM)heslopian Wrote: "...marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down..."

that's a brave thing to say considering the day and age we're in... an especially braver thing to say since he's a mormon.

(07-18-2013, 06:56 PM)heslopian Wrote: Should Ender's Game be boycotted, and more importantly, is it possible to separate artist from art?

well, there's no better way to combat the freedom of speech and force others to do and think what you want than with a good old fashioned boycott.

i don't think that the movie should be boycotted and there is no point in even trying to separate the artist from art. i think that time would be better spent boycotting anyone using the word 'homophobe' in reference to anyone who does not have the same values as the LGBT special interest groups... because it's stupid propaganda scheme.

the call for protest by the LGBT special interest groups in this case... and many similar to this, is not to fight for equality or anything of the sort... it is to punish someone for exercising their freedom to believe whatever they want. I mean, seriously, do the LGBT special interest groups really think they are going to change his mind just by boycotting his movie? lol... they are going to hope to accomplish one of two things: silence his freedom of speech, or attempt to ruin his career.

LGBT special interest groups only want to promote one interest: theirs and destroy anyone who gets in their way.

so you can go with the flow, shun the freedom of belief and free speech and boycott the movie...

support freedom, and pay to see the movie, but, at the same time: indirectly support another special interest group (MPAA) that want's to to shun the freedom of speech...

or, wait til the video hits tpb and download then watch that bitch for... free-dom.
"Yeah. I understand the mechanics of it, shithead. I just don't understand how this is any less retarded than what I'm suggesting." - Kiley; Housebound.
Reply
#4
I once came across a Wikipedia article about a straight British actor who played a gay guy in a teen drama, and the article felt the need to point out that, though his character is gay, he is not. That was absurd to me. If you're going to do that why not write in James Earl Jones' entry that, though his character can choke people without touching them, he cannot.

(07-18-2013, 07:39 PM)Wildcard Wrote: I have to deal with this often. Because a singer participated in Gay Pride parades and has a gay sister (Garth Brooks)

Would I be right in saying that Garth Brooks is quite popular in rural states of America? If so, does the gay sister thing complicate his popularity?
Stephen King has a gay daughter, though I suspect that novelists, even wildly famous ones like King, aren't as culturally exposed as singers, actors and reality TV stars. That's why this Card business surprised me. I knew that he was a homophobe long before this current controversy, yet aside from a few bloggers and literature fans not many people seemed to care. It certainly wasn't a big news issue. Movies, though, are an incalculably massive part of our cultural sphere, so now that worldwide marketing for the Ender's Game film has begun suddenly everyone's getting mad.
Reply
#5
(07-18-2013, 08:58 PM)heslopian Wrote: Would I be right in saying that Garth Brooks is quite popular in rural states of America? If so, does the gay sister thing complicate his popularity?

Only among the most extremely intolerant-- and then only the ones of them who know. I am an evil person so I have introduced some hatred-filled hillbilly to an artist and after they say how awesome it is then tell them that the person is gay (sometimes when it isn't even true) just to watch their expression sour and feet stop tapping XD

I think if I were that person my own reaction would serve to teach me a lesson-- if it is great music, it is great music regardless of who sings, writes or covers it.

Art is heavily influenced by perception-- but the perception of the art, not the artist is what counts.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)